Palo Alto City Council
January 20, 2026

Table 126: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 6% N=13 10% N=22 19% N=40 32% N=69 32% N=69 100% N=214 K-12 education 44% N=93 29% N=61 15% N=31 2% N=3 11% N=23 100% N=212 Adult educational opportunities 25% N=53 35% N=76 15% N=31 4% N=8 22% N=47 100% N=215 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 19% N=41 50% N=107 13% N=27 5% N=11 13% N=27 100% N=213 Openness and acceptance of the community toward
people of diverse backgrounds 15% N=33 34% N=72 24% N=51 17% N=36 10% N=22 100% N=214 Opportunities to learn about City services via City website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn) 18% N=37 45% N=94 20% N=41 7% N=14 11% N=24 100% N=211

Table 127: Question 6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate each of the following characteristics as they relate to Palo Alto as a whole: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 9% N=13 15% N=22 28% N=40 48% N=69 100% N=144 K-12 education 49% N=93 33% N=61 16% N=31 2% N=3 100% N=188 Adult educational opportunities 31% N=53 45% N=76 19% N=31 5% N=8 100% N=168 Opportunities to participate in social events and activities 22% N=41 57% N=107 15% N=27 6% N=11 100% N=186 Openness and acceptance of the community toward people of diverse backgrounds 17% N=33 37% N=72 27% N=51 19% N=36 100% N=192 Opportunities to learn about City services via City website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook, Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn) 20% N=37 51% N=94 22% N=41 7% N=14 100% N=187

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
134

Packet Pg. 142 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 128: Question 7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please indicate whether or not you have done each of the following in the last 12 months. No Yes Total Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 35% N=75 65% N=138 100% N=213 Visited a neighborhood park or City park 4% N=9 96% N=205 100% N=214 Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 16% N=34 84% N=179 100% N=213 Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto 69% N=146 31% N=64 100% N=210 Attended a City-sponsored event 30% N=63 70% N=149 100% N=212 Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 7% N=14 93% N=198 100% N=212 Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay bills 41% N=86 59% N=125 100% N=211 Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay bills 36% N=77 64% N=136 100% N=214 Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone, email or web) for help or information 38% N=80 62% N=131 100% N=211 Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person, phone, email or web) to express your opinion 47% N=99 53% N=113 100% N=212 Attended a local public meeting (of local elected officials like City Council or County Commissioners, advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood watch, etc.) 51% N=107 49% N=104 100% N=211 Watched (online or on television) a local public meeting 61% N=128 39% N=84 100% N=212 Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo Alto 39% N=83 61% N=129 100% N=211 Voted in your most recent local election 10% N=22 90% N=192 100% N=214 Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation instead of driving 40% N=85 60% N=128 100% N=213 Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo Alto 89% N=189 11% N=22 100% N=212 Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 79% N=169 21% N=45 100% N=214 *This question did not have a "don't know" option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
135

Packet Pg. 143 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 129: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto
government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 14% N=30 34% N=73 33% N=71 14% N=29 4% N=9 100% N=211 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 10% N=22 29% N=60 40% N=83 18% N=37 3% N=6 100% N=207 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 12% N=26 35% N=73 33% N=69 11% N=22 9% N=19 100% N=208 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 9% N=18 28% N=58 37% N=77 21% N=44 4% N=8 100% N=205 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 14% N=29 30% N=63 28% N=57 23% N=48 5% N=11 100% N=208 Being honest 14% N=29 37% N=77 22% N=46 17% N=35 10% N=21 100% N=208 Being open and transparent to the public 11% N=23 36% N=74 26% N=54 18% N=37 10% N=21 100% N=209 Informing residents about issues facing the community 14% N=28 37% N=76 26% N=54 15% N=31 8% N=16 100% N=204 Treating all residents fairly 9% N=20 32% N=67 22% N=46 21% N=43 15% N=32 100% N=208 Treating residents with respect 18% N=37 37% N=78 19% N=40 11% N=23 15% N=32 100% N=209

Table 130: Question 8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following categories of Palo Alto government performance. Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 15% N=30 36% N=73 35% N=71 14% N=29 100% N=202 The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 11% N=22 30% N=60 41% N=83 18% N=37 100% N=201 The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement 13% N=26 39% N=73 36% N=69 12% N=22 100% N=190 Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 9% N=18 30% N=58 39% N=77 22% N=44 100% N=197 Generally acting in the best interest of the community 15% N=29 32% N=63 29% N=57 24% N=48 100% N=198 Being honest 16% N=29 41% N=77 25% N=46 18% N=35 100% N=187 Being open and transparent to the public 12% N=23 39% N=74 29% N=54 20% N=37 100% N=188 Informing residents about issues facing the community 15% N=28 40% N=76 29% N=54 16% N=31 100% N=188 Treating all residents fairly 11% N=20 38% N=67 26% N=46 25% N=43 100% N=176 Treating residents with respect 21% N=37 44% N=78 22% N=40 13% N=23 100% N=178

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
136

Packet Pg. 144 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 131: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't
know Total
The City of Palo Alto 22% N=46 48% N=101 22% N=47 6% N=12 2% N=5 100% N=210 The State Government 7% N=15 37% N=76 38% N=79 13% N=28 6% N=11 100% N=209 The Federal Government 1% N=3 12% N=24 28% N=57 53% N=109 6% N=12 100% N=205

Table 132: Question 9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Overall, how would you rate the quality of the services provided by each of the following? Excellent Good Fair Poor Total
The City of Palo Alto 22% N=46 49% N=101 23% N=47 6% N=12 100% N=206 The State Government 7% N=15 39% N=76 40% N=79 14% N=28 100% N=197 The Federal Government 1% N=3 12% N=24 30% N=57 57% N=109 100% N=193

Table 133: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Traffic enforcement 9% N=19 33% N=70 29% N=60 21% N=45 7% N=15 100% N=209 Traffic signal timing 15% N=32 28% N=58 40% N=84 13% N=27 4% N=8 100% N=209 Street repair 15% N=31 47% N=98 23% N=47 15% N=32 0% N=0 100% N=208 Street cleaning 26% N=55 55% N=114 13% N=27 5% N=9 2% N=4 100% N=209 Street tree maintenance 29% N=59 49% N=101 11% N=23 7% N=14 4% N=9 100% N=206 Sidewalk maintenance 10% N=21 54% N=112 22% N=47 11% N=23 3% N=6 100% N=209 Land use, planning, and zoning 7% N=13 17% N=34 29% N=60 34% N=71 13% N=27 100% N=206 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 8% N=16 27% N=56 26% N=55 18% N=37 21% N=44 100% N=208 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 31% N=64 41% N=85 18% N=36 3% N=6 7% N=15 100% N=206 Building and planning application processing services 4% N=8 11% N=23 19% N=39 31% N=65 35% N=72 100% N=207 Affordable high-speed internet access 17% N=35 32% N=67 22% N=47 13% N=28 15% N=32 100% N=209 Electric utility 38% N=79 38% N=80 14% N=29 9% N=19 1% N=3 100% N=209 Gas utility 32% N=65 36% N=73 19% N=39 6% N=13 7% N=14 100% N=205 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
137

Packet Pg. 145 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Utility payment options 38% N=79 37% N=77 12% N=25 1% N=2 11% N=24 100% N=207 Drinking water 47% N=97 42% N=85 8% N=17 0% N=0 3% N=6 100% N=205 Sewer services 35% N=72 45% N=93 6% N=13 3% N=6 11% N=23 100% N=207 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees,
etc.) 20% N=42 55% N=114 9% N=18 4% N=7 12% N=25 100% N=206 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e- waste) 42% N=87 45% N=95 6% N=13 4% N=9 2% N=5 100% N=209 Police services 37% N=77 26% N=55 8% N=18 2% N=5 26% N=54 100% N=209 Crime prevention 26% N=53 36% N=75 10% N=20 8% N=16 21% N=45 100% N=209 Animal control 26% N=54 31% N=64 9% N=17 1% N=2 33% N=67 100% N=205 Ambulance or emergency medical services 40% N=83 19% N=39 3% N=7 0% N=0 38% N=79 100% N=209 Fire emergency services 37% N=78 31% N=65 1% N=3 0% N=1 30% N=63 100% N=209 Fire prevention and education 29% N=58 32% N=65 3% N=6 3% N=6 33% N=66 100% N=202 Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 55% N=114 32% N=68 7% N=15 1% N=1 5% N=10 100% N=208 City parks 47% N=98 42% N=89 6% N=13 0% N=0 4% N=8 100% N=208 Recreation programs or classes 32% N=66 33% N=69 11% N=22 1% N=2 23% N=47 100% N=207 Recreation centers or facilities 32% N=67 41% N=84 12% N=24 2% N=3 14% N=28 100% N=206 Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 58% N=120 29% N=58 3% N=5 0% N=0 10% N=21 100% N=205 Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment,
accessibility) 61% N=127 31% N=64 1% N=2 2% N=4 5% N=10 100% N=207 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 52% N=108 32% N=67 7% N=15 2% N=4 7% N=14 100% N=207 Art programs and theater 39% N=81 32% N=65 5% N=11 2% N=3 22% N=46 100% N=206 City-sponsored special events 24% N=50 42% N=88 8% N=17 3% N=6 22% N=46 100% N=207 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 16% N=34 41% N=85 28% N=58 3% N=5 11% N=24 100% N=206 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 27% N=54 45% N=92 11% N=21 5% N=10 12% N=25 100% N=203

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
138

Packet Pg. 146 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 134: Question 10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Traffic enforcement 10% N=19 36% N=70 31% N=60 23% N=45 100% N=194 Traffic signal timing 16% N=32 29% N=58 42% N=84 14% N=27 100% N=201 Street repair 15% N=31 47% N=98 23% N=47 15% N=32 100% N=208 Street cleaning 27% N=55 56% N=114 13% N=27 5% N=9 100% N=205 Street tree maintenance 30% N=59 51% N=101 12% N=23 7% N=14 100% N=197 Sidewalk maintenance 10% N=21 55% N=112 23% N=47 11% N=23 100% N=203 Land use, planning, and zoning 8% N=13 19% N=34 33% N=60 40% N=71 100% N=179 Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 10% N=16 34% N=56 34% N=55 22% N=37 100% N=164 Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts) 34% N=64 44% N=85 19% N=36 3% N=6 100% N=191 Building and planning application processing services 6% N=8 17% N=23 29% N=39 48% N=65 100% N=135 Affordable high-speed internet access 20% N=35 38% N=67 27% N=47 16% N=28 100% N=177 Electric utility 38% N=79 39% N=80 14% N=29 9% N=19 100% N=206 Gas utility 34% N=65 38% N=73 21% N=39 7% N=13 100% N=191 Utility payment options 43% N=79 42% N=77 14% N=25 1% N=2 100% N=184 Drinking water 49% N=97 43% N=85 8% N=17 0% N=0 100% N=199 Sewer services 39% N=72 50% N=93 7% N=13 3% N=6 100% N=184 Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees, etc.) 23% N=42 63% N=114 10% N=18 4% N=7 100% N=181 Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e-waste) 43% N=87 46% N=95 6% N=13 4% N=9 100% N=204 Police services 50% N=77 36% N=55 11% N=18 3% N=5 100% N=155 Crime prevention 33% N=53 46% N=75 12% N=20 10% N=16 100% N=164 Animal control 39% N=54 47% N=64 13% N=17 2% N=2 100% N=138 Ambulance or emergency medical services 64% N=83 30% N=39 5% N=7 0% N=0 100% N=130 Fire emergency services 53% N=78 44% N=65 2% N=3 0% N=1 100% N=146 Fire prevention and education 43% N=58 48% N=65 5% N=6 5% N=6 100% N=136 Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 58% N=114 34% N=68 8% N=15 1% N=1 100% N=198 City parks 49% N=98 44% N=89 6% N=13 0% N=0 100% N=200
Recreation programs or classes 42% N=66 43% N=69 14% N=22 1% N=2 100% N=159 Recreation centers or facilities 37% N=67 47% N=84 14% N=24 2% N=3 100% N=178 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
139

Packet Pg. 147 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Please rate the quality of each of the following services in Palo Alto: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs) 65% N=120 32% N=58 3% N=5 0% N=0 100% N=183
Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment, accessibility) 65% N=127 33% N=64 1% N=2 2% N=4 100% N=197 Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks) 56% N=108 34% N=67 8% N=15 2% N=4 100% N=193 Art programs and theater 50% N=81 41% N=65 7% N=11 2% N=3 100% N=160 City-sponsored special events 31% N=50 55% N=88 11% N=17 4% N=6 100% N=161 City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 19% N=34 47% N=85 32% N=58 3% N=5 100% N=183 Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.) 30% N=54 52% N=92 12% N=21 6% N=10 100% N=177

Table 135: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents including "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto
Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Don't know Total Reliability of utility services 51% N=105 42% N=86 5% N=10 2% N=3 1% N=3 100% N=206 Affordability of utility services 24% N=49 38% N=79 23% N=47 13% N=27 2% N=5 100% N=206 Community value received from the City owning and
operating its own municipal utility services 37% N=78 39% N=81 12% N=24 4% N=9 8% N=16 100% N=208 Utilities online customer self-service features 31% N=64 32% N=67 12% N=24 2% N=4 23% N=48 100% N=207 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 31% N=63 40% N=82 10% N=20 4% N=8 15% N=31 100% N=204 Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 28% N=57 34% N=71 10% N=20 10% N=22 18% N=38 100% N=208 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 28% N=59 37% N=76 19% N=39 8% N=16 8% N=17 100% N=207 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 20% N=42 41% N=84 18% N=38 7% N=14 14% N=29 100% N=207 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 29% N=59 34% N=69 13% N=27 4% N=9 20% N=40 100% N=205 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 29% N=59 27% N=55 7% N=13 4% N=9 32% N=65 100% N=201 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 27% N=56 29% N=59 4% N=9 3% N=7 36% N=75 100% N=206

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
140

Packet Pg. 148 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 136: Question 11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents without "Don't Know" Responses Please rate the following as they relate to Palo Alto Utilities’ services: Excellent Good Fair Poor Total Reliability of utility services 51% N=105 42% N=86 5% N=10 2% N=3 100% N=203 Affordability of utility services 24% N=49 39% N=79 23% N=47 13% N=27 100% N=202 Community value received from the City owning and operating its own municipal utility services 40% N=78 42% N=81 13% N=24 5% N=9 100% N=192 Utilities online customer self-service features 40% N=64 42% N=67 15% N=24 2% N=4 100% N=159 Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business 36% N=63 47% N=82 12% N=20 5% N=8 100% N=173
Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 34% N=57 42% N=71 12% N=20 13% N=22 100% N=170 Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay 31% N=59 40% N=76 21% N=39 9% N=16 100% N=190 Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website 24% N=42 47% N=84 21% N=38 8% N=14 100% N=178 Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 36% N=59 42% N=69 16% N=27 6% N=9 100% N=165 Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 43% N=59 41% N=55 10% N=13 7% N=9 100% N=136 Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff 42% N=56 45% N=59 7% N=9 5% N=7 100% N=131

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
141

Packet Pg. 149 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 137: Question 12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Please rate how important, if at all, you think it is for the Palo Alto community to focus on each of the following in the coming two years. Essential
Very
important
Somewhat
important
Not at all
important Total
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems) 63% N=122 25% N=49 10% N=19 2% N=4 100% N=195 Overall economic health of Palo Alto 59% N=120 32% N=65 6% N=13 4% N=7 100% N=205 Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 49% N=102 33% N=68 13% N=27 5% N=9 100% N=207 Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 42% N=88 36% N=75 19% N=40 3% N=6 100% N=208 Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 28% N=58 40% N=83 27% N=56 5% N=10 100% N=208 Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 30% N=61 42% N=86 21% N=43 6% N=13 100% N=203 Residents' connection and engagement with their community 31% N=64 39% N=80 27% N=55 4% N=8 100% N=207 Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 29% N=59 36% N=75 21% N=43 14% N=30 100% N=208 Increasing local solar generation capacity within city boundaries 26% N=54 33% N=68 25% N=53 16% N=33 100% N=208 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 21% N=44 25% N=52 38% N=78 16% N=33 100% N=208 Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues 33% N=69 33% N=67 24% N=49 10% N=21 100% N=207 * This question did not have a “don’t know” option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
142

Packet Pg. 150 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 138: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Including "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely
Very
unlikely
Don't
know Total
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend
church/temple) 47% N=97 22% N=47 14% N=30 16% N=32 1% N=2 100% N=208 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or
neighbors 59% N=122 33% N=69 6% N=12 2% N=3 1% N=1 100% N=208

Table 139: Question 13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Without "Don't Know" Responses In a typical week, how likely are you to: Very likely
Somewhat
likely
Somewhat
unlikely
Very
unlikely Total
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 47% N=97 23% N=47 14% N=30 16% N=32 100% N=206 Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or neighbors 59% N=122 33% N=69 6% N=12 2% N=3 100% N=206

Table 140: Question 14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What mode of transportation do you use most for your typical daily needs for getting around town? Percent Number Driving 56% N=117
Walking 18% N=37
Biking 23% N=47
Bus 1% N=2
Train 1% N=1
Scootering 0% N=1
Palo Alto Link 0% N=0
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 0% N=0
Carpooling 1% N=3
Total 100% N=208
* This question did not have a “don’t know” option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
143

Packet Pg. 151 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 141: Question 15 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents If you did not have access to a car for your usual daily transportation around town, how convenient
(based on time and proximity) would you consider each
of the following methods of getting around?
Very
convenient
Somewhat
convenient
Somewhat
inconvenient
Very
inconvenient Total
Walking 39% N=76 38% N=74 15% N=30 7% N=14 100% N=194
Biking 43% N=81 31% N=58 14% N=26 12% N=23 100% N=189
Bus 8% N=16 25% N=49 30% N=58 36% N=69 100% N=191
Train 18% N=35 33% N=63 32% N=61 16% N=30 100% N=190
Scootering 9% N=17 34% N=61 22% N=39 35% N=63 100% N=181 Palo Alto Link 5% N=9 48% N=86 25% N=45 21% N=38 100% N=177 Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 51% N=95 32% N=60 11% N=20 6% N=11 100% N=186 Carpooling 15% N=27 33% N=61 26% N=48 27% N=50 100% N=186 * This question did not have a “don’t know” option.

Table 142: Question 16 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030? Percent Number
Extremely familiar 11% N=23
Very familiar 11% N=24
Moderately familiar 21% N=43
Slightly familiar 25% N=53
Not familiar 31% N=64
Total 100% N=206
* This question did not have a “don’t know” option.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
144

Packet Pg. 152 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 143: Question 17 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s programs to advance our community goals such as home electrification? Percent Number Extremely familiar 13% N=27
Very familiar 19% N=40
Moderately familiar 27% N=56
Slightly familiar 25% N=52
Not familiar 15% N=30
Total 100% N=205
* This question did not have a “don’t know” option.

Table 144: Question Q18 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which of the following considerations would most motivate you to replace your major gas appliances with an electric model? (Select up to three) Percent Number
Save time with helpful installation 32% N=64
Save money through rebates 61% N=123
Improve health and safety 40% N=80
Affect climate change 40% N=81
Support Home resale value 16% N=32
I am not going to upgrade to electric 29% N=58

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
145

Packet Pg. 153 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Demographic Questions

Table 145: Question D1 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What impact, if any, do you think the economy will have on your family income in the next 6 months? Do you think the impact will be: Percent Number
Very positive 5% N=10
Somewhat positive 10% N=20
Neutral 41% N=85
Somewhat negative 35% N=73
Very negative 10% N=20
Total 100% N=208

Table 146: Question D2 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your employment status? Percent Number
Working full time for pay 50% N=104
Working part time for pay 9% N=19
Unemployed, looking for paid work 7% N=16
Unemployed, not looking for paid work 3% N=6
Fully retired 30% N=63
College student, unemployed 0% N=0
Total 100% N=208

Table 147: Question D3 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you work inside the boundaries of Palo Alto? Percent Number Yes, outside the home 28% N=35
Yes, from home 39% N=47
No 33% N=40
Total 100% N=122
Question asked of those reporting that they work full or part time.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
146

Packet Pg. 154 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 148: Question D4 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How many years have you lived in Palo Alto? Percent Number Less than 2 years 2% N=4
2 to 5 years 9% N=19
6 to 10 years 22% N=47
11 to 20 years 16% N=33
More than 20 years 50% N=105
Total 100% N=208

Table 149: Question D5 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Which best describes the building you live in? Percent Number One family house detached from any other houses 58% N=122 Building with two or more homes (duplex, townhome, apartment or condominium) 34% N=70 Mobile home 0% N=0
Other 8% N=17
Total 100% N=208

Table 150: Question D6 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do you rent or own your home? Percent Number
Rent 39% N=80
Own 61% N=126
Total 100% N=206

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
147

Packet Pg. 155 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 151: Question D7 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents About how much is your monthly housing cost for the place you live (including rent, mortgage payment, property tax, property insurance and homeowners' association (HOA) fees)? Percent Number Less than $500 per month 3% N=5
$500 to $999 per month 7% N=13
$1,000 to $1,499 per month 5% N=10
$1,500 to $1,999 per month 14% N=27
$2,000 to $2,499 per month 3% N=5
$2,500 to $2,999 per month 11% N=21
$3,000 to $3,499 per month 6% N=11
$3,500 to $3,999 per month 11% N=21
$4,000 to $4,499 per month 6% N=12
$4,500 to $4,999 per month 3% N=6
$4,500 to $4,999 per month 6% N=11
$5,500 to $5,999 per month 3% N=6
$6,000 to $6,499 per month 4% N=8
$6,500 to $6,999 per month 0% N=0
$7,000 to $7,499 per month 4% N=7
$7,500 to $7,999 per month 1% N=1
$8,000 to $8,499 per month 2% N=3
$8,500 to $8,999 per month 0% N=1
$9,000 to $9,499 per month 0% N=0
$9,500 to $9,999 per month 2% N=4
$10,000 or more per month 9% N=17
Total 100% N=187

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
148

Packet Pg. 156 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 152: Question D8 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Do any children 17 or under live in your household? Percent Number No 66% N=136
Yes 34% N=69
Total 100% N=205

Table 153: Question D9 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you or any other members of your household aged 65 or older? Percent Number No 60% N=125
Yes 40% N=83
Total 100% N=208

Table 154: Question D10 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents How much do you anticipate your household's total income before taxes will be for the current year? (Please include in your total income money from all sources for all persons living in your household.) Percent Number Less than $25,000 0% N=0
$25,000 to $49,999 2% N=3
$50,000 to $74,999 16% N=27
$75,000 to $99,999 10% N=17
$100,000 to $149,999 11% N=18
$150,000 to $199,999 9% N=15
$200,000 to $249,999 12% N=19
$250,000 to $299,999 6% N=9
$300,000 to $349,999 4% N=6
$350,000 to $399,999 6% N=9
$400,000 to $449,999 2% N=4
$450,000 to $499,999 22% N=36
$500,000 or more 0% N=0
Total 100% N=163

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
149

Packet Pg. 157 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 155: Question D11 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents Are you Spanish, Hispanic or Latino? Percent Number
No, not Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 93% N=181
Yes, I consider myself to be Spanish, Hispanic or Latino 7% N=14 Total 100% N=163

Table 156: Question D12 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your race? (Mark one or more races to indicate what race(s) you consider yourself to be.) Percent Number American Indian or Alaskan Native 1% N=1
Asian, Asian Indian or Pacific Islander 28% N=54
Black or African American 1% N=2
Middle Eastern or North African 0% N=0
White 71% N=135
Other 4% N=7
Total may exceed 100% as respondents could select more than one option.

Table 157: Question D13 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents In which category is your age? Percent Number
18 to 24 years 0% N=0
25 to 34 years 13% N=25
35 to 44 years 18% N=37
45 to 54 years 20% N=39
55 to 64 years 17% N=34
65 to 74 years 12% N=23
75 years or older 21% N=42
Total 100% N=199

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
150

Packet Pg. 158 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 158: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your gender? Percent Number
Female 52% N=102
Male 46% N=91
Identify in another way 2% N=4
Total 100% N=197

Table 159: Question D14 - Response Percentages and Number of Respondents What is your sexual orientation? Percent Number
Heterosexual 93% N=172
Lesbian 0% N=0
Gay 4% N=7
Bisexual 3% N=5
Identify another way 1% N=2
Total 100% N=185

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025 Community
Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
151

Packet Pg. 159 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix D: Results to Open -Participation Survey
compared to Probability Survey

Table 160: Question 1 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Palo Alto as a place to live 90% 86%
Your neighborhood as a place to live 92% 91%
Palo Alto as a place to raise children 83% 86%
Palo Alto as a place to work 80% 82%
Palo Alto as a place to visit 71% 73%
Palo Alto as a place to retire 55% 48%
The overall quality of life in Palo Alto 87% 82%

Table 161: Question 2 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Overall "built environment" of Palo Alto (including
overall design, buildings, parks and transportation
systems)
75%
B
67%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 90% 90%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 88% 90% Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 85% 85% Residents' connection and engagement with their
community
59% 60%

Table 162: Question 3 - by Sample
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Recommend living in Palo Alto to someone who asks 82% 77% Remain in Palo Alto for the next five years 81% 87%
Recommend Palo Alto’s libraries to friends 92% 96%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
152

Packet Pg. 160 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 163: Question 4 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Making all residents feel welcome 67%
B
52%
Attracting people from diverse backgrounds 59%
B
43%
Valuing/respecting residents from diverse
backgrounds
73%
B
54%
Taking care of vulnerable residents (elderly, disabled, homeless, etc.)
49%
B
34%

Table 164: Question 5 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Overall quality of business and service
establishments in Palo Alto
78% 72%
Variety of business and service establishments in
Palo Alto
60% 59%
Vibrancy of downtown/commercial area 62% 57%
Employment opportunities 60% 65%
Shopping opportunities 67% 74%
Cost of living in Palo Alto 8% 6%
Overall image or reputation of Palo Alto 81%
B
69%
Traffic flow on major streets 45% 50%
Ease of public parking 64% 70%
Ease of travel by car in Palo Alto 70% 75%
Ease of travel by public transportation in Palo Alto 33% 28% Ease of travel by bicycle in Palo Alto 80%
B
69%
Ease of walking in Palo Alto 83%
B
74%
Variety of housing options 26% 19%
Availability of affordable quality housing 10% 11%
Overall quality of new development in Palo Alto 40% 37% Availability of paths and walking trails 74% 75%
Fitness opportunities (including exercise classes and
paths or trails, etc.)
79% 77%
Recreational opportunities 77% 83%
Availability of affordable quality mental health care 37% 30% Opportunities to attend cultural/arts/music activities 72% 79% Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
153

Packet Pg. 161 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 165: Question 6 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Availability of affordable quality childcare/preschool 37% B
24%
K-12 education 88% 82%
Adult educational opportunities 81% 77%
Opportunities to participate in social events and
activities
67% 79%
A
Openness and acceptance of the community toward
people of diverse backgrounds
71%
B
55%
Opportunities to learn about City services via City
website, social media (Twitter/X, Nextdoor, Facebook,
Instagram, Medium, LinkedIn)
71% 70%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
154

Packet Pg. 162 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 166: Question 7 - by Sample
Percent "yes"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Used Palo Alto recreation centers or their services 52% 65% A
Visited a neighborhood park or City park 95% 96%
Used Palo Alto public libraries or their services 74% 84% A
Participated in religious or spiritual activities in Palo Alto
24% 31%
Attended a City-sponsored event 56% 70%
A
Talked to or visited with your immediate neighbors 88% 93% A
Used the City’s website to conduct business or pay
bills
57% 59%
Used the Utilities webpage to conduct business or pay
bills
69% 64%
Contacted the City of Palo Alto (in-person, phone,
email or web) for help or information
51% 62%
A
Contacted Palo Alto elected officials (in-person,
phone, email or web) to express your opinion
22% 53%
A
Attended a local public meeting (of local elected
officials like City Council or County Commissioners,
advisory boards, town halls, HOA, neighborhood
watch, etc.)
25% 49%
A
Watched (online or on television) a local public
meeting
18% 39%
A
Volunteered your time to some group/activity in Palo
Alto
41% 61%
A
Voted in your most recent local election 78% 90%
A
Used bus, rail, subway, or other public transportation
instead of driving
53% 60%
Carpooled with other adults or children instead of
driving alone
59% 61%
Walked or biked instead of driving 86% 86%
Observed a code violation or other hazard in Palo Alto
(weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.)
43% 55%
A
Household member was a victim of a crime in Palo
Alto
13% 11%
Reported a crime to the police in Palo Alto 19% 21%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
155

Packet Pg. 163 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 167: Question 8 - by Sample
Percent "excellent" or "good".

Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
The value of services for the taxes paid to Palo Alto 59% B
51%
The overall direction that Palo Alto is taking 53%
B
40%
The job Palo Alto government does at welcoming resident involvement
59% 52%
Overall confidence in Palo Alto government 55%
B
39%
Generally acting in the best interest of the community 60% B
47%
Being honest 62% 57%
Being open and transparent to the public 60% 52%
Informing residents about issues facing the community 57% 55% Treating all residents fairly 62%
B
49%
Treating residents with respect 73%
B
65%

Table 168: Question 9 - by Sample
Percent "excellent" or "good"
Address-based
Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
The City of Palo Alto 78% 71%
The State Government 52% 46%
The Federal Government 19% 14%

Table 169: Question 10 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Traffic enforcement 60%
B
46%
Traffic signal timing 51% 45%
Street repair 57% 62%
Street cleaning 80% 82%
Street tree maintenance 72% 81%
A
Sidewalk maintenance 59% 66%
Land use, planning, and zoning 43%
B
27%
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
156

Packet Pg. 164 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Code enforcement (weeds, abandoned buildings, etc.) 47% 44% Preservation of natural areas (open space, farmlands, and greenbelts)
83% 78%
Building and planning application processing services 32% 23% Affordable high-speed internet access 54% 58%
Electric utility 75% 77%
Gas utility 75% 73%
Utility payment options 86% 85%
Drinking water 90% 92%
Sewer services 87% 90%
Storm water management (storm drainage, dams, levees,
etc.)
78% 86%
A
Refuse collection (garbage, recycling, yard waste, and e- waste)
86% 89%
Police services 86% 86%
Crime prevention 73% 78%
Animal control 81% 86%
Ambulance or emergency medical services 91% 94%
Fire emergency services 90% 98%
A
Fire prevention and education 78% 91%
A
Palo Alto open space (e.g Foothills, Baylands) 93% 92%
City parks 94% 93%
Recreation programs or classes 86% 85%
Recreation centers or facilities 84% 85%
Public library services (e.g., hold requests, storytimes, teen events, bookclubs)
94% 97%
Library facilities (buildings, computer equipment,
accessibility)
93% 97%
Variety of library materials (books, e-books, streaming, databases, audiobooks)
88% 90%
Art programs and theater 85% 91%
City-sponsored special events 80% 86%
City website (cityofpaloalto.org) 75%
B
65%
Overall customer service by Palo Alto employees (police, receptionists, planners, etc.)
80% 82%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
157

Packet Pg. 165 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 170: Question 11 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Reliability of utility services 92% 94%
Affordability of utility services 54% 63%
A
Community value received from the City owning and
operating its own municipal utility services
80% 83%
Utilities online customer self-service features 84% 82% Providing opportunities for energy and water efficiency at home or business
78% 84%
Working hard to keep utilities prices competitive 62% 75% A
Value of all the services Palo Alto Utilities provides for the price you pay
66% 71%
Ease of obtaining information or performing a transaction through the City’s website
73% 71%
Value of Palo Alto Utilities’ customer communications 73% 78% Ease of contacting Utilities department staff 76% 84%
Speed of response after contacting Utilities department staff
75% 88%
A

Table 171: Question 12 - by Sample
Percent rating "excellent" or "good"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Overall “built environment” of Palo Alto (including overall design, buildings, parks and transportation systems)
85% 88%
Overall economic health of Palo Alto 85% 90%
Overall feeling of safety in Palo Alto 83% 82%
Overall quality of natural environment in Palo Alto 86% B
78%
Overall health and wellness opportunities in Palo Alto 63% 68% Overall opportunities for education, culture and the arts 70% 73% Residents' connection and engagement with their
community
63% 70%
Reducing community greenhouse gas emissions 57% 65%
Increasing local solar generation capacity within city
boundaries
56% 59%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for Utilities billing issues, efficiency tips, outage information 46% 46%
Faster notification systems (online, mobile or email) for public safety issues
62% 66%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
158

Packet Pg. 166 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 172: Question 13 - by Sample
Percent rating "very likely" or "somewhat likely"
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Participate in organized group activities (such as clubs, sports teams, volunteer your time, attend church/temple) 56% 70%
A
Spend quality time with local friends, family, and/or
neighbors
88% 92%

Table 173: Question 15 - by Sample
Percent rating "very" or "somewhat" likely
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Walking 71% 77%
Biking 78% 74%
Bus 35% 34%
Train 48% 52%
Scootering 39% 43%
Palo Alto Link 49% 53%
Uber/Lyft or similar rideshare service 79% 83%
Carpooling 38% 47%
A

Table 174: Question 16 - by Sample
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s Sustainability and Climate Action Plan (S/CAP) and its goal to reduce
greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions 80% by 2030?
6% 22%
A

Table 175: Question 17 - by Sample
Percent rating "very" or "extremely" familiar
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
How familiar are you with Palo Alto’s programs to advance our community goals such as home electrification?
15% 33%
A

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
159

Packet Pg. 167 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Table 176: Question 18 - by Sample
Which of the following considerations would most motivate you to replace your major gas appliances with an electric model? (Select up to three)
Probability Sample
Open participation
Sample
(A) (B)
Save time with helpful installation 30% 32%
Save money through rebates 59% 61%
Improve health and safety 37% 40%
Affect climate change 35% 40%
Support Home resale value 15% 16%
I am not going to upgrade to electric 29% 29%

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
160

Packet Pg. 168 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix E: Verbatim Responses to Open -ended
Questions from Open Participation Survey
The following are responses to questions 19 and 20. Responses are presented here in verbatim form, including any typographical, grammatical or other mistakes. Responses are in alphabetical order.

Question 19: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one change could the City make that would make you happier?
Housing and Construction
• Actual affordable housing for very low-income residents • Add more housing. This would have a remarkably strong impact on rental prices. • affordable housing
• Affordable housing
• Affordable housing for PAUSD teachers
• Approve more housing for all income groups
• build a lot more housing
• Build affordable housing quickly and in locations near downtown and midtown • Build more affordable housing
• Build more homes at all income levels. Our housing shortage is a crisis. My kids and mom cannot afford to live near me. This is my #1 local issues. We must upzone. • Build more housing
• Build much much much more housing
• Decrease the new apartment buildings - too crowded in residential area already. Need to build along highway or bayland openspace. Please don;t keep adding high rise to the residential areas.

Rental units should be far away from owner occupied homes as home owners value their properties and surrounding area/community. Rentals come and go and tends to trash the surrounding areas and make the neighborhood less attractive to live in. Please don't try and build affordakle housing and sacrifice the quality of l iving and open space, too crowded. Don't keep changing the Zoning and allow more and more crowded units and high rise - that's San Francisco.

Thank you for listening.
• Don't allow huge development like extremely tall and dense new Mollie Stone's • Encourage more density for housing or mixed use. Promote more innovative architecture and design. Move beyond suburban mentally to no-urban perspective. • Faster approve more affordable housing
• Focusing on affordable housing, I acknowledge that there is work being done however it is a bit lacking.
• get serious about affordable housing - government (local, state, and federal) must get involved since the "free market" will never prefer low profit development when higher profits are available. • implement consistent and effective housing development plans • Increase residential building height limits significantly eeverywhere • Less development and coming construction and traffic congestion in South Palo Alto.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
161

Packet Pg. 169 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• meaningful steps to add housing supply and address vacancy/investment properties • More housing for low and moderate income people.
• More affordable high rise housing
• More affordable housing for needed workers; eg health care workers, childcare workers and teachers who do not make competitive salaries anymore in the entire Bay Area and we are losing workers in our community because of this.Housing for our homeless parti cularly handicapped ( many in wheel chairs living outside) and seniors which we see daily in Palo Alto. • more affordable housing, remove zoning
• More housing (affordable and otherwise)
• More housing across all cost levels.
• more housing for a diverse mix of residents!
• More housing in the walkable downtown areas (University Ave and California Avenue) My family and I are able to live a low carbon lifestyle and I want thousands more to be able to do so in Palo Alto. We need customers for local businesses who live within a few blocks of our downtowns to sustain those businesses economically and we need to win back middle class residents in Palo Alto. I would give younger residents more say in public processes and a stake to participate in civic life - sadly, their proportions are shrinking
• More housing! More density! More neighbors!
• New housing rentals need to increase and be available for the middle class, not just those with low incomes or who are unhoused.
• Permit more housing. Lot of it!
• Provide more affordable housing and allow canbis sales in the city. Our vets next door have to drive a long way or pay large fees to obtain their regular canbis supply. • Resist over urbanization. I know housing is terribly expensive but I hate seeing Palo Alto turn into a big city. Rush hour traffic is starting earlier and earlier. • Rezone to allow high rise housing
• The City could make it easier to build dense housing so that more people could live more affordably here. The City could make a decision about where the train-track crossings should be and what they will look like.
• The city needs to permit the construction of more homes to become more affordable! • The city needs top make it much easier for developers to create multi-family dwellings in the city.

The myriad of rules limiting construction have left us without enough reasobly priced housing in the city, and it has radically reduced the number of people in the 20's and early 30's who can live here. It also makes it very hard for many of the people who work here to live near their jobs. • Urbanize - add lots of housing/density
Public Safety and Policing
• Enforce speed limits and red lights on Embarcadero Rd so I can safely enter traffic from side streets without risking getting T -boned or run over. Speeds esp. bad east of Newell, and I see light-running daily at Bryant and Greer intersections.
• Enforce the speed limits
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
162

Packet Pg. 170 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Enforce traffic laws by using automated red-light and speed cameras in major intersections near safe-to-school routes, and prioritize people over passenger vehicles • For the police to enforce the low. For the city council to be aware of what is going on in difference areas of Palo Alto.
• Install speeding ticket cameras on Middlefield in Midtown and South Palo Alto • Make the city safer and reduce noise.
• Monitor the sale of canbis products to minors. Several parents have informed PAPD about Smokers Station on El Camino selling canbis vapes to minors only to be told PAPD cannot "do anything" without a self-incrimiting statement from the minor. Why is that necessary? Why can't PAPD just go into Smokers Station and remind them of their legal obligations? Shouldn't PAPD be doing that anyway? Right now they are selling with impunity and have a "we dote to PAPD" sticker on their front door. If PAPD is not protecting our kids, what are they doing? • More police watching speeders
• More traffic enforcement
• More traffic enforcement (drivers on Alma exhibit crazy and fast driving behaviors) • Patrol my street better for speedy drivers. I live on Greer Road between Embarcadero and Channing. Speedy vehicles go down my street all the time, especially during the work week, mornings and afternoons especially. It's used as 'through way.' Would lov e if city would install speed bumps along Greer Road between Embarcadero and Channing. • Stronger law enforcement. Removal of all street or parking lot parked RVs and junk them.

Transportation and Traffic
• Better traffic enforcement. Too often, I see red lights run, speeding, and stop signs run. • Better traffic flow
• Better traffic law enforcement
• For the question above that does not apply to renters - my landlord also has no interest in upgrading or my heath. One change that would make me happier is to elimite the train-crossings.

I don't mean talk about it for a few more decades, I mean start doing it now. • Have public transportation options for South Palo Alto • hire traffic enforcement personnel
• I know you asked for one, but I'm giving you two themes and some specific suggestions.Theme:
continued improvements to public transit1. A light rail running perpendicular to Caltrain.2. Making University Avenue pedestrian only similar to California Avenue and Castro Street in MTV.3. More infrastructure that prioritizes bikes over cars. Theme: aggressive action to mitigate climate change4. More programs that incentivize homeowners to fully convert appliances to electric options. The heat pump program was fa ntastic.5. Making our climate goals more aggressive.

Why not 100% by 2027? We should be leading the country.6. Offer homeowners $$$ incentives to participate in Virtual Power Plants if they have a home storage battery.7. Offer homeowners $$$ to termite their gas connection.
• Improve traffic flow and police speed enforcement
• improve traffic light timing in major streets especially El Cam and Embarcadero • Provide more public transportation, so I don't have to rely on my car as much.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
163

Packet Pg. 171 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Road safety and reducing speeding drivers!
• Stop rumiting over railroad crossings and leave it the way it is. • Traffic control on Embarcadero road
• Traffic enforcement. Cars aren't even stopping at stop signs and they speed everywhere. It's dangerous.
• Traffic law enforcement
Homelessness and RVs
• Deal with homeless and vehicle dwellers
• Find a successf Approach to getting the unhoused off the streets and out of the parks • Get rid of the vans
• Resolve the issue of RV parking in residential and business locations. • Work on homeless RVs due to reduced sanitation and order.

City Governance and Administration
• (1) Fire super-intendent.
• A fully staffed fire engine in Midtown; treating Midtown area equally to Old Palo Alto. • Be less dismissive of resident concerns and questions and more transparent about communicating what the city is and is not doing. For instance, if a setback is optiol for developers, don't leave out that information when staff talks about it in public meet ings. Plan comprehensively as the city used to, and pay more attention to planning for south Palo Alto where the city has decided to put most of the state -mandated housing. Also, multiple choice surveys are not good for the kinds of questions you are asking here. For instance, this survey asks very general questions about existing conditions and gives little opportunity to give nuanced responses and no opportunity to express concerns about planning for substantive future land use changes that are coming.
• Better listening to south Palo Alto residents regarding transportation plans esp grade separation preferred plan by certain city council members that reduce safety for students commuting from Gunn back to their house on the east side of Alma, turning Alma into an expressway to improve traffic flow
• Building code less restrictive and move project faster. • City Council make decisions quicker and stick with them -- too much back and forth and trying to please everyone. Also, neighborhood representation on Council, i.e., not citywide elections • City Council should listen to all residents, not just NIMBYs. We need more affordable housing for everyone. And don't close Churchill crossing to cars - Paly staff and buses need that intersection.

City Council only listens to Southgate NIMBYs on that issue • City council to serve the community- be honest and effective and utility department to be present and responsive and billing to be fair
• City Government could be more receptive to resident input, not just listening but taking the feedback to heart.
• City planning department be more efficient
• Dealing with the planning dept. in "days" instead of weeks, months, and years.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
164

Packet Pg. 172 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• End all monetary subsidies for electrification. Highlight the fact that mandatory fees already offset all CO2 emissions. After that, remove protections on redwood trees. • Figure out a way to totally subsidize conversion to electric for low income homeowners. Hire more Code Enforcement officers. Try to reign in Builders Remedy, SB9 lot splits and SB79 projects to maintain City quality of life.
• Focus on getting things done, rather than endless debates that are never resolved (railroad crossings, fiber to the home, underground utilities, low cost housing, homeless issues, zoning, etc., etc.)
• Get a new City Mager.
• Get rid of hight limits
• Have city council members represent specific areas of the city as their districts. • Help keep neighborhoods more residential and uncrowded. Too many ADU's or multi units in neighborhoods will over urbanize Palo Alto. Put denser housing on busier streets away from neighborhoods.
• Lower taxes!
• lower utility rates
• Make decisions based on the quality of life for it's residents, and not just economic impact. • mayor should not ignore problems by saying resident issues are "unintended consequences". City council protects many sectors ( low income, homeless, developers/builders) but shows little empathy for condo & homeowner issues. Nice that they protect the needed and they want future jobs/campaign funds from the wealthy developers.
• More input on community issues -- resident voting online on current items before the council and committees (2nd: Fix permitting process)
• Prioritize resident interests over business demands. Whatever business wants, it seems to get regardless of how it affects the quality of life for residents. Many meetings with businesses to generate altertives and action plans based on what business wants. Meetings with residents are only after decisions have been made. Residents are not in the room where things happen. • Replace all the City Council members who don't want change or do anything to make this City better.
• Replace PAUSD board and superintendent. Not safe for kids. • Retain person to peron interactions. Was surprised to be denied speaking with a staff person at City Hall. Too much reliance on the internet degrades comminity" • Speed up building department approvals
• Speed up the "Palo Alto process." Make posicy by what is good for the city as a whole, and stop retreating in the face of NIMBYs.
• Stop isolating city offices from public. Open up city hall again • That the city STOP/cut using expensive consultants with no local knowledge like the bike and retail consultants and the business registry morons that waste our time correcting and that have little staff oversight and push up our utility rates
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
165

Packet Pg. 173 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Too much bureaucracy. It takes years to do projects such as Charleston / Arastradero. Rail upgrades and improvements (the city's part). Cubberly. I feel like it takes so long to get these project done I might not be alive to see them complete and I am not that old. • Urban planning and programming to make Palo Alto more attractive to young adults. Palo Alto feels like a retirement community.
• Use consultants a lot less, eg less than half of current status • We are having a horrible experience with the planning department. They do not seem to communicate with each other and renegotiate what they've already agreed to. It is costing us thousands in fees to our architect who has to respond and chase them when they take weeks to reply and they have also made comments about our plans as if our budget is infinite, specifically that instead of a remodel, we should just do a new build. Well that's another $500k for the work that would take and it comes off tone deaf a s if everyone here is Zuckerberg or Marissa Mayer.

I'd like to have the city have a clear process for permitting work on my home and it's clear that the people in planning can't collaborate or communicate with each other. It seems like everything is done over email and that's not an auditable or repeatable process. I'm really irritated at this and will vote for whoever improves this problem. It also cost $17k to have them do the initial review and it's just been a huge headache.
• With the implementation of the bike lanes and the need to build so much housing because of ABAG requirements, I would like that there be more consideration given to the individual neighborhoods in the city when creating overall long range plans for future development. Not every neighborhood in Palo Alto is the same, so what might work for downtown PA creates big problems in south Palo Alto. I am feeling that many residents do not have a voice.

Community Amenities and Services
• 8 (or more) additiol pickleball courts in Mitchell Park • Add more pickleball courts to Mitchell Park, please!
• Allow rapid and complete redevelopment of El Camino corridor through the length of the city, providing more attractive spaces for walking, recreation, business, and much denser housing. • Be more transparent, invest less in the airport (1%) but more in people services like theater and recreation for many (99%). I would like to remove my PAUSD tax because I don't have kids in the school district.
• Build new Cubberley Community Center
• Complete Mayfield soccer complex upgrade and better maintence of soccer fields in general. • No more pickleball sites near my house
Economic Development
• Being less of a boring place. Having more commerce, everything closes • better more diverse restaurants
• Bigger grocery store in midtown. More opportunities for small business owners. • creative ways to encourage local business development • Fill vacant commercial leases; utilize available space Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
166

Packet Pg. 174 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Here are two : ). Please incentivize development and commerce along El Camino in south Palo Alto. So many abandoned -looking places are there currentlya very depressing place to pass through and an unfortute image for a town that is otherwise vibrant (Midto wn could use similar incentives but it is less dire). And how about an education campaign to ensure cars stop at stop signs - that would greatly improve safety and quality of life. • Revitalize the downtown area with retail business and community-building events. Our town looks like a ghost town compared to RWC, Mountain View and even Los altos. It looks like we are pandering to Asian tourists.
• Too many vacant store fronts downtown. I would like to see more restaurants and stores so that Palo Alto is a better destition with more choices.
• University Downtown has stagted. Years back, there were surveys run on Downtown Revitalization, and nothing has been done. This effort, put on hold, is vital to not only the community you seek to build in Palo Alto, but the economic vitality, traffic abatement and safety, and desirability as a travel destition. In the meantime, California Avenue is closed to traffic and is your obvious example sitting right in front of you. It is high time you take this issue on, since COVID is no long here as an excuse to hide behind. Want to make a difference in your public service, get the community and funding behind revitalizing University Avenue and downtown.

Noise and Urban Environment
• close down the airport
• Protect open space by reducing FAR in zoning ordinces and/or increasing public parks. For example, for each 1000 square feet of ADU that is actually built increase public park space by ten square feet. Or increase the number of units allowed per 10,000 square foot lot but require a large fee payment into the public park land acquisition fund. Or reduce the FAR so that there is more open space (private) on each lot.
• Reduce noise from trains and train crossings
• Reduce the impact of aircraft noise. This includes traffic at PAO airport, including Stanford Hospital helicopters that fly at very low altitudes (as low as 500 ft), including at night, just to refuel (these flights are not emergency flights). From a noise, fuel consumption, and carbon emissions perspective, this does not make any sense. Stanford could easily build a ground helipad with a fueling station with about 10,000 square feet of land at a cost of $1M or less.This also includes stopping the promotion and growth of PAO, including for new electric aircraft (air taxis, drones).

Even though electric aircraft are quieter, most of them will fly at low altitudes (sometimes only a few hundred feet) resulting in additiol audible noise for many residents who are already exposed to aircraft noise. The sheer volume of low -flying electric aircraft combined with the fact that the City cannot regulate PAO operations (such as imposing curfew or limiting the number of operations) will severely impact the quality of life for many residents, let alone very likely endanger their safety. Low-flying aircraft are more dangerous for communities because of a much higher risk of collision with obstacles (buildings, power lines) and a much higher likelihood of accidents because pilots have a very limited time to react to unforeseen events and prevent a crash. • Stop destroying the environment by overbuilding and adding more human population, since both use more tural resources and also degrade the local livability.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
167

Packet Pg. 175 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• The noise level from the 101 freeway has been exponentially increasing. We live 1/2 mile from the freeway, and we now feel we are near it. It might be related to the new sound walls installed in a new townhouse project on Bayshore. Is the City studying the noise impact of neighborhood before allowing sound walls?
Develop Infrastructure
• Address the uttractive overhead utility lines. Remove or tidy up. • City of Palo Alto high bandwidth internet service
• Coming el Camino real to be a complete street
• Extend the fiber-optic network for FTTP to my area of town (Barron Park) before I die - the city seems to prioritize "north palo alto" over "south palo alto" in almost everything they do • Fix deadly intersection at Lincoln/middlefield
• Move more quickly on flood control related to the San Francisquito Creek • No forced fluoridation in water
• Quickly address the San Francisquito Creek problem
• Underground utilities (Ventura)
Walking and Biking trails
• A solution to the E Charleston and E Meadow train crossing that preserves as many properties as possible and ensures the safety of both pedestrians and bicyclists • Better bike infrastructure -- it always takes second priority to cars and/or pedestrians, most drivers will never make the switch until the infrastructure is built. e.g. Passages under Caltrain require bicyclists to dismount for pedestrians -- would you ever ask drivers to push their cars to defer to bikers?
• Bikability of Churchill train intersection is so bad. I feel unsafe / can take 5+ minute of waiting to cross over to Paly
• Bike paths that are bike first. Bryant St is great, El Camino is frightening. Cal Ave underpass is frustrating. Make biking a first class transit method, not a 'scurry around and don't bother cars or people'
• Make biking safer and easier
• More bike friendly lanes (more than just paint)
• more protected bikeways and enforcement of bike safety laws • Require more bicycle racks in retail spaces. Build most new housing downtown, where public rail and bus transportation exists, not in the traffic-clogged air-polluted (from 101) San Antonio Road section of the city.
• Safer biking on major streets
• Wider sidewalks
Code Enforcement
• Better access to code enforcement. The app is difficult to use. Code enforcement takes a long time to get back to you.
• Better cleanup of vehicles constantly parked in same locations without moving. People are camping on streets and making some areas feel unsafe and dirty • Enforce the ban on gas-powered leaf blowers
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
168

Packet Pg. 176 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Force my immediate neighbor to observe building codes and stop being such an *** to everyone on the entire street. He is mentally ill and nobody does anything. • Keeping landlords of single family homes as accountable as landlords of multiple-unit dwellings, with regard to property maintence and safety.

Make the city more affordable
• Ability for families! How about a place that is affordable for dinner, groceries, visit South Palo Alto on public transportation? Police address crime when it is reported. How about some public transportation to the locations we actually need to go - Kaiser, Target- PA is not a bubble. How about libraries and a zoo that is actually open when kids are Not in school Monday holidays and after 6PM - that is when we can go and this would be actually meeting customer needs. San Mateo County is doing a great job and it seems that we are not aware of how to provide services for people that are not ritch and retired.
• Lower costs for everything
• Stop letting billioires buy all the homes in the area and rent them out and keep home prices so high
Cleanliness of community; upkeep
• beautify clean up downtown and keep schools up to-date, clean • Improve the look and feel of Downtown and Cal Ave. Create attractive, inviting areas for restaurants, shopping is largely done outside of these areas anyway. Do not cheap out like the broken glass thrown on the sidewalk of Cal Ave. If you had $150M to spend on an opulent police station, we don't need to be sitting out on some dirty old asphalt with ebikes flying by at 30 mph!! Also, stop raising our utility rates to siphon cash into the general fund. • increased flexibility around clean-up days. should be twice a year (as now) but customer shuld be able to pick the day. should not have it so close to Labor Day and other holidays. I called to see if I could move it and was treated rudely and told no way. We paya fortune and get treated terribly.

Also I hate the 'smart meter' for utilities.
• Keep city clean, less expensive utilities
• Replace dead vegetation along Oregon Expressway; fill in gaps in vegetation. These changes recommended to improve aesthetic appearances for the busy lanes of traffic that cut PA in half, but most importantly to improve the health of community members who l ive in adjacent neighborhoods.
• Weed the foxtail weeds in parks which injure dogs. They are everywhere. Cost me $4000 for my dog. He was so sick! And tree pruning is badly neglected.

Other
• Allow for limited income seniors that currently qualify for BMR apartments to continue living in BMR apts once retired. SS, retirement & possible small side business is not sufficient income to qualify to continue in BMR. Forced to retire due to work-related injuries.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
169

Packet Pg. 177 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• California St (between Alma and High St) too wide - it makes me feel unsafe (my house on the corner) - is it possible to make it rrower (options include planting more trees on California St between High St and Alma, or simply extending Boyden park towards California St (and thus make California St rrower)? Would very much appreciate some feedback, especially given the recent burglary next door to me
• Car dependent city design means choices that are made across city planning often are compromised or fall short.
• Consider the bias towards the city has towards homeowners, for example the last question assumes that I own a home rather than rent.
• Elimite fee for residential parking permits
• Highlight & publicize how "average citizens" are working to reduce their GHGs. • If I saw that the City was being much more considerate to its residents than to the new developers of very large construction.
• Improve San Antonio residential corridor
• Improve the quality of life here. For example, enforce traffic violations such as speeding and running red lights.
• increase diversity of city residents
• Less virtue sigling and more realistic assessment of aspiratiol goals • More connection with the community
• Provide opportunities for open discussion of RH.
• Remove 3-day limit for resident/permitted on-street parking • Stop being a bunch of rrow -sighted pearl -clutching NIMBY -ebling slow -moving virtue sigling politicians and actually building ******* dense housing near transportation hubs. The entire process of building in Palo Alto and the Bay Area is absurd, convoluted, socially destructive, and too slow. Local zoning and regulations need to be updated, expedited, and the power to determine who gets to build more housing is held by too many people. Simply put, you need to build, build, and build more housing, and you need to ignore the whining, NIMBY boomers, because otherwise you're going to start getting "**** the system" political candidates who reflect the anger and frustration we see tion -wide. That means the so -called "In This Neighborhood Love Is Real" slacktavists have had their turn at stagting resources and hoarding housing, and real leadership that can address the housing crisis needs to be empowered. Whether it's going to be realignment of our progressive values or some "burn it all down and start over" candidate, something is going to need to happen before the disparity of wealth inequality leads to worse outcomes and more frustration.
• Stop focusing on tiol and world political issues. Focus on what you can affect: Palo Alto. And stop pushing for electrification. It does not meaningfully impact the environment and is a huge pain. • Tell residents to stop acting so entitled, bring back gas leaf blowers • Welcoming to diverse residents and visitors of All INCOME and services that address a wide range of needs
Don't know
• I'm pretty happy living here - I think all is going well.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
170

Packet Pg. 178 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• None
• None.

Question 20: As a resident of Palo Alto, what one thing do you believe the City does well and would want to maintain?
Parks, open space, and natural environment
• Access to city parks and preserves.
• Baylands, Foothill ture Preserve.
• Clean parks
• Done a nice job with the public parks, need to continue to support and take care of them. • Foothills Park and Baylands; Utilities
• Gorgeous green spaces
• great parks and libraries
• Green parks. Johnson Park in particular.
• Greenery and landscaping (trees lining the streets)
• I love Foothills Park.
• It's green spaces (Parks, Foothills, Arastradero, Baylands) • Keep Foothills Park open and its wildlife protected
• Keep the open and green place
• Keeping public parks available
• Maintain the open space parks. Expand them.
• Maintain the tree canopy.
• Maintaining the trees in this city.
• Maintencecfor all city building parks etc
• Many things, Parks, Street Maintence, Utility Service, Police Department, • Open space.
• Open spaces and parks
• Our trees
• our tural environment ( bay land , and foot hill park ) • Overall quality of spaces - generally safe and clean. • Palo Alto has maintained its parks which do a lot to make the city more livable. Unfortutely, an increase in park space is not considered given the increased density of housing. We are paving to the curb everywhere
• Park maintence
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
• Parks
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
171

Packet Pg. 179 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Parks and arts
• Parks and libraries
• Parks and open space--Maintain the current ratio of space per resident in south Palo Alto as the city adds population there. Though --No more pickleball courts. Let other cities serve THEIR residents with their tax dollars. Mitchell Park is overrun by car traffic and parking and noise from regiol pickleball players. This is destroying the serenity and availability of the park space for local residents.
• Parks very appreciative for the new Ventura neighborhood park • parks, open space, trees
• Parks!
• Prioritizing trees
• protect the baylands and get rid of the airport.
• Quality of parks, libraries, classes.
• Supports the parks and libraries.
• The parks and tree-lined residential areas must be maintained. • The parks.
• tree lined streets
• trees
• Trees
• We have incredible parks and libraries and community centers.

Utilities and city services
• City owned public utilities
• City owned utilities.
• City-owned utilities
• I appreciate our city-owned utilities.
• Infrastructure and basic services
• It's a safe city
• Low cost utilities
• Mage utilities well
• Municipal utilities are excellent and a major reason I love Palo Alto • Our locally owned utilities program is excellent and I hope we keep it! Almost everything else is really also excellent, too.
• Palo Alto Utilities! We appreciate the excellence of the city's own utility service. Thank you! • Proud we have our own utilities and make sustaible guided decisions • Provides good services for residents - utilities, water, roads for example. The core needs for all residents to live in a city need to be maintained.
• Providing efficient public services
• Public utilities (with the possible exception of water) • publicly owned utilities are great
• The city-owned utilities have proven to be a valuable investment for many decades. Continued strong leadership of the utilities is essential.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
172

Packet Pg. 180 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• The fact that we have our own utilities is a major benefit of living in Palo Alto. However, water / sewer is way too expensive.
• Trash pickup is great.
• utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities
• Utilities, and other city services
• Utilities, cleanliness
• Utility governce, park space historically
• Utility services.
• Utilities and city services
Safety services
• emergency services and response times
• EMT and police
• Focus on safety downtown (too many drug addicts/homeless - they are one and the same), For their own safety and everyone else's, remove them from the street and put in rehab, relocate to shelters or jail if they refuse those options.. Open up California Avenue!! You've ruined it! Will not go down there - it's ugly and there's no parking. See downtown Los Altos with small park -lets.

That's what Calif Ave should do.
• I live in a very safe, walkable and bikeable neighborhood. I want to maintain that character, even if density increased
• Keeping the city safe
• Overall safety
• Provides everything one needs to have a comfortable and safe neighborhood. • Public safety
• Public safety
• Safety, great neighborhood feel.
• this is a safe, beautiful place to live without a lot of hassles of bigger cities. Trying to preserve that is important to the City and I appreciate that.

Activities and Recreation (arts, libraries, museums, theaters, etc.) • A lot of planned activities, classes, feedback and study groups... • Charge non-Palo Alto residents when they use our public facility • City librarians esp at Rincoda area great, support of Ada's at Mitchell community center providing job opportunities to some more challenged residents, pickleball courts, bike lanes except for El Camino bike lanes
• Community driven events such as art walks, library reading events and small park concerts. I love having these and maintaining these is crucial to keeping residents engaged and happy. • community events
• Cultural events are a must to engage communities.
• Excellent library services
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
173

Packet Pg. 181 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Fine library and quality cultural and educatiol events. • Good library system.
• Here are two: ) Great rec department! Super responsive and helpful and a good variety of available offerings. And the libraries are a gem!
• I like the Mayfield soccer complex.
• libraries and parks
• Libraries and recreation programs.
• libraries and trees (2)
• Library operations
• Library services.
• Maintain an environment with eating, entertainment, cultural opportunities. • Music in the parks
• Neighborhood block parties
• Neighborhood meetings. Need to do more follow up on suggestions. • programs for seniors
• reacreatiol opportunities
• recreatiol activities
• Recreation opportunities, beautiful parks and open space • Supporting the libraries and the senior Avenidas Center. • The libraries used to be great until they stopped doing author alerts to save a piddling amount of money
• The library is excellent, parks are good except where they have children's play equipment and no bathroom. Streets are generally well paved and bike lanes are abundant. • The library, art center, summer camps, children's theater etc are cherished programs that build and nourish community in Palo Alto.
• The various communities (volunteer, hobbies, sports, etc) are a wonderful part of living here. • They library system is excellent
Government/leadership; government communication
• Communicating with the public and we are lucky to have the Palo Alto Weekly. • Enlightened policing - City Council meetings with police chief and independent police auditor are critical to maintain this good policing.
• Great staff
• High quality leadership
• Outreach to residents
• public hearings over the internet are useful and helpful, and we have good bike parking (thought not at the train or transit centers!),- this is another example of assuming everyone has everything they need, no rentable options. Our utilities in house is a plus. Public works projects seem to take 2x as long as other cities. The public events are very well done. • shares sustaibility info, great job with weekly residential collections and cleanliness of streets, attempts to communicate clearly but still lots of room (ex. water increase, does public hearing 2 weeks before increase and at a time where most people have left for summer vacation.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
174

Packet Pg. 182 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• The efforts to keep everyone informed.
• Transparency
Schools and education, programs for the youth
• educatiol system
• education
• Excellent education especially the schools, the children's museum and the libraries. • Good public schools and libraries.
• Quality of education and basic essential services (safety, street cleaning, park maintence). • Quality of public schools
• School quality.
• Schools
• Schools
• Support our public school teachers who are the "gold" in our community. • We have good schools, but let's take care of our kids please.

Cleanliness of community; upkeep
• City property maintence
• cleaning streets and maintaining trees
• It keeps the City clean.
• keep city clean
• Keeps Palo Alto a clean city
• Picking up garbage, recycling, hazardous waste area
• Sweep streets
Quality of life, reputation
• Attempts to provide quality services to residents
• Creates a community environment well
• It's focus on the quality of life, green spaces and parks, and just the overall feeling of Palo Alto as a green and livable small city.
• Keep a focus on quality of life for many residents. Keep investing in the Baylands, parks, libraries, separated bike lanes, pedestrian areas, etc. because such things benefit many people, generate few negative exterlities, and contribute to reducing carbon emissions. • Keeping Palo Alto as a great place to raise kids, from the good work PAUSD has been doing to the parks, libraries and safe environment
• Low density neighborhoods
• Maintain overall quality of life for residents
• Positive attitude as a community
• Supporting quality of life activities like the farmers markets and swimming pool • The overall beauty of the city and the surrounding area. NO development in the Stanford Foothills! • This is an excellent city to live in.

Infrastructure, streets, transportation
• quality of infrastructure maintence (utilities, streets) is quite good.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
175

Packet Pg. 183 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Ease of bicycle travel/walking
• Baylands paths are excellent
• Bike and pedestrian routes and infrastructure are great, and we need more safe routes to be prioritized over car parking
• Bike safety
• Bikeabilty.
• Good biking for students and feel safe to walk
• Maintains walkability
• Making PA a bike-friendly city
• Marking for bikes, more trails for bikes
• Prioritizes bike/walking over cars
• The pedestrian/bike bridge over 101 is awesome. Keep doing inspiring projects like this.

Sustainability
• city maintains the environment well. I love to walk and feel safe doing so. • Climate change goals
Culture, diversity
• Make Palo Alto affordable to the lower and middle class again by joining with the county to provide revolving construction loans to affordable housing developers and building/renovating mixed income public or nonprofit- owned housing
• respect for diverse opinions and types
Other
• (2) continue to work with builders to "build up" in palo alto and increase occupancy in smart ways. • Attracts high tech businesses and cooperation with Stanford • Currently very disillusioned by the way the City of Palo Alto has treated younger residents (<45 years old) and renters (including long term, middle aged renters) by excluding them in public processes and and defacto pushing them out. We are not building a next generation in our city or making it affordable for the next generation to live here, so the community is ossifying, becoming anti-innovative and uble to build a strong future Palo Alto. • Encouraging people to get to know their neighbors with the KYN grant and in helping people reduce their carbon footprint
• Hard to think about any . When I compere how was Palo Alto on the 70, 80, and 90, today is very well define that are certain benefit that only apply to certain people. • Most things
• Palo Alto has walked a balance between trying to feel like a small city and courting billioires and cowtowing to tech interests. Often, it has erred in the side of money and wealth. But it also has some of the brightest minds in the world in these few zip codes, and it's very diverse. Palo Alto sometimes embraces that cultural and intellectual diversity, and that's why it continues to be a place where ground breaking ideas happen. It's a city sized incubator, and that's pretty neat. I hope the city continues to emphasize education and the arts. • Remain your high tech sophistication
• Resale value due to limited housing
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
176

Packet Pg. 184 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

• Startup and business community is the jewel of Palo Alto • Take decisions on buildings faster (ie., Cubberley and San Antonio) • The very, very, slow permit process for housing construction. Less construction equals less dirt and noise. Thank you.
• They have numerous areas of improvement
Nothing / Don’t know
• None
• Not sure.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
177

Packet Pg. 185 of 510

City of Palo Alto Community Survey
October 2025

Report of Results

Appendix F: Survey Materials
The following pages contain copies of the survey materials sent to randomly selected households within the City of Palo Alto.

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
178

Packet Pg. 186 of 510

Dear Denver Resident,
It won’t take much of your time to make a big difference! Your household has been randomly selected to participate in the 2025 Denver Public Library Survey. Scan the QR code or visit the link below to complete our survey and enter your email for a chance to win Denver Zoo passes, Denver Nuggets tickets, or a grocery gift card! https://polco.us/xxplaceholder
Please do not share your survey link . This survey is for randomly selected households only. A separate survey that is open to all residents will open in a few weeks.

If you have any questions about the survey, please call (720) 865-1111.

Thank you for your time and participation!
Sincerely,

Para contestar la encuesta en
línea en español y participar por
un premio, seleccione la opción
‘español’ en el menú desplegable
que aparece en la parte superior
de la página de la encuesta.

Để trả lời khảo sát trực tuyến
bằng tiếng Việt và tham gia nhận
giải thưởng, vui lòng chọn tùy
chọn ‘Tiếng Việt’ trong menu thả
xuống ở đầu trang khảo sát.

እባክዎ ከኢንተርኔት ጥናቱ ገፅ ላይ ከላይ
ያለው የሚወጣ ምናሌ ማውጫ
ማናቸውንም አማርኛ አማራጭ
ይምረጡ እና እንደዚህ በአማርኛ
የሚካሄደውን መለማመጥ በመሙላት
ሽልማት ለመሸምተት ይሳተፉ።
Nicolle Davies
City Librarian

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
179

Packet Pg. 187 of 510

Presorted
First Class Mail
US Postage
PAID
Boulder, CO
Permit NO. 94

Tell us what you think!
Complete the Denver Public Library survey by scanning the QR code. ¡Su opinión nos interesa!  Hãy cho chúng tôi biết suy nghĩ của bạn!  ምን እንደሚያስቡ ይንገሩን! QR Code
Placeholder
Denver Public Library
Attn: Strategy & Evaluation
10 W 14th Ave. Denver, CO 80204
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
180

Packet Pg. 188 of 510

Dear Denver Resident,
Just a reminder—if you have not yet completed the 2025 Denver Public Library survey, please do so. If you have completed it, thank you.

Please do not respond twice.

Your household has been randomly selected to participate in the 2025 Denver Public Library Survey. Scan the QR code or visit the link below to complete our survey and enter your email for a chance to win Denver Zoo passes, Denver Nuggets tickets, or a grocery gift card! https://polco.us/xxplaceholder
Please do not share your survey link. This survey is for randomly selected households only. A separate survey for all residents will open next week.

If you have any questions about the survey, please call (720) 865-1111.

Thank you for your time and participation!
Sincerely,

Para contestar la encuesta en
línea en español y participar por
un premio, seleccione la opción
‘español’ en el menú desplegable
que aparece en la parte superior
de la página de la encuesta.

Để trả lời khảo sát trực tuyến
bằng tiếng Việt và tham gia nhận
giải thưởng, vui lòng chọn tùy
chọn ‘Tiếng Việt’ trong menu thả
xuống ở đầu trang khảo sát.

እባክዎ ከኢንተርኔት ጥናቱ ገፅ ላይ ከላይ
ያለው የሚወጣ ምናሌ ማውጫ
ማናቸውንም አማርኛ አማራጭ
ይምረጡ እና እንደዚህ በአማርኛ
የሚካሄደውን መለማመጥ በመሙላት
ሽልማት ለመሸምተት ይሳተፉ።

Nicolle Davies
City Librarian

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
181

Packet Pg. 189 of 510

Presorted
First Class Mail
US Postage
PAID
Boulder, CO
Permit NO. 94

Denver Public Library
Attn: Strategy & Evaluation
10 W 14th Ave. Denver, CO 80204
Tell us what you think!
Complete the Denver Public Library survey by scanning the QR code. ¡Su opinión nos interesa!  Hãy cho chúng tôi biết suy nghĩ của bạn!  ምን እንደሚያስቡ ይንገሩን! QR Code
Placeholder
Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
182

Packet Pg. 190 of 510

Denver Public Library Survey Page 1 of 5
Denver Public Library Survey 2025
Please take this survey if you are the adult (age 18 or older) in your household with the most recent birthday. Your year of birth does not matter. All responses are confidential and reported only as a group. Thank you.

1. Do you have a Denver Public Library card?
 Yes No  Don’t know

2. In the past 12 months, how often did you use any Denver Public Library service?  Daily  Weekly  Monthly  Less than once per month  Never

3. If you have not used Denver Public Library in the last 12 months, why not? (Please check all that apply.) ❑ I don’t need to use it ❑ It's too hard to find what I am looking for ❑ I use another library (e.g., school library, library in ❑ Library hours are not convenient another city, etc.) ❑ Parking is difficult
❑ The library is too far from my home ❑ The library is an unsafe environment ❑ I don't have any transportation ❑ The customer service at the library is not very good ❑ I don't have a library card ❑ The hold times are too long to get the books and ❑ I get my information from the Internet materials I want ❑ I buy my own books/magazines/DVDs ❑ Not applicable
❑ I don't know what the library offers

4. Which library location do you visit most frequently? (Please select one.)  Athmar Park Branch Library
 Bear Valley Branch Library
 Blair-Caldwell African
American Research Library
 Bob Ragland Branch Library
 Denver Central Library
 Decker Branch Library
 Eugene Field Branch Library
 Ford Warren Branch Library
 Green Valley Ranch Library
 Hadley Branch Library
 Hampden Branch Library

 John "Thunderbird Man"
Emhoolah, Jr. Branch Library
 Montbello Branch Library
 Park Hill Branch Library
 Pauline Robinson Branch
Library
 Rodolfo "Corky" Gonzales
Branch Library
 Ross-Phyllis Bigpond Branch
Library (formerly Ross-
Barnum)
 Ross-Broadway Branch Library
 Ross-Cherry Creek Branch
Library
 Ross-University Hills Branch
Library
 Sam Gary Branch Library
 Schlessman Family Branch
Library
 Smiley Branch Library
 Valdez-Perry Branch Library
 Virginia Village Branch Library
 Westwood Branch Library
 Woodbury Branch Library
 I only access the library online
 None/I don’t visit any library
location

5. In the past 12 months, about how often, on average, did you: Less than once Daily Weekly Monthly per month Never
Browse shelves ............................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow physical materials (books, DVDs, music, etc.)
from the library ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow digital materials (books, movies, music, etc.)
from the library ....................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow newspapers and magazines from the library ................ 1 2 3 4 5 Request an interlibrary loan .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Pick up materials put on hold ................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Receive staff-provided book/material recommendations ....... 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's Internet access/Wifi ............................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's computers ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's printer, photocopier, or fax machine............... 1 2 3 4 5 Use makerspace equipment ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Have a librarian help you use computers, printers, etc. ............ 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's online services (website, catalog,
research databases, etc.) ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Use reference/research services (assistance from librarians) ......1 2 3 4 5 Book 1x1 appointments ........................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Access archival collections ..................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's study rooms ............................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's community/meeting rooms ................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Use the Denver Public Library as a place to spend time ............ 1 2 3 4 5

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
183

Packet Pg. 191 of 510

Denver Public Library Survey Page 2 of 5
Less than once
Daily Weekly Monthly per month Never
Attend programs for children (classes, storytimes, etc.) at the library ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Attend programs for adults (classes, book clubs, etc.)
at the library ............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Use the Bookmobile ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Get help from the library's social workers or
peer navigators ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Get a sack lunch, snack, cold weather gear, or other items ...... 1 2 3 4 5 Utilize small business & non-profit support ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Other (please specify):_________________________________________ .... 1 2 3 4 5

6. Please first rate the quality and importance of each library service.

Don’t Very Somewhat Not at all Don’t
Excellent Good Fair Poor know Essential important important important know Browse shelves ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow physical materials (books, DVDs,
music, etc.) from the library .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Variety of physical materials (books,
DVDs, music, etc.) from the library ............ 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow digital materials (books, movies,
music, etc.) from the library .......................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Borrow newspapers and magazines
from the library .................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Request an interlibrary loan ............................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Pick up materials put on hold ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Have library books and materials
delivered to your home ................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Receive staff-provided book/material
recommendations.............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's Internet access/Wifi .......... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's computers .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's printer, photocopier, or
fax machine .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use makerspace equipment .............................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Have a librarian help you use computers,
printers, etc. ......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the online catalog .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library’s website .......................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use reference/research services
(assistance from librarians) ............................ 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Book 1x1 appointments ...................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Access archival collections ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's study rooms ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the library's community meeting
rooms ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the Denver Public Library as a place
to spend time ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Attend programs for children (classes,
storytimes, etc.) at the library ...................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Attend programs for adults (classes,
book clubs, etc.) at the library ...................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Use the Bookmobile .............................................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Get help from the library's social
workers or peer navigators ........................... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Get a sack lunch, snack, cold weather gear,
or other items ................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Utilize small business & non-profit support ...... 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Other (please specify):
__________________________________________........ 1 2 3 4 5 1 2 3 4 5 Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
184

Packet Pg. 192 of 510

Denver Public Library Survey Page 3 of 5

7. In the last year, did you or anyone in your household go to denverlibrary.org for any of the following, either at the library or outside the library?
Wanted to, Did not know the Did not
Yes, with but did not library website want or
Yes someone’s help know how offered this need to
Search a public library catalog ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Download library e-book, magazine or audio file .. 1 2 3 4 5 Search a database through the library’s website .... 1 2 3 4 5 Request or renew a library book............................. 1 2 3 4 5 Register for a library program ................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Find a program or event to attend ......................... 1 2 3 4 5 Reserve a meeting room or a study room ........... 1 2 3 4 5

8. In the last 12 months, how often have you interacted with library staff? (Please include any interactions such as in person, by phone or online.) (If "0 times," please skip the next question.)  0 times (skip to question 10)  1-2 times  3-5 times  6-8 times  9 or more times

9. How would you rate your last experience with library staff? Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
Knowledge .......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Courtesy .............................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Responsiveness to requests and/or needs .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Treating all people in a respectful manner .......................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Overall impression of library staff member ........................................................ 1 2 3 4 5

10. How often are you able to locate the books and other materials that you are looking for in the library or on its website?
Always Sometimes Rarely Never Not applicable
In the Library ..................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 On the website ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

11. In general, how do you feel about the time it takes to receive items you request or place on hold?  The time is longer than I expect
 The time is just as long as I expect
 The time is shorter than I expect
 Don’t know/I don’t place items on hold

12. Please rate the Denver Public Library location you use the most on each of the following:

Excellent Good Fair Poor Don’t know
Condition of the outside of the library ................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Condition of the inside of the library ...................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of access entering the building ....................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Ease of access inside the library ............................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Signs and signage ............................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Layout and arrangement .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of seating and tables .............................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of meeting spaces ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of technology ............................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Availability of youth designated space .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Time waiting for service ............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Cleanliness ......................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Lighting ................................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Acoustics ............................................................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Safety .................................................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Temperature and comfort ........................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

13. What types of materials do you prefer?
 I prefer physical items only
 I prefer digital items only
 I prefer physical items but sometimes use
digital items
 I prefer digital items but sometimes use
physical items
 Format does not matter to me
 Don't know

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
185

Packet Pg. 193 of 510

Denver Public Library Survey Page 4 of 5

14. When do/would you like to visit the library? (Select top 3.) ❑ Early mornings (before 10am) ❑ Weekday evenings ❑ Sunday mornings ❑ Late evening (after 8pm) ❑ Saturday mornings ❑ Sunday afternoons ❑ Weekday mornings ❑ Saturday afternoons ❑ Sunday evenings ❑ Weekday afternoons ❑ Saturday evenings

15. When do/would you like to attend programs and events? (Select top 3.) ❑ Early mornings (before 10am) ❑ Weekday evenings ❑ Sunday mornings ❑ Late evening (after 8pm) ❑ Saturday mornings ❑ Sunday afternoons ❑ Weekday mornings ❑ Saturday afternoons ❑ Sunday evenings ❑ Weekday afternoons ❑ Saturday evenings

16. How much do you know about the programs and services provided by the Denver Public Library?  Very knowledgeable  Somewhat knowledgeable  Not at all knowledgeable  Don’t know

17. How do you learn about library programs and services? (Please check all that apply.) ❑ Library staff and/or signage
❑ Library website
❑ Library publications (Engage, Conexiones, flyers, etc.) ❑ Library email newsletters
❑ Library social media (Facebook, Instagram, etc.)
❑ Search Engines
❑ Advertisements (TV, radio, magazine, etc.)
❑ Other social media (not from the library)
❑ Other events (not at the library)
❑ Word of mouth (not library staff)
❑ Other: ______________________________
❑ Don't know/Not applicable

18. If you use Denver Public Library's promotional materials to learn about programs and services, how reflective do you find these resources of your community?  Very reflective  Somewhat reflective  Not at all reflective  Don't know

19. How important is it that Denver Public Library offers programs for:

Very Somewhat Not at all Don’t
Essential important important important know
Young children (0-5) .......................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Primary/middle school children (6-12) .................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Teens (13-18) ....................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Adults (18+)........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Older adults (50+)............................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Immigrants/refugees ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Lower-income residents ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Residents without technology at home ....................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Unhoused individuals ........................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Unemployed individuals .................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5

20. How much do you agree with the following statements? Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Don’t
agree agree disagree disagree know
The library helps me to feel more connected to my community............. 1 2 3 4 5 The library is a welcoming place for people of all backgrounds and identities ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The library helps me learn and grow .................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The library is a trustworthy institution ............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 The library is a space where I feel less likely to experience discrimination and racism ................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The library is a good use of public funds ........................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 The library is committed to its values of equity and welcoming ............ 1 2 3 4 5 The library helps me connect to other resources and organizations .... 1 2 3 4 5

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
186

Packet Pg. 194 of 510

Denver Public Library Survey Page 5 of 5

21. Please rate which of the following features make you feel welcome at the library.

Strongly Somewhat Somewhat Strongly Don’t
agree agree disagree disagree know
Library staff ................................................................................................................ 1 2 3 4 5 Access to computers and technology .............................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Library spaces ........................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5 Other library visitors .............................................................................................. 1 2 3 4 5 Building safety .......................................................................................................... 1 2 3 4 5

22. What contributed to your experience of either feeling welcome or unwelcome at the library?

23. How can Denver Public Library better serve you and your community?

24. Would you like to subscribe to our emails for a chance to win a prize? 🔾 No 🔾 Yes -> please type your email here___________________________________________________________ Our last questions are about you. These responses will be used to compare survey responses to better understand the potential differing experiences of residents from diverse backgrounds. These questions are voluntary, but we are asking you to please help us by providing this critical information so that we can fully understand survey results. The Denver Public Library strives to fairly meet the needs of all of our customers. To do this well, we want to understand more about people using the library. Your answers will help us design programs, services and spaces to better meet your needs.

D1. How long have you lived in Denver?
 Less than 2 years
 2-5 years
 6-10 years
 11-20 years
 More than 20 years
D2. Which best describes the building you live in?
 One family house detached from any other
houses
 Building with two or more homes
(duplex, townhome, apartment, or
condominium)
 Mobile home
 Other
🔾 Transitional/unhoused
D3. Do you rent or own your home?
 Rent
 Own
D4. Do you describe yourself as a person with a
disability? (Check all that apply).
❑ Developmental disability
❑ Learning disability
❑ Mental health or emotional disability
❑ Unseen disability
❑ Physical disability
❑ Sensory disability
❑ If you use an alternative term, please describe
here: ________________________________________________
❑ Not applicable
D5. How do you describe yourself? (Check all that
apply).
❑ Indigenous/Native American or Alaskan Native
❑ Black or African American
❑ East or Southeast Asian
❑ Hispanic or Latino
❑ Middle Eastern or Arab
❑ Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander
❑ South Asian
❑ White
❑ Biracial or Multiracial
❑ Other: ______________________________________________ ❑ Prefer not to say
D6. What is your age?
 18-24 years  55-64 years
 25-34 years  65-74 years
 35-44 years  75 years or older
 45-54 years  Prefer not to say
D7. How do you describe your gender identity?
 Woman/girl
 Man/boy
 Non-binary, third gender, or Two Spirit
 Prefer to self-describe:
______________________________________________________

Item 2
Attachment A - 2025
Community Survey Report

Item 2: Staff Report
Pg.
187

Packet Pg. 195 of 510

City Council
Staff Report
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: City Clerk
Meeting Date: January 20, 2026
Report #:2601-5807
TITLE
Approval of Minutes from January 5, 2026 Meeting

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends that the City Council review and approve the minutes.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: January 5, 2026 Draft Action Minutes
APPROVED BY:

Mahealani Ah Yun, City Clerk
Item 3
Item 3 Staff Report

Item 3: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 196 of 510

CITY COUNCIL

DRAFT ACTION MINUTES

Regular Meeting
January 5, 2026
The City Council of the City of Palo Alto met on this date in the Council Chambers and by virtual teleconference at 5:30 P.M.

Present In Person: Burt, Lauing, Lu, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl, Stone, Veenker Present Remotely:

Absent:

Call to Order

2026 Mayor and Vice Mayor

1. Election of the 2026 Mayor
NOMINATION: Councilmember Lauing nominated Councilmember Veenker for Mayor for 2026.

NOMINATION FOR COUNCILMEMBER VEENKER AS MAYOR FOR 2026 PASSED: 7-0

2. Election of the 2026 Vice Mayor
NOMINATION: Councilmember Lu nominated Councilmember Stone for Vice Mayor for 2026.

NOMINATION: Councilmember Lythcott-Haims nominated Council member Reckdahl for Vice Mayor for 2026.

First Round of voting for the position of Vice Mayor with term ending December 31, 2026.

Voting For:

Reckdahl Burt, Lythcott-Haims, Reckdahl (3)
Stone Lauing, Lu, Stone, Veenker (4)
NOMINATION FOR COUNCILMEMBER STONE AS VICE MAYOR FOR 2026 PASSED: 4-3 Item 3
Attachment A - January 5,
2026 Draft Action Minutes

Item 3: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 197 of 510

DRAFT ACTION MINUTES

City Council Meeting
Draft Action Minutes: 1/5/2026

3. Adoption of a Resolution Expressing Appreciation for Outstanding Public Service to Ed Lauing as 2025 Mayor
MOTION: Council member Reckdahl moved, seconded by Council member Lythcott-Haims to adopt a resolution expressing appreciation to Ed Lauing as 2025 Mayor.

MOTION PASSED: 6-0-1, Lauing Abstain

Public Comment

Adjournment: The meeting was adjourned at 7:33 P.M.

ATTEST: APPROVED:
____________________ ____________________
City Clerk Mayor NOTE: Action minutes are prepared in accordance with Palo Alto Municipal Code (PAMC)

2.04.160(a) and (b). Summary minutes (sense) are prepared in accordance with PAMC Section

2.04.160(c). Beginning in January 2018, in accordance with Ordinance No. 5423, the City Council found action minutes and the video/audio recordings of Council proceedings to be the official records of both Council and committee proceedings. These recordings are available on the City’s website.

Item 3
Attachment A - January 5,
2026 Draft Action Minutes

Item 3: Staff Report
Pg.
3 Packet Pg. 198 of 510

City Council
Staff Report
From: City Manager
Report Type: CONSENT CALENDAR
Lead Department: Administrative Services
Meeting Date: January 20, 2026
Report #:2511-5417
TITLE
Accept CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2024; CEQA Status – Not a project.

RECOMMENDATION
Accept CalPERS Pension Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2024

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The CalPERS Annual Valuation Report was reviewed with the Finance Committee on September 16, 2025, and the Committee unanimously recommended that the City Council accept the report.1 The June 30, 2024 CalPERS Annual Valuation report is used to inform the development of the upcoming FY 2027 Budget process and FY 2027 - 2036 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF).

This report estimates total employer costs of $71.1 million in FY 2027, an increase of $2.6 million or 3.8% from the total employer cost of $68.5 million in FY 2026. This increase is primarily due to CalPERS investment gain of 9.3% and 5.8% as compared to target levels of 6.8% for the period ending June 30, 2024 and June 30, 2023, respectively. This was preceded by significant volatile investment loss of -6.1% and gain of +21.3% for the period ending June 30, 2022 and June 30, 2021, respectively. This gain triggered the CalPERS Risk Mitigation Policy, which ultimately resulted in the reduction of the discount rate (target investment return) from

7.0% to 6.8%. Overall, the City’s combined funded status is projected to be 66.0% in FY 2027 as compared to 64.0% in FY 2026 and 63.8% in FY 2025.
1 Finance Committee, September 16, 2025; Agenda Item #1, https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=226273&repo=r-704298fc&searchid=c49daef3-0f29-4953- a8f5-d2340d77b346
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
1 Packet Pg. 199 of 510

The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) is $566.4 million. This amount is reduced to $456.5 million or 72.6% funded status once adjusted for the City’s Pension Trust, which has $109.9 million of contributions/principal and net earnings. In total, planned contributions (principal) of $87.5 million to the Pension Trust have been made through FY 2025 ($56.5 million, or 64.6% of the total, is from the General Fund). Contributions to this Trust continue in alignment with the City’s goal to reach 90% funded by FY 2036.

BACKGROUND
The City of Palo Alto offers its employees and retirees a defined pension benefit plan which is managed and administered by CalPERS, a State of California Pension Trust Program. The CalPERS program maintains two pension plans for the City: one for safety employees (sworn fire and police personnel) and another for miscellaneous employees (all other non-safety personnel employed by the City, including field personnel, administrative support, and managers).

There are three tiers of benefits within the two plans described above. Table 1 below details the current pension plans and the different benefit levels in each tier. It takes City employees five (5) years of service to vest in any tier of the pension program. Attachment A outlines the number of employees in each tier by pension plan and employee group. As of the third quarter of calendar year 2025, the majority of the workforce in both plans are in Tier 3, or PEPRA. The employee ratios within the Miscellaneous Plans tier 1, tier 2 and tier 3 are 25.0%, 10.2%, and

64.8% respectively. The employee ratios within the Safety Plans tier 1, tier 2 and tier 3 are

34.5%, 6.4%, and 59.1% respectively for the same period.

Table 1: City of Palo Alto Pension Benefit Plans and Tiers Miscellaneous Safety: Fire Safety: Police
Tier 1 2.7%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at the age of 55
(2.7% @ 55)

3.0%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at the age of 50
(3.0% @ 50)

3.0%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at the age of 50
(3.0% @ 50)
Tier 2 Effective July 16, 2010:

2.0%/service year worked,
eligibility starting at age 60 (2.0%
@ 60)
Effective June 7, 2012:

3.0%/service year worked,
eligibility starting at age 55 (3.0%
@ 55)
Effective December 6, 2012:

3.0%/service year worked,
eligibility starting at age 55 (3.0%
@ 55)
Tier 3
“PEPRA”*
Effective January 1, 2013:

2.0%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at age 62 (2.0%
at 62)
Effective January 1, 2013:

2.7%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at age 57 (2.7%
at 57)
Effective January 1, 2013:

2.7%/service year worked;
eligibility starting at age 57 (2.7%
at 57)
* Under the California Public Employees’ Pension Reform Act (PEPRA), the benefit calculation is limited by a maximum salary of $186,096 in 2025 for both the Miscellaneous and Safety plans, therefore it is calculated based on service years but cannot exceed the maximum amount. The final salary calculation is based on the average of the highest three years.

Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
2 Packet Pg. 200 of 510

CalPERS Annual Valuations
The CalPERS Annual Valuation reports are included in Attachments B and C and provide an actuarial analysis of the City of Palo Alto pension trust plans based on member and financial data as of June 30, 2024. The purpose of these reports is to provide an update on the assets and accrued liabilities of plans, determine minimum employer contributions for the coming fiscal year, and communicate significant changes in actuarial assumptions or policies. The valuation reports included for review as part of this memo were used to inform the FY 2027 – FY 2036 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF) presented to the Finance Committee on December 2, 20253, and will be used to inform the FY 2027 budget development process. The calculations for annual employer contributions are based on a set of actuarial assumptions for demographic (e.g., mortality, retirement, termination, and disability rates) and economic factors (e.g., investment returns, inflations, salary growth). These assumptions reflect CalPERS’ best estimate for future experience of the plans and are long term in nature. Valuation results will vary from one year to the next due to assumption or method changes, changes in plan provisions, and actuarial experience that is different than anticipated such as investment returns that do not meet the CalPERS 6.8% target.
2025 CalPERS Asset Liability Management (ALM) Study
In addition to the valuation reports issued annually, CalPERS completes a comprehensive review of plans every four years. In November 2025, CalPERS completed an Asset Liability Management (ALM) process to review the capital market assumptions and the strategic asset allocation to ascertain whether a change in the discount rate and other economic assumptions was warranted.

As part of this process, the Actuarial Office also completed an Experience Study to review pension demographics for potential modification. The 2021 ALM resulted in a reduction in the discount rate from 7.0% to 6.8%. Notable outcomes of the 2025 ALM process included but were not limited to the following:
Maintaining the discount rate at 6.8%;
New actuarial assumptions, including an increase for price inflation from 2.3% to 2.5% and total wage inflation from 2.8% to 3.0%; and
Adoption of a new investment governance model.

While not impacting the June 30, 2024 CalPERS Annual Valuation reports, it should be noted that the CalPERS investment gain for the period ending June 30, 2025 is estimated to be 11.6% compared to target levels of 6.8%. On April 16, 2024, the CalPERS board suspended the CalPERS Risk Mitigation Policy which automatically reduced expected investment return when actual investment returns outperform the expected investment return by at least two percentage points, replacing it with the CalPERS board decision whether the pension fund’s expected 3 Finance Committee, December 2, 2025; Agenda Item #3,
https://cityofpaloalto.primegov.com/Public/CompiledDocument?meetingTemplateId=16340&compileOutputType =1
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
3 Packet Pg. 201 of 510

investment return should be adjusted and its asset allocation changed in line with the new expected rate of return.

The most recent CalPERS ALM concluded in November 2025. This kicks off preparations for the City’s internal comprehensive review of the Retiree Benefit Policy. In alignment with City policy, the Retiree Benefit Policy review will be brought forward in fall 2026. This will include collaboration with an outside actuary, transmittal of pertinent results from the CalPERS ALM, and any proposed amendments to the policy. The City’s Retiree Benefit Policy and impacts of the preliminary ALM were used to inform recommended budget balancing strategies presented to the Finance Committee on November 18, 2025 5 including a recommendation that funds in the Section 115 Pension Trust Fund (Pension Trust) held by Public Agency Retirement Services (PARS) be transmitted to CalPERS. Continued implementation of this policy has been incorporated into the development of the FY 2027-2036 LRFF presented to the Finance Committee on December 2, 2025 and tentatively agendized for the City Council on January 20, 2026.

Long-term Financial Planning
The City has taken several proactive steps to address rising pension costs and long-term liabilities, including cost-sharing in labor agreements, establishing an irrevocable Section 115 Pension Trust “Pension Trust” (CMR 75536), and adopting a Retiree Benefit Funding Policy that guides financial planning of retirement benefits. The City initially contributed to the Pension Trust in FY 2017 on an ad-hoc basis, using one-time savings or excess revenues. Beginning in FY 2019, the City Council directed staff to use a more conservative discount rate as compared to CalPERS for the Normal Cost (NC) portion of the payment, and transferring the additional “supplemental” funding beyond CalPERS required employer contributions to the Pension Trust (CMR 97407). This practice was reinforced in the development of a funding policy, as adopted by the City Council in FY 2021 (CMR 11722 8) and modified in FY 2023 (CMR 2212-0513 9). In FY 2024 this rate is 5.3% as compared to the CalPERS discount rate of 6.8%. Additionally, one-time contributions continue to be made each year if excess revenues or unspent savings are available, subject to City Council approval. As part of policy goals, the City seeks to reach a 90% funded status by FY 2036.

Every four years, in alignment with the timing of the CalPERS ALM study, the policy requires that staff consult with an actuary to inform the City Council of progress the City has made towards 5 Finance Committee, November 18, 2025; Agenda Item #2, https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=237463&repo=r-704298fc&searchid=e8a12ee4-fd4b-477f- a76b-35a8552565c2
6 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/year-archive/2017/7553.pdf
7 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/year-archive/2018/9740.pdf
8 https://www.cityofpaloalto.org/files/assets/public/v/1/agendas-minutes-reports/reports/city-manager-reports- cmrs/year-archive/2020-2/id-11722.pdf
9 https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=61647&repo=r-704298fc&searchid=45f12baf-af0c-4c97- a077-fd70ec5cb60a
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
4 Packet Pg. 202 of 510

achieving a 90% funded status goal and assess and respond to changes impacting the City’s retiree benefit plans. The previous comprehensive review of the policy by Council was completed in FY 2023 and resulted in several policy revisions, most notably reducing the discount rate used to calculate supplemental contributions from 6.2% to 5.3% and extending actuary reporting from three to four years to align with the CalPERS ALM Study. Additionally, the title of the policy was revised from the Pension Policy to the Retiree Benefit Policy to recognize actions approved by the City Council to proactively plan for retiree healthcare plans in a similar manner to pensions (CMR 2212-0513 15). The most recent City pension actuary analysis encompassing the CalPERS assets/liabilities and the Pension Trust conducted in 2022 projects that the City will meet a 90% funded goal by FY 2034 (Miscellaneous plan) and FY 2036-37 (Safety plan). The City’s practice of transmitting excess one-time savings will help reach goals sooner.

It is important to note that this policy, and the funding elements within it, are subject to modification at any time by the City Council. Consistent with prior years, any changes to the budget or financial planning of retiree benefits in interim years will be implemented at the timing of City Council approval and formalized in the policy document in the next comprehensive reporting period.

ANALYSIS
CalPERS has two components designated in the annual billing for employer contributions:

1. The Normal Cost (NC) or “pay-go”
This cost reflects the employer contribution for the plan retirement benefits provided to current employees based on the current set of assumptions and is billed as a percentage of payroll.

2. The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) or “catch-up”
This cost represents the employer amortization of unfunded accrued liability and is billed as a flat dollar rate. The CalPERS’s annual payment is calculated to pay down the City’s unfunded accrued pension liability over the amortization timeline. If all actuarial assumptions were realized through the amortization timeline, the City would eliminate its unfunded pension liability after making these annual payments.

The Actuarial Determined Contribution (ADC) or “blended rate” reflects the combined cost of NC and UAL to approximate total employer cost.

Current and Projected Employer Contributions
15 https://portal.laserfiche.com/Portal/DocView.aspx?id=61647&repo=r-704298fc&searchid=69e227dc-060b-4c7d- b9bd-4f761d8e2018
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
5 Packet Pg. 203 of 510

Table 2 summarizes the projected employer contributions required for each plan to fund the ADC and the NC and UAL that make up this rate. Over the next six years, CALPERS estimates that future ADCs will adjust from 43.7% of payroll or $43.7 million in FY 2026 to 34.6% of Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
6 Packet Pg. 204 of 510

payroll or $46.5 million by FY 2032 for the Miscellaneous plan. Over the same six-year span, CalPERS estimates that the ADC will adjust from 81.7% of payroll or $24.8 million in FY 2026 to

77.5% of payroll or $29.1 million in 2032 for Safety. As projected in the table below, the cost fluctuations in the outyears are primarily due to investment returns of +21.3% as of June 30, 2021 (used to develop FY 2024), -6.1% as of June 30, 2022 (used to develop FY 2025), +5.8% as of June 30, 2023 (used to develop FY 2026) where investment gains and losses are subject to a five-year ramp-up period. The full impact from these returns will be realized in FY 2028, FY 2029 and FY 2030, respectively.

TABLE 2: CalPERS Current and Projected Employer Contributions* Miscellaneous FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 NC (%)** 11.3% 10.9% 10.5% 10.2% 9.9% 9.7% 9.5% 9.3%
UAL (%) 36.1% 32.8% 27.2% 27.4% 29.1% 28.6% 28.0% 25.3% Total ADC
(% payroll)

47.4% 43.7% 37.6% 37.6% 39.0% 38.3% 37.5% 34.6%

NC ($) 10.1 10.9 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.3 12.4 12.5
UAL ($)** 32.2 32.8 31.8 33.0 35.9 36.4 36.7 34.0
Total ADC ($M) $42.3 $43.7 $44.1 $45.3 $48.2 $48.7 $49.1 $46.5 Safety FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 NC (%)** 22.2% 20.6% 19.6% 19.0% 18.3% 17.7% 17.1% 16.5% UAL (%) 60.9% 61.1% 62.8% 63.2% 66.0% 65.1% 64.0% 61.0% Total ADC
(% payroll)

83.1% 81.7% 82.4% 82.2% 84.3% 82.8% 81.1% 77.5%

NC ($) 6.0 6.3 6.4 6.4 6.3 6.3 6.3 6.2
UAL ($)** 16.6 18.5 20.5 21.3 22.8 23.1 23.4 22.9
Total ADC ($M) $22.6 $24.8 $27.0 $27.7 $29.1 $29.4 $29.7 $29.1 * This table does not include cost savings for prepayment of the UAL, which confers 3.2% or $1.7 million in savings, or provisions in labor agreements for employees to pay a portion of employer normal costs; Miscellaneous groups pay 1-2% and Safety groups pay 3-4%. These savings will continue to be included in budget development. ** The City makes payments to CalPERS for NC as a percentage of payroll and for UAL as a flat dollar rate. For illustrative purposes, this table uses CalPERS estimates to restate the total ADC (NC and UAL) in respective terms.

TABLE 3: CalPERS Investment Returns
Returns as of 6/30/22 6/30/23 6/30/24 6/30/25 6/30/26 6/30/27 6/30/28 6/30/29 Used to develop FY 2025 FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 FY 2032 Actual (%) -6.1 5.8 9.3 11.6* - - - -
Target (%) 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8
*This CalPERS report does not consider the preliminary 11.6% return on investments for the period ending June 30, 2025 (6.8 percent target)[5]. The estimated impact from this return will be included in long-term financial planning.

Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
7 Packet Pg. 205 of 510

TABLE 4: FY 2026 - 2025 Long-Range Financial Forecast – Pension Rates by Plan * Plan Type FY 2026 FY 2027 FY 2028 FY 2029 FY 2030 FY 2031 Miscellaneous 43.7% 40.6% 41.0% 43.1% 42.7% 42.2%
Safety 81.7% 82.8% 83.3% 86.3% 85.4% 84.4%
*Total ADC as % of payroll as of the June 30, 2023 valuation In comparing the CalPERS current and projected rates (Table #2) in the June 30, 2024 valuation with the prior year’s valuation, which was used to inform the previous FY 2026-2035 long-range financial forecast (Table #4), these new pension projected rates align and are favorable compared to the prior long-range projections within 0.4% to 4% between FY 2027 and FY 2031. Note that only the next fiscal year (FY 2027) are definite rates, while the next years are projections, subject to change with annual actuarial reports especially future investment returns.

Pension Plan’s Funded Status
The funded status is a measure of how well funded, or how “on track” a plan is with respect to assets versus accrued liabilities. As of June 30, 2024, the funded status of the overall Public Employee’s Retirement Fund (PERF) increased from 71.4% to projected levels of 75.0%[6]. This rate is higher than the City’s funded status of 68.7% for Miscellaneous and 61.1% for Safety.

Table 5 details the City’s June 30, 2024 funded status for the Miscellaneous and Safety plans.

The total unfunded pension liability decreased from $573.5 million as of June 30, 2023 to $566.4 million as of June 30, 2024. This represents a decrease of $7.1 million, or 1.2% compared to the prior year. This change was predominantly due to investment returns. When investment returns come in lower than anticipated, this increases the City’s unfunded liability.

Conversely, when investment returns come in higher than anticipated this favorably impacts the City’s plans.

TABLE 5: CalPERS Projected Unfunded Accrued Liability
As of
June 30, 2020
As of
June 30, 2021
As of
June 30, 2022
As of
June 30, 2023
As of
June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous 317,116,346 236,033,956 340,518,738 349,828,105 339,818,201 Misc. Funded Status 65.1% 75.3% 65.8% 66.3% 68.7%
Safety 193,301,713 155,885,841 212,812,272 223,707,130 226,573,506 Safety Funded Status 60.3% 69.4% 60.0% 59.7% 61.1%

TOTAL UNFUNDED

PENSION LIABILITY
$510,418,059 $391,919,797 $553,331,510 $573,535,235 $566,391,707 % Change from Prior Yr $ 7.0% -23.2% 41.2% 3.7% -1.2%
TOTAL FUNDED STATUS % 63.5% 73.3% 63.8% 64.0% 66.0%
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
8 Packet Pg. 206 of 510

Pension Trust Status
In total, planned contributions (principal) of $87.5 million to the Pension Trust will have been made since inception in FY 2017 through FY 2025 ($56.5 million, or 64.6% of the total, is from the General Fund). The Pension Trust is invested in a Balanced portfolio, earning 12.5%, 11.5%, and

6.7% for the years ending June 30, 2025, 2024, and 2023 respectively. The annualized five-year return as of July 2025 is 6.1%. The total balance of $109.9 million as of June 30, 2025 includes contributions of $87.5 million and net earnings since inception of $22.4 million. The Pension Trust is not factored into the CalPERS reports funded status; however, when included the City’s combined funded status is 72.6%.

The Retirement Benefit Policy indicates that the City make Additional Discretionary Payments (ADPs) from the Pension Trust to CalPERS for amounts that exceed the one-year minimum employer contribution. CalPERS allows agencies to make ADPs at any time and in any amount at the agency’s discretion. These optional payments serve to reduce the UAL and future required contributions.

FISCAL/RESOURCE IMPACT
This report and feedback from the City Council will be used to inform the development of the FY 2027–2036 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF), the FY 2027 Budget, and other long-term financial planning. Staff will continue to update the City Council and incorporate information as it becomes available. Below is a timeline for anticipated reporting:

December/January: FY 2027 to FY 2036 Long Range Financial Forecast (LRFF) Annually, staff brings forward a LRFF that projects the City’s financial outlook over the next 10 years based on current City Council approved service levels and several alternative scenarios.

Staff presented the FY 2027-2036 LRFF to the Finance Committee on December 2, 2025 and is scheduled to present to City Council on January 20, 2026. The financial implications of these reports and input from the Finance Committee are used to inform the development of the annual budget. Staff incorporates estimates in the base budget as part of the annual budget development process.

May/June: FY 2027 Budget Deliberations and City Council Adoption Consistent with current practice, staff will include the actuarially determined contributions as calculated by CalPERS in the June 30, 2024 valuation reports and the additional contributions per the pension funding policy including use of a lower 5.3% discount rate as part of the development of the FY 2027 budget for contributions to the pension trust fund.

Fall 2026: Four Year Palo Alto Retiree Benefit Policy Review The most recent CalPERS ALM concluded in November 2025. This kicks off preparations for the City’s internal comprehensive review of the Retiree Benefit Policy. In alignment with City policy, Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
9 Packet Pg. 207 of 510

the Retiree Benefit Policy review will be brought forward in fall 2026. This will include collaboration with an outside actuary, transmittal of pertinent results from the CalPERS ALM, and any recommended policy adjustments.

STAKEHOLDER ENGAGEMENT
The Administrative Service Department staff worked primarily with the City Manager’s Office on this informational report.

ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
Council action on this item is not a project as defined by the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) because accepting the CalPERS pension annual valuation report is an organizational or administrative activity that will not result in direct or indirect physical changes in the environment. CEQA Guidelines section 15378(b)(5.

ATTACHMENTS
Attachment A: Pension Plan Benefit Levels Enrollment by Plan and Employee Group Attachment B: CalPERS Miscellaneous Valuation as of June 30, 2024 Attachment C: CalPERS Safety Valuation as of June 30, 2024 APPROVED BY:

Lauren Lai, Administrative Services Director
Item 4
Item 4 Staff Report

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
10 Packet Pg. 208 of 510

Employee Group Employee Group
Q3 2025 Q3 2024 Q3 2025 Q3 2024
City Council & Council Appointees 8 8 IAFF 87 79
Tier 1 1 1 Tier 1 28 30
Tier 2 2 2 Tier 2 9 8
Tier 3 5 5 Tier 3 50 41
Management & Professional 218 199 Fire Chiefs' Association 4 4 Tier 1 54 56 Tier 1 4 4
Tier 2 36 36 Tier 2 0 0
Tier 3 128 107 Tier 3 0 0
Service Employees' International 556 571 Fire Management 4 6 Tier 1 127 145 Tier 1 4 3
Tier 2 38 43 Tier 2 0 1
Tier 3 391 383 Tier 3 0 2
Utilities Management 45 47 PAPOA 67 73
Tier 1 25 29 Tier 1 15 20
Tier 2 8 6 Tier 2 1 3
Tier 3 12 12 Tier 3 51 50
Police Management Association 7 7
Tier 1 7 7
Tier 2 0 0
Tier 3 0 0
Police Management 2 9
Tier 1 1 3
Tier 2 1 2
Tier 3 0 4
Grand Total Miscellaneous Plans 827 825 Grand Total Safety Plans 171 178 Tier 1 207 231 Tier 1 59 67
Tier 2 84 87 Tier 2 11 14
Tier 3 536 507 Tier 3 101 97
Tiered Percentage Miscellaneous Plans Tiered Percentage Safety Plans Tier 1 25.0% 28.0% Tier 1 34.5% 37.6%
Tier 2 10.2% 10.5% Tier 2 6.4% 7.9%
Tier 3 64.8% 61.5% Tier 3 59.1% 54.5%
Tier Definitions Tier Definitions
Tier 1 2.7% @ 55 Tier 1 3% @ 50
Tier 2 2% @ 60 Tier 2 3% @ 55
Tier 3 2% @ 62 Tier 3 2.7% @ 57
* Includes Police Trainee and Limited Hourly FTE
Attachment A:

City of Palo Alto Pension Plan Benefit Levels Enrollment by Plan and Employee Group as of Third Quarter Miscellaneous Plans Safety Plans
Employee Count Employee Count
Item 4
Attachment A - Pension
Plan Benefit Levels
Enrollment by Plan and
Employee Group

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
11 Packet Pg. 209 of 510

California Public Employees’ Retirement System
Actuarial Office
400 Q Street, Sacramento, CA 95811 | Phone: (916) 795-3000 | Fax: (916) 795-2744 888 CalPERS (or 888-225-7377) | TTY: (877) 249-7442 | www.calpers.ca.gov

July 2025

Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto (CalPERS ID: 6373437857 ) Annual Valuation Report as of June 30, 2024

Dear Employer,

Attached to this letter is the June 30, 2024 , actuarial valuation report for the plan noted above. Provided in this report is the determination of the minimum required employer contributions for fiscal year (FY) 2026-27. In addition, the report contains important information regarding the current financial status of the plan as well as projections and risk measures to aid in planning for the future.

Required Contributions

The table below shows the minimum required employer contributions and the PEPRA member contribution rates for FY 2026-27 along with an estimate of the employer contribution requirements for FY 2027-28. The required employer and member contributions in this report do not reflect any cost sharing arrangement between the agency and the employees.

Fiscal Year Employer Normal
Cost Rate
Employer Amortization of
Unfunded Accrued Liability
PEPRA Member
Contribution Rate
2026-27 10.48% $31,802,552 7.25%

Projected Results
2027-28 10.2% $32,983,000 TBD

The actual investment return for FY 2024-25 was not known at the time this report was prepared. The projection UAL payment above assume s the investment return for that year would be 6.8%. To the extent the actual investment return for FY 2024-25 differs from 6.8%, the actual UAL contribution requirement for FY 2027-28 will differ from that shown above. For additional information on future contribution requirements , please refer to Projected Employer Contributions . This section also contains projected required contributions through FY 2031-32.

PEPRA Member Contribution Rate

The employee contribution rate for PEPRA members can change based on the result s of the actuarial valuation. See Member Contribution Rates for more information.

Report Navigation Features

The valuation report has a number of features to ease navigation and allow the reader to find specific information more quickly.

The tables of contents are “clickable .” This is true for the main table of contents that follows the title page and the intermediate tables of contents at the beginning of sections. The Adobe navigation pane on the left can also be used to skip to specific exhibits.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
12 Packet Pg. 210 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

There are a number of links throughout the document in blue text. Links that are internal to the document are not underlined, while underlined links will take you to the CalPERS website. Examples are shown be low.

Internal Bookmarks CalPERS Website Links
Required Employer Contributions Required Employer Contribution Search Tool Member Contribution Rates Public Agency PEPRA Member Contribution Rates Summary of Key Valuation Results Pension Outlook Overview Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis Interactive Summary of Public Agency Valuation Results Projected Employer Contributions Public Agency Actuarial Valuation Reports

Further descriptions of general changes are included in the Highlights and Executive Summary section and in Appendix A - Actuarial Methods and Assumptions . The effects of any changes on the required contributions are included in the Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions section.

Questions

A CalPERS actuary is available to answer questions about this report. Other questions may be directed to the Customer Contact Center at 888 CalPERS (or 888-225-7377).

Sincerely,

Matthew Biggart, ASA, MAAA
Actuary, CalPERS

Randall Dziubek, ASA, MAAA
Deputy Chief Actuary, Valuation Services , CalPERS

Scott Terando , ASA, EA, MAAA, FCA, CFA
Chief Actuary, CalPERS

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
13 Packet Pg. 211 of 510

California Public Employees’ Retirement System

Actuarial Valuation for the
Miscellaneous Plan
of the City of Palo Alto
as of June 30, 2024

(CalPERS ID: 6373437857)
(Rate Plan ID: 8)

Required Contributions for Fiscal Year

July 1, 2026 — June 30, 2027
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
14 Packet Pg. 212 of 510

CY Fin Job Instance ID: 464138 PY Fin Job Instance ID: 438257 Report ID: 473152

Table of Contents

Actuarial Certification.......................................................................................................................................................................................1 Highlights and Executive Summary .............................................................................................................................................................2 Introduction .......................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Purpose .............................................................................................................................................................................................................3 Summary of Key Valuation Results ..............................................................................................................................................................4 Changes Since the Prior Year’s Valuation ..................................................................................................................................................5 Subsequent Events .........................................................................................................................................................................................5 Assets ...................................................................................................................................................................................................................6 Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets..............................................................................................................................................7 Asset Allocation................................................................................................................................................................................................8 CalPERS History of Investment Returns .....................................................................................................................................................9 Liabilities and Contributions ....................................................................................................................................................................... 10 Determination of Required Contributions.................................................................................................................................................. 11 Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities ................................................................................................................................. 12 Required Employer Contributions .............................................................................................................................................................. 13 Member Contribution Rates ........................................................................................................................................................................ 14 Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis ..................................................................................................................................................... 15 Additional Employer Contributions............................................................................................................................................................. 16 Projected Employer Contributions ............................................................................................................................................................. 17 (Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/23 – 6/30/24 .................................................................................................................................................... 18 Schedule of Amortization Bases ................................................................................................................................................................ 19 Amortization Schedule and Alternatives ................................................................................................................................................... 21 Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions................................................................................................................................ 23 Employer Contribution History .................................................................................................................................................................... 24 Funding History ............................................................................................................................................................................................. 24 Risk Analysis ................................................................................................................................................................................................... 25 Future Investment Return Scenarios......................................................................................................................................................... 26 Discount Rate Sensitivity............................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Mortality Rate Sensitivity ............................................................................................................................................................................. 27 Maturity Measures ........................................................................................................................................................................................ 28 Maturity Measures History........................................................................................................................................................................... 29 Funded Status – Termination Basis .......................................................................................................................................................... 30 Funded Status – Low-Default-Risk Basis ................................................................................................................................................. 31 Supplementary Information ......................................................................................................................................................................... 32 Normal Cost by Benefit Group.................................................................................................................................................................... 33 Summary of Valuation Data ........................................................................................................................................................................ 34 Status of PEPRA Transition ........................................................................................................................................................................ 35 Plan's Major Benefit Options....................................................................................................................................................................... 36 Appendix A - Actuarial Methods and Assumptions .............................................................................................................................. 38 Appendix B - Principal Plan Provisions.................................................................................................................................................... 64 Appendix C - Participant Data ..................................................................................................................................................................... 75 Appendix D - Glossary .................................................................................................................................................................................. 80

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
15 Packet Pg. 213 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Actuarial Certification

It is our opinion that the valuation has been performed in accordance with generally accepted actuarial principles as well as the applicable Standards of Practice promulgated by the Actuarial Standards Board. While this report is intended to be complete, our office is available to answer questions as needed. All of the undersigned are actuaries who satisfy the Qualification Standards for Actuaries Issuing Statements of Actuarial Opinion in the United States of the American Academy of Actuaries with regard to pension s.

Actuarial Methods and Assumptions

It is our opinion that the assumptions and methods, as recommended by the Chief Actuary and adopted by the CalPERS Board of Administration, are internally consistent and reasonable for this plan.

Randall Dziubek, ASA, MAAA
Deputy Chief Actuary, Valuation Services , CalPERS

Scott Terando , ASA, EA, MAAA, FCA, CFA
Chief Actuary, CalPERS

Actuarial Data and Rate Plan Results

To the best of my knowledge and having relied upon the attestation above that the actuarial methods and assumptions are reasonable , this report is complete and accurate and contains sufficient information to disclose, fully and fairly, the funded condition of the Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto and satisfies the actuarial valuation requirements of Government Code section 7504. This valuation and related validation work was performed by the CalPERS Actuarial Office. The valuation was based on the member and financial data as of June 30, 2024, provided by the various CalPERS databases and the benefits under this plan with CalPERS as of the date this report was produced.

Matthew Biggart, ASA, MAAA
Actuary, CalPERS

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
16 Packet Pg. 214 of 510

Highlights and Executive Summary

• Introduction 3
• Purpose 3
• Summary of Key Valuation Results 4
• Changes Since the Prior Year’s Valuation 5
• Subsequent Events 5

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
17 Packet Pg. 215 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Introduction

This report presents the results of the June 30, 2024 , actuarial valuation of the Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto of the California Public Employees’ Retirement System (CalPERS). This actuarial valuation sets the minimum required contributions for fiscal year (FY) 2026-27.

Purpose

This report documents the results of the actuarial valuation prepared by the CalPERS Actuarial Office using data as of June 30, 2024. This report contains actuarial information for the following rate plan(s). • 8, Miscellaneous First Level
• 30157, Miscellaneous Second Level
• 26004, Miscellaneous PEPRA Level
The purpose of the valuation is to:

• Set forth the assets and accrued liabilities of this rate plan as of June 30, 2024; • Determine the minimum required employer contributions for this rate plan for FY July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027; • Determine the required member contribution rate for FY July 1, 2026, through June 30, 2027, for employees subject to the California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA); and • Provide actuarial information as of June 30, 2024, to the CalPERS Board of Administration (board) and other interested parties.

The pension funding in formation presented in this report should not be used in financial reports subject to Governmental Accounting Standards Board (GASB) Statement No. 68 for an Agent Employer Defined Benefit Pension Plan. A separate accounting valuation report for such purpos es is available from CalPERS and details for ordering are available on the CalPERS website (www.calpers.ca.gov).

The measurements shown in this actuarial valuation may not be applicable for other purposes. The agency should contact a CalPERS actuary before disseminating any portion of this report for any reason that is not explicitly described above.

Future actuarial measurements may differ significantly from the current measurements presented in this report due to such factors as the following: plan experience differing from that anticipated by the economic or demographic assumptions; changes in economic or demographic assumptions; changes in actuarial policies; changes in plan provisions or applicable law; and differences between the required contributio ns determined by the valuation and the actual contributions made by the agency.

Assessment and Disclosure of Risk

This report includes the following risk disclosures consistent with the guidance of the Actuarial Standards of Practice:

• A “Scenario Test,” projecting future results under different investment income returns. • A “Sensitivity Analysis,” showing the impact on current valuation results using alternative discount rates of 5.8% and

7.8%.
• A “Sensitivity Analysis,” showing the impact on current valuation results assuming rates of mortality are 10% lower or 10% higher than our current post-retirement mortality assumptions adopted in 2021. • Plan maturity measures indicating how sensitive a plan may be to the risks noted above. • The funded status on a termination basis .
• A low-default-risk obligation measure (LDROM) of benefit costs accrued as of the valuation date.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
18 Packet Pg. 216 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Summary of Key Valuation Results

Below is a brief summary of key valuation resu lts along with page references where more detailed information can be found.

Required Employer Contributions — page 13

Fiscal Year
2025-26
Fiscal Year
2026-27
Employer Normal Cost Rate 10.90% 10.48%
Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution Amount $32,780,459 $31,802,552 Paid either as
Option 1) 12 Monthly Payments of $2,731,705 $2,650,213 Option 2) Annual Prepayment in July $31,719,724 $30,773,461

Member Contribution Rates — page 14

Fiscal Year
2025-26
Fiscal Year
2026-27
Classic Member Contribution Rate 7.00%/8.00% 7.00%/8.00% PEPRA Member Contribution Rate 7.25% 7.25%

Projected Employer Contributions — page 17

Fiscal Year Normal Cost
(% of payroll)
Annual
UAL Payment
2027-28 10.2% $32,983,000
2028-29 9.9% $35,941,000
2029-30 9.7% $36,353,000
2030-31 9.5% $36,662,000
2031-32 9.3% $33,998,000

Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis — page 15

June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024
Entry Age Accrued Liability (AL) $1,037,247,281 $1,085,448,984 Market Value of Assets (MVA) 687,419,176 745,630,783 Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [AL – MVA] $349,828,105 $339,818,201 Funded Ratio [MVA ÷ AL] 66.3% 68.7%

Summary of Valuation Data — page 34

June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024
Active Member Count 757 833
Annual Covered Payroll $91,956,169 $107,807,296
Transferred Member Count 392 393
Separated Member Count 488 504
Retired Members and Beneficiaries Count 1,348 1,364

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
19 Packet Pg. 217 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Changes Since the Prior Year’s Valuation

Benefits

The standard actuarial practice at CalPERS is to recognize mandated legislative benefit changes in the first annual valuation following the effective date of the legislation. For rate plans that are not in a risk pool (non-pooled), benefit changes by contract amendment are generally included in the first valuation that is prepared after the amendment becomes effective, even if the effective date of the amendment is after the valuation date.

Please refer to the Plan’s Major Benefit Options and Appendix B - Principal Plan Provisions for a summary of the plan provisions used in this valuation. The effect of any mandated benefit changes or plan amendments on the unfunded liability is shown in the (Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/ 23 – 6/30/24 and the effect on the employer contribution is shown in the Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions . It should be noted that no change in liability or contribution is shown for any plan changes which were already included in the prior year’s valuation.

Board Policy

On April 16, 2024, the board took action to modify the Funding Risk Mitigation Policy to remove the automatic change to the discount rate when the investment return exceeds various thresholds. Rather than an automatic change to the discount rate, a board discussion would be placed on the calendar. The 95 th percentile return in the Future Investment Return Scenarios exhibit in this report, which include s returns high enough to trigger a board discussion, does not reflect any change in the discount rate.

Actuarial Methods and Assumptions

There are no significant changes to the actuarial methods or assumptions for the June 30, 2024, actuarial valuation.

Subsequent Events

This actuarial valuation report reflects fund investment return through June 30, 2024, as well as statutory changes, regulatory changes and board actions through January 2025.

CalPERS will be completing an Asset Liability Management (ALM) review process in November 2025 that will review the capital market assumptions and the CalPERS Total Fund Investment Policy and ascertain whether a change in the discount is warranted. In addition, the Actuarial Office will be presenting the findings of its Experience Study which reviews economic assumptions other than the discount rate as well as all demographic assumptions and makes recommendations to modify actuarial assumptions where appropriate. Any changes in actuarial assumptions will be reflected in the June 30, 2025, actuarial valuations.

The 2024 annual benefit limit under Internal Revenue Code (IRC) section 415(b) and annual compensation limits under IR C section 401(a)(17) and Government Code section 7522.10 were use d for this valuation and are assumed to increase 2.3% per year based on the price inflation assumption. The actual 2025 limits , determined in October 2024, are not reflected.

To the best of our knowledge, there have been no other subsequent events that could materially affect current or future certifications rendered in this report.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
20 Packet Pg. 218 of 510

Assets

• Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets 7
• Asset Allocation 8
• CalPERS History of Investment Returns 9

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
21 Packet Pg. 219 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Reconciliation of the Market Value of Assets

1. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/23 including Receivables $687,419,176

2. Change in Receivables for Service Buybacks (237,909)

3. Employer Contributions 38,293,903

4. Employee Contributions 9,399,972

5. Benefit Payments to Retirees and Beneficiaries (54,755,943)

6. Refunds (415,563)

7. Transfers 0

8. Service Credit Purchase (SCP) Payments and Interest 220,928

9. Administrative Expenses (502,688)

10. Miscellaneous Adjustments 0

11. Investment Return (Net of Investment Expenses) 66,208,907

12. Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/24 including Receivables $745,630,783

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
22 Packet Pg. 220 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Asset Allocation

CalPERS adheres to an Asset Allocation Strategy which establishes asset class allocation policy targets and ranges and manages those asset class allocations within their policy ranges . CalPERS Investment Belief No. 6 recognizes that strategic asset allocation is the dominant determinant of portfolio risk and return.

The asset allocation shown below reflect s the allocation of the Public Employees’ Retirement Fund (PERF) in its entirety. The assets for City of Palo Alto Miscellaneous Plan are a subset of the PERF and are invested accordingly.

On March 20, 2024 , the board adopted changes to the strategic asset allocation . The new allocation was effective July 1, 2024.

The asset allocation as of June 30, 2024, is shown below, along with the strategic asset allocation targets.

For more information s ee the Trust Level Review as of June 30, 2024, which is available on the CalPERS website.

31.8%

10.0%

7.3%

5.3%

6.4%

5.3%

5.3%

15.5%

13.2%

2.8%
(3.0%)
27%
10%
7%
5%
6%
5%
5%
17%
15%
8%
(5%)
(10%) 0% 10% 20% 30% 40%
Public Equities - Cap Weighted
Public Equities - Factor Weighted
Treasury
Mortgage-Backed Securities
Investment Grade Corporates
High Yield
Emerging Market Sovereign Bonds
Private Equity
Real Assets
Private Debt
Strategic Financing
Current Allocation Strategic Asset Allocation Target
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
23 Packet Pg. 221 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

CalPERS History of Investment Returns

The following is a chart with 20 years of historical annual returns of the PERF for each fiscal year ending on June 30 as reported by the Investment Office. Investment returns reported are net of investment expenses but without reduction for administrative expenses. The assumed rate of return, however, is net of both investment and administrative expenses. Also, the Investment Office uses lag ged private asset valuations for investment performance reporting purposes. This can lead to a timing difference in private asset influence on performance in the returns below and those used for financial reporting purposes. The investment gain or loss calculation in this report relies on final assets that have been audited and are appropriate for financial reporting.

Because of these differences, the effective investment return for funding purposes in a single year can be higher or lower than the return reported by the Investment Office shown here.

History of Investment Returns (2005 through 2024)

* As reported by the Investment Office w ith lagged private valuations and w ithout any reduction for administrative expenses.

The table below shows annualized investment returns of the PERF for various time periods ending on June 30, 2024. These returns are the annual rates that if compounded over the indicated number of years would equate to the actual time -weighted investment performance of the PERF. It should be recognized that the annual rate of return is volatile, as the chart above illustrates, so when looking at investment returns, it is informative to look at average returns over longer time horizons.

PERF Realized Rates of Return as of June 30, 2024
1 year 3 year 5 year 10 year 20 year 30 year

9.3% 2.8% 6.6% 6.2% 6.7% 7.7%

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
24 Packet Pg. 222 of 510

Liabilities and Contributions

• Determination of Required Contributions 11
• Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities 12
• Required Employer Contributions 13
• Member Contribution Rates 14
• Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis 15
• Additional Employer Contributions 16
• Projected Employer Contributions 17
• (Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/23 – 6/30/24 18
• Schedule of Amortization Bases 19
• Amortization Schedule and Alternatives 21
• Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions 23
• Employer Contribution History 24
• Funding History 24

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
25 Packet Pg. 223 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Determination of Required Contributions

Contributions to fund the plan are determined by an actuarial valuation performed each year. The valuation employs complex calculations based on a set of actuarial assumptions and methods. See Appendix A for information on the assumptions and methods used in this valuation. The valuation incorporates all plan experience through the valuation date and sets required contributions for the fiscal year that begins two years after the valuation date.

Contribution Components

Two components comprise required contributions:

• Normal Cost — expressed as a percentage of pensionable payroll • Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution — expressed as a dollar amount

Normal Cost represents the value of benefits allocated to the upcoming year for active employees. If all plan experience exactly matched the actuarial assumptions, normal cost would be sufficient to fully fund all benefits. The employer and employees each pay a share of the normal cost with contributions payable as part of the regular payroll reporting process. The contribution rate for Classic members is set by statute based on benefit formula whereas for PEPRA members it is based on 50% of the total normal cost.

When plan experience differs from the actuarial assumptions, UAL emerges. The new UAL may be positive or negative. If the total UAL is positive (i.e., accrued liability exceeds assets), the employer is required to make contributions to pay off the UAL over time. This is called the UAL Contribution component . There is an option to prepay this amount during July of each fiscal year, otherwise it is paid monthly.

In measuring the UAL each year, plan experience is split by source. Common sources of UAL include investment experience different than expected, non-investment experience different than expected, assumption changes , and benefit changes. Each source of UAL (positive or negative) forms a base that is amortized, or paid off, over a specified period of time in accordan ce with the CalPERS Actuarial Amortization Policy. The UAL Contribution is the sum of the payments on all bases. See the Schedule of Amortization Bases section of this report for an inventory of existing bases and Appendix A for more information on the amortization policy.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
26 Packet Pg. 224 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Development of Accrued and Unfunded Liabilities

June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Present Value of Projected Benefits
a) Active Members $454,680,927 $500,299,849
b) Transferred Members 45,946,284 50,315,737
c) Separated Members 22,788,782 24,294,459
d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments 653,009,459 670,851,688 e) Total $1,176,425,452 $1,245,761,733

2. Present Value of Future Employer Normal Costs $77,828,908 $88,353,448

3. Present Value of Future Employee Contributions $61,349,263 $71,959,301

4. Entry Age Accrued Liability
a) Active Members [(1a) - (2) - (3)] $315,502,756 $339,987,100 b) Transferred Members (1b) 45,946,284 50,315,737
c) Separated Members (1c) 22,788,782 24,294,459
d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments (1d) 653,009,459 670,851,688 e) Total $1,037,247,281 $1,085,448,984

5. Market Value of Assets (MVA) $687,419,176 $745,630,783

6. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(4e) - (5)] $349,828,105 $339,818,201

7. Funded Ratio [(5) ÷ (4e)] 66.3% 68.7%

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
27 Packet Pg. 225 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Required Employer Contributions

The required employer contributions in this report do not reflect any cost sharing arrangement between the agency and the employees.

Fiscal Year
Required Employer Contributions 2026-27
Employer Normal Cost Rate 10.48%
Plus
Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution Amount $31,802,552 Paid either as
1) Monthly Payment $2,650,213
Or
2) Annual Prepayment Option* $30,773,461
The total minimum required employer contribution is the sum of the Plan’s Employer Normal Cost Rate (expressed as a percentage of payroll and paid as payroll is reported) and the Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) Contribution Amount (billed monthly (1) or prepaid annually (2) in dollars). * Only the UAL portion of the employer contribution can be prepaid (which must be received in full no later than July 31).

For Member Contribution Rates see the following page.

Fiscal Year Fiscal Year
2025-26 2026-27
Normal Cost Contribution as a Percentage of Payroll
Total Normal Cost 1 18.39% 17.93%
Offset due to Employee Contribution s2 (7.49%) (7.45%) Employer Normal Cost 10.90% 10.48%

Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year $99,898,787 $117,119,039

Estimated Employer Contributions Based on Projected Payroll Total Normal Cost $18,371,387 $20,999,444
Expected Employee Contribution s (7,482,419) (8,725,368) Employer Normal Cost $10,888,968 $12,274,076
Unfunded Liability Contribution

$32,780,459 $31,802,552
% of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 32.81% 27.15% Estimated Total Employer Contribution

$43,669,427 $44,076,628
% of Projected Payroll (illustrative only) 43.71% 37.63%

1 The Total Normal Cost is a blended rate for all benefit groups in the plan. For a breakout of normal cost by benefit group, see Normal Cost by Benefit Group.
2 This is the expected employee contributions, taking into account individual benefit formula and any offset from the use of a modified formula, divided by projected annual payroll. For member contribution rates above the breakpoint for each benefit formula, see Member Contribution Rates.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
28 Packet Pg. 226 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Member Contribution Rates

The required member contributions in this report do not reflect any cost sharing arrangement between the agency and the employees.

Classic Members

Each member contributes toward their retirement based upon the retirement formula. The standard Classic member contribution rate above the breakpoint, if any, is as described below.

Benefit Formula
Percent Contributed
above the Breakpoint
Miscellaneous, 1.5% at age 65 2%
Miscellaneous, 2% at age 60 7%
Miscellaneous, 2% at age 55 7%
Miscellaneous, 2.5% at age 55 8%
Miscellaneous, 2.7% at age 55 8%
Miscellaneous, 3% at age 60 8%
Auxiliary organizations of the CSU system may elect reduced contribution rates for Miscellaneous members , in which case the contribution rate above the breakpoint is 6% if members are not covered by Social Security and 5% if they are.

PEPRA Members

The California Public Employees’ P ension Reform Act of 2013 (“PEPRA”) established new benefit formulas, final compensation period, and contribution requirements for “new” employees (generally those first hired into a CalPERS -covered position on or after January 1, 2013). In accordance with Government Code Section 7522.30(b), “new members … shall have an initial contribution rate of at least 50% of the normal cost rate.” The normal cost rate for the plan is dependent on the benefit levels, actuarial assumptions, and demographics of the plan, particularly members’ entry age into the plan. Should the total normal cost rate of the plan change by more than 1% from the base total normal cost rate established for the plan, the new member rate shall be 50% of the new normal cost rate rounded to the nearest quarter percent.

The table below shows the determination of the PEPRA member contribution rates effective July 1, 2026, based on 50% of the total normal cost rate for each respective rate plan as of the June 30, 2024, valuation.

Basis for Current Rate Rates Effective July 1, 2026 Rate Plan
Identifier Benefit Group Name
Total
Normal
Cost
Member
Rate
Total
Normal
Cost
Change
in
Normal
Cost
Adj.

Needed
Member
Rate
26004 Miscellaneous PEPRA
Level 14.250% 7.25% 14.59% 0.340% No 7.25%

For a description of the methodology used to determine the Total Normal Cost for this purpose, see PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology in Appendix A.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
29 Packet Pg. 227 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis

The table below provides information on the current funded status of the plan under the funding policy. The funded status for this purpose is based on the market value of assets relative to the funding target produced by the entry age actuarial cost method and actuarial assumptions adopted by the board. The actuarial cost method allocates the total expected cost of a member’s projected benefit (Present Value of Benefits) to individual years of service (the Normal Cost). The value of the projected benefit that is not allocated to future service is referred to as the Accrued Liability and is the plan’s funding target on the valuation date. The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) equals the funding target minus the assets. The UAL is an absolute measure of funded status and can be viewed as employer debt. The Funded Ratio equals the assets divided by the funding target. The funded ratio is a relative measure of the funded status and allows for comparisons between plans of different sizes.

June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Present Value of Benefits $1,176,425,452 $1,245,761,733

2. Entry Age Accrued Liability 1,037,247,281 1,085,448,984

3. Market Value of Assets (MVA) 687,419,176 745,630,783

4. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(2) – (3)] $349,828,105 $339,818,201

5. Funded Ratio [(3) ÷ (2)] 66.3% 68.7%

A funded ratio of 100% (UAL of $0) implies that the funding of the plan is on target and that future contributions equal to the normal cost of the active plan members will be sufficient to fully fund all retirement benefits if future experience matches the actuarial assumptions. A funded ratio of less than 100% (positive UAL) implies that in addition to normal costs, payments toward the UAL will be required. Plans with a funded ratio greater than 100% have a negative UAL (or surplus) but are required under current law to continue contributing the normal cost in most cases, preserving the surplus for future contingencies.

Calculations for the funding target reflect the expected long -term investment return of 6.8%. If it were known on the valuation date that future investment returns wi ll average something greater/less than the expected return, calculated normal costs and accrued liabilities provided in this report would be less/greater than the results shown. Therefore, for example, if actual a verage future returns are less than the expected return, calculated normal costs and UAL contributions will not be sufficient to fully fund all retirement benefits. Under this scenario, required future normal cost contributions will need to increase from those provided in this report, and the plan will develop unfunded liabilities that will also add to required future contributions. For illustrative purposes, funded status es based on a 1% lower and higher average future investment return (discount rate) are as follows:

1% Lower
Average Return
Current
Assumption
1% Higher
Average Return
Discount Rate 5.8% 6.8% 7.8%

1. Present Value of Benefits $1,442,802,538 $1,245,761,733 $1,090,341,534

2. Entry Age Accrued Liability 1,223,262,430 1,085,448,984 971,255,802

3. Market Value of Assets (MVA) 745,630,783 745,630,783 745,630,783

4. Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) [(2) – (3)] $477,631,647 $339,818, 201 $225,625,019

5. Funded Ratio [(3) ÷ (2)] 61.0% 68.7% 76.8%

The Risk Analysis section of the report provides additional information regarding the sensitivity of valuation results to the expected investment return and other factors. Also provided in that section are measures of funded status that are appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover estimated termination liabilities.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
30 Packet Pg. 228 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Additional Employer Contributions

The CalPERS amortization policy provides a systematic methodology for paying down a plan’s unfunded accrued liability (UAL) over a reasonable period of years. The projected schedule of required payments for this plan under the amortization policy is provided in Amortization Schedule and Alternatives. Certain aspects of the policy such as 1) layered amortization bases (positive and negative) with different remaining payoff periods, and 2) the phase-in of required payments toward investment gains and losses, can result in volatility in year-to-year projected UAL payments. Provided below is information on how an Additional Discretionary Payment (ADP), together with your required UAL payment of $31,802,552 for FY 2026-27, may better accomplish your agency’s specific objectives with regard to either smoothing out projected future payments or achieving a greater reduction in UAL than would otherwise occur when making only the minimum required payment. Such additional payments are allowed at any time and can also result in significant long -term savings.

Fiscal Year 2026-27 Employer Contribution Versus Agency Funding Objectives

The interest -to-payment ratio for the FY 2026-27 minimum required UAL payment is 65%, which means the required payment of $31,802,552 includes $20,574,053 of interest cost and results in a $11,228,499 reduction in the UAL, as can be seen in Amortization Schedule and Alternatives (see columns labelled Current Amortization Schedule). If the interest -to-payment ratio is close to 100%, and the reduction in the UAL is small, it may indicate that required contributions will be increasing in the coming years, which would be shown in Projected Employer Contributions . Another measure that can be used to evaluate how well the FY 2026-27 required UAL payment meets the agency’s specific funding objectives is the number o f years required to pay off the existing UAL if the annual payment were held constant in future years. With an annual payment of $31,802,552 it would take

16.3 years to pay off the current UAL. A result that is longer than the agency’s target funding period suggest s that the option of supplementing the minimum payment with an ADP should be weighed against the agency’s budget constraints.

Provided below are select ADP options for consideration. Making such an ADP during FY 2026-27 does not require an ADP be made in any future year, nor does it change the remaining amortization period of any portion of unfunded liability. For information on permanent changes to amortization periods, see Amortization Schedule and Alternatives. Agencies considering making an ADP should contact CalPERS for additional information.

Fiscal Year 2026-27 Employer Contributions — Illustrative Scenarios

If the Annual UAL
Payment Each
Year Were…
The Current
UAL Would be
Paid Off in…
This Would
Require an ADP1
in FY 2026-27 of…
Plus the Estimated
Normal Cost of…
Estimated Total
Contribution
$31,802,552 16.3 years $0 $12,274,076 $44,076,628
33,380,276 15 years 1,577,724 12,274,076 45,654,352
43,434,023 10 years 11,631,471 12,274,076 55,708,099 74,692,930 5 years 42,890,378 12,274,076 86,967,006

1 The ADP amounts are assumed to be made in the middle of the fiscal year. A payment made earlier or later in the fiscal year w ould have to be less or more than the amount show n to have the same effect on the UAL amortization.

The calculations above are based on the projected UAL as of June 30, 2026, as determined in the June 30, 2024, actuarial valuation. New unfunded liabilities can emerge in future years due to assumption or method changes, changes in plan provisions, and actuarial experience different than assumed. Making an ADP illustrated above for the indicated number of years will not result in a plan that is exactly 100% funded in the indicated number of years. Valuation results will vary from one year to the next and can diverge significantly from projections over a period of several years.

Additional Discretionary Payment History

The following table provides a recent history of actual ADPs made to the plan.

Fiscal
Year ADP Fiscal
Year ADP
2017-18 N/A 2021-22 $0
2018-19 $0 2022-23 0
2019-20 0 2023-24 0
2020-21 0 2024-25 0

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
31 Packet Pg. 229 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Projected Employer Contributions

The table below shows the required and projected employer contributions (before cost sharing) for the next six fiscal years. The projection assumes that all actuarial assumptions will b e realized and that no further changes to assumptions, contributions, benefits, or funding will occur during the projection period. In particular, the investment return beginning with FY 2024-25 is assumed to be 6.80% per year, net of investment and administrative expenses. The actual long -term cost of the plan will depend on the actual benefits and expenses paid and the actual investment experience of the fund.

The projected normal cost percentages below reflect that the normal cost is expected to continue to decline over time as new employees are hired into lower cost benefit tiers. Future contribution requirements may differ significantly from those shown below. The actuarial valuation does not include payroll beyond the valuation date. For the most realistic projections, the employer should apply projected payroll amounts to the rates below based on the most recent information available, such as current payroll as well as any plans to fill vacancies or add or remove positions.

Required
Contribution
Projected Future Employer Contributions
(Assumes 6.80% Return for Fiscal Year 2024-25 and Beyond) 2026-27 2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 2031-32
Normal Cost % 10.48% 10.2% 9.9% 9.7% 9.5% 9.3%
UAL Payment $31,802,552 $32,983,000 $35,941,000 $36,353,000 $36,662,000 $33,998,000

Total as a % of Payroll* 37.63% 37.6% 39.0% 38.3% 37.5% 34.6% Projected Payroll $117,119,039 $120,398,372 $123,769,526 $127,235,073 $130,797,655 $134,459,989

*Illustrative only and based on the projected payroll shown.

The required UAL payments are expected to vary significantly from the projections above due to experience, particularly investment experience. For projected contributions under alternate investment return scenarios, please see the Future Investment Return Scenarios exhibit. Our online pension plan projection tool, Pension Outlook , is available in the Employers section of the CalPERS website. Pension Outlook can help plan and budget pension costs under various scenarios.

For ongoing plans, investment gains and losses are amortized using an initial 5-year ramp. For more information, please see Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability in Appendix A. This method phases in the impact of the change in UAL over a 5-year period in order to reduce employer cost volatility from year to year. As a result of this methodology, dramatic changes in the required employer contributions in any one year are less likely. However, required contributions can change gradually and significantly over the next five years. In years when there is a large investment loss, the relatively small amortization payments during the initial ramp period could result in contributions that are less than interest on the UAL (i.e. negative amortization) while the contribution impact of the increase in the UAL is phased in.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
32 Packet Pg. 230 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

(Gain)/Loss Analysis 6/30/ 23 – 6/30/24

To calculate the cost requirements of the plan, assumptions are made about future events that affect the amount and timing of benefits to be paid and assets to be accumulated. Each year, actual experience is comp ared to the expected experience based on the actuarial assumptions. This results in actuarial gains or losses, as shown below.

1. Total (Gain)/Loss for the Year
a) Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) as of 6/30/23 $349,828,105 b) Expected payment on the UAL during 2023-24 28,646,081 c) Interest through 6/30/24 [0.068 x (1a) - ((1.068)½ - 1) x (1b)] 22,830,365 d) Expected UAL before all other changes [(1a) - (1b) + (1c)] 344,012,389 e) Change due to plan changes 0
f) Change due to AL Significant Increase 0
g) Change due to assumption change s 0
h) Change due to method change s 0
i) Change due to discount rate change with Funding Risk Mitigation 0 j) Expected UAL after all other changes [(1d) + (1e) + (1f) + (1g) + (1h) + (1i)] 344,012,389 k) Actual UAL as of 6/30/24 339,818,201
l) Total (Gain)/Loss for 2023-24 [(1k) - (1j)] ($4,194,188)

2. Investment (Gain)/Loss for the Year
a) Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/23 $687,419,176
b) Prior fiscal year receivables (512,051)
c) Current fiscal year receivables 274,142
d) Contributions received 47,693,875
e) Benefits and refunds paid (55,171,505)
f) Transfers, SCP payments and interest, and miscellaneous adjustments 220,928 g) Expected return at 6.8% per year 47,425,254
h) Expected assets as of 6/30/24 [(2a) + (2b) + (2c) + (2d) + (2e) + (2f) + (2g)] 727,349,818 i) Actual Market Value of Assets as of 6/30/24 745,630,783 j) Investment (Gain)/Loss [(2h) - (2i)] ($18,280,965)

3. Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss for the Year
a) Total (Gain)/Loss ( 1l) ($4,194,188)
b) Investment (Gain)/Loss ( 2j) (18,280,965)
c) Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss [(3a) - (3b)] $14,086,777

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
33 Packet Pg. 231 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Schedule of Amortization Bases

Below is the schedule of the plan’s amortization bases. Note that there is a two-year lag between the valuation date and the start of the contribution year.

• The assets, liabilities, and funded status of the plan are measured as of the valuation date: June 30, 2024. • The required employer contributions determined by the valuation are for the fiscal year beginning two years after the valuation date: FY 2026-27.

This two-year lag is necessary due to the amount of time needed to extract and test the membership and financial data, and the need to provide public agencies with their required employer contribution well in advance of the start of the fiscal year.

The Unfunded Accrued Liability (UAL) is used to determine the employer contribution and therefore must be rolled forward two years from the valuation date to the first day of the fiscal year for which the contribution is being determined. The UAL is rolled forward each year by subtracting the expected payment on the UAL for the fiscal year and adjusting for interest. The expected payment on the UAL for FY 2024-25 is based on the actuarial valuation two years ago, adjusted for additional discretionary payments, if necessary , and the expected payment for FY 2025-26 is based on the actuarial valuation one year ago.

Reason for Base
Date
Est.

Ramp
Level
2026-27
Ramp
Shape
Escala-
tion
Rate
Amort.

Period
Balance
6/30/24
Expected
Payment
2024-25
Balance
6/30/25
Expected
Payment
2025-26
Balance
6/30/26
Minimum
Required
Payment
2026-27
Assumption Change 6/30/03 No Ramp 2.80% 0 2,483,697 2,566,754 0 0 0 0 Method Change 6/30/04 No Ramp 2.80% 0 (342,649) (180,433) (179,482) (185,484) 0 0 Benefit Change 6/30/05 No Ramp 2.80% 0 7,591,259 3,997,417 3,976,371 4,109,344 0 0 Assumption Change 6/30/09 No Ramp 2.80% 5 17,191,729 2,837,767 15,428,102 2,917,224 13,462,434 2,998,906 Special (Gain)/Loss 6/30/09 No Ramp 2.80% 15 16,114,614 1,306,515 15,860,202 1,343,097 15,550,684 1,380,704 Special (Gain)/Loss 6/30/10 No Ramp 2.80% 16 1,352,994 105,376 1,336,098 108,326 1,315,004 111,359 Assumption Change 6/30/11 No Ramp 2.80% 7 9,139,787 1,216,703 8,503,902 1,250,770 7,789,571 1,285,792 Special (Gain)/Loss 6/30/11 No Ramp 2.80% 17 (57,758) (4,334) (57,207) (4,455) (56,493) (4,580) (Gain)/Loss 6/30/12 No Ramp 2.80% 18 25,812,160 1,871,123 25,633,692 1,923,514 25,388,945 1,977,372 Payment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/12 No Ramp 2.80% 18 3,061,875 221,955 3,040,705 228,170 3,011,673 234,559 (Gain)/Loss 6/30/13 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 19 80,448,305 6,044,993 79,671,647 6,214,252 78,667,257 6,388,252 (Gain)/Loss 6/30/14 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 20 (51,512,649) (3,738,908) (51,151,569) (3,843,597) (50,657,746) (3,951,218) Assumption Change 6/30/14 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 10 38,560,921 4,718,366 36,306,911 4,850,480 33,763,097 4,986,293 (Gain)/Loss 6/30/15 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 21 32,173,075 2,261,077 32,024,155 2,324,387 31,799,681 2,389,470 (Gain)/Loss 6/30/16 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 22 37,121,900 2,531,532 37,030,001 2,602,415 36,858,599 2,675,283 Assumption Change 6/30/16 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 12 13,131,361 1,386,503 12,591,425 1,425,325 11,974,653 1,465,235 (Gain)/Loss 6/30/17 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 23 (21,004,122) (1,392,639) (20,993,192) (1,431,633) (20,941,221) (1,471,719) Assumption Change 6/30/17 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 13 14,748,572 1,462,604 14,239,960 1,503,557 13,654,440 1,545,657 Assumption Change 6/30/18 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 14 28,301,618 2,651,517 27,485,942 2,725,759 26,538,075 2,802,080 Method Change 6/30/18 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 14 5,482,156 513,611 5,324,156 527,992 5,140,550 542,776

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS Miscellaneous
Valuation as of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
34 Packet Pg. 232 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Schedule of Amortization Bases (continued)
Reason for Base
Date
Est.

Ramp
Level
2026-27
Ramp
Shape
Escala-
tion
Rate
Amort.

Period
Balance
6/30/24
Expected
Payment
2024-25
Balance
6/30/25
Expected
Payment
2025-26
Balance
6/30/26
Minimum
Required
Payment
2026-27
(Gain)/Loss 6/30/18 100% Up/Dn 2.80% 24 (6,651,530) (429,546) (6,659,924) (441,574) (6,656,458) (453,938) Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/19 100% Up Only 0.00% 15 2,743,035 218,624 2,703,626 273,280 2,605,054 273,280 Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/19 No Ramp 0.00% 15 5,365,131 524,400 5,188,024 524,400 4,998,873 524,400 Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/20 100% Up Only 0.00% 16 16,946,208 1,018,917 17,045,560 1,358,556 16,800,671 1,698,195 Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/20 No Ramp 0.00% 16 9,819,658 931,019 9,525,242 931,019 9,210,805 931,019 Assumption Change 6/30/21 No Ramp 0.00% 17 2,035,513 187,721 1,979,929 187,720 1,920,567 187,721 Net Investment (Gain) 6/30/21 80% Up Only 0.00% 17 (85,533,269) (3,516,036) (87,715,916) (5,274,054) (88,230,175) (7,032,072) Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/21 No Ramp 0.00% 17 (7,304,375) (673,629) (7,104,917) (673,629) (6,891,896) (673,630) Benefit Change 6/30/22 No Ramp 0.00% 18 946,437 85,107 922,842 85,107 897,642 85,107 Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/22 60% Up Only 0.00% 18 119,392,600 2,566,307 124,859,170 5,132,615 128,045,340 7,698,922 Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/22 No Ramp 0.00% 18 10,006,578 899,827 9,757,107 899,827 9,490,672 899,827 Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/23 40% Up Only 0.00% 19 5,361,749 0 5,726,348 123,086 5,988,538 246,172 Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/23 No Ramp 0.00% 19 11,085,809 0 11,839,644 1,064,663 11,544,474 1,064,663 Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/24 20% Up Only 0.00% 20 (18,280,965) 0 (19,524,071) 0 (20,851,708) (448,201) Non-Investment (Gain)/Loss 6/30/24 No Ramp 0.00% 20 14,086,777 0 15,044,678 0 16,067,716 1,444,866 Total 339,818,201 32,190,210 329,659,161 32,780,459 318,199,318 31,802,552

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS Miscellaneous
Valuation as of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
35 Packet Pg. 233 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Amortization Schedule and Alternatives

The amortization schedule on the previous pag e(s) shows the minimum contributions required according to the CalPERS amortization policy. Each year, many agencies express a desire for a more stable pattern of payments or indicate interest in paying off the unfunded accrued liabilities more quickly than required. As such, we have provided alternative amortization schedules to help analyze the current amortization schedule and illustrate the potential savings of accelerating unfunded lia bility payments.

Shown on the following page are future year amortization payments based on 1) the current amortization schedule reflecting th e individual bases and remaining periods shown on the previous page, and 2) alternative “fresh start” amortization schedules using two sample periods that would both result in interest savings relative to the current amortization schedule. To initiate a fresh start, please contact a CalPERS actuary.

The current amortization schedule typically contains both positive and negative bases . Positive bases result from plan changes, assumption changes, method changes , or plan experience that increase unfunded liability. Negative bases result from plan changes, assumption changes, method changes, or plan experience that decrease unfunded liabi lity. The combination of positive and negative bases within an amortization schedule can result in unusual or problematic circumstances in future years, such as:

• When a negative payment would be required on a positive unfunded actuarial liability; or • When the payment would completely amortize the total unfunded liability in a very short time period, and results in a large change in the employer contribution requirement.

In any year when one of the above scenarios occurs, the actuary will consider correcti ve action such as replacing the existing unfunded liability bases with a single “fresh start” base and amortizing it over an appropriate period.

The current amortization schedule on the following page may appear to show that, based on the current amortization bases, one of the above scenarios will occur at some point in the future. It is impossible to know today whether such a scenario will in fact arise since there will be additional bases added to the amortization schedule in each future year. Should su ch a scenario arise in any future year, the actuary will take appropriate action based on guidelines in the CalPERS Actuarial Amortization Policy.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
36 Packet Pg. 234 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Amortization Schedule and Alternatives (continued)

Alternative Schedules
Current Amortization
Schedule 15 Year Amortization 10 Year Amortization
Date Balance Payment Balance Payment Balance Payment
6/30/2026 318,199,318 31,802,552 318,199,318 33,380,276 318,199,318 43,434,023 6/30/2027 306,970,819 32,982,994 305,340,331 33,380,276 294,950,378 43,434,022 6/30/2028 293,758,863 35,940,967 291,606,933 33,380,276 270,120,511 43,434,023 6/30/2029 276,591,603 36,352,715 276,939,663 33,380,275 243,602,212 43,434,023 6/30/2030 257,831,449 36,662,002 261,275,020 33,380,275 215,280,669 43,434,023 6/30/2031 237,475,979 33,997,767 244,545,181 33,380,275 185,033,261 43,434,022 6/30/2032 218,489,664 33,524,893 226,677,713 33,380,276 152,729,030 43,434,023 6/30/2033 198,700,967 31,445,836 207,595,257 33,380,276 118,228,110 43,434,022 6/30/2034 179,715,220 30,469,177 187,215,194 33,380,276 81,381,129 43,434,023 6/30/2035 160,447,760 29,023,760 165,449,286 33,380,275 42,028,552 43,434,023 6/30/2036 141,363,869 26,598,727 142,203,298 33,380,276 6/30/2037 123,488,402 25,373,300 117,376,581 33,380,275 6/30/2038 105,663,810 24,065,344 90,861,649 33,380,276 6/30/2039 87,978,841 23,090,801 62,543,700 33,380,275 6/30/2040 70,098,426 22,504,787 32,300,132 33,380,276 6/30/2041 51,607,754 18,066,784
6/30/2042 36,446,126 14,786,516
6/30/2043 23,643,472 22,788,335
6/30/2044 1,700,831 1,757,708
6/30/2045
6/30/2046
6/30/2047
6/30/2048
6/30/2049

Total 511,234,965 500,704,134 434,340,227
Interest Paid 193,035,647 182,504,816 116,140,909
Estimated Savings 10,530,831 76,894,738
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
37 Packet Pg. 235 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Reconciliation of Required Employer Contributions

Normal Cost (% of Payroll)

1. For Period 7/1/25 – 6/30/26
a) Employer Normal Cost 10.90%
b) Employee contribution 7.49%
c) Total Normal Cost 18.39%

2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation
a) Effect of demographic experience (0.46%)
b) Effect of plan changes 0.00%
c) Effect of discount rate change due to Funding Risk Mitigation 0.00% d) Effect of assumption changes 0.00%
e) Effect of method changes 0.00%
f) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (e)] (0.46%)

3. For Period 7/1/26 – 6/30/27
a) Employer Normal Cost 10.48%
b) Employee contribution 7.45%
c) Total Normal Cost 17.93%
Employer Normal Cost Change [(3a) – (1a)] (0.42%)
Employee Contribution Change [(3b) – (1b)] (0.04%)

Unfunded Liability Contribution ($)

1. For Period 7/1/25 – 6/30/26 32,780,459

2. Changes since the prior year annual valuation
a) Effect of adjustments to prior year’s amortization schedule 0 b) Effect of elimination of amortization bases (3,923,860) c) Effect of progression of amortization bases 1 1,949,288 d) Effect of investment (gain) /loss during prior year2 (448,201) e) Effect of non-investment (gain)/loss during prior year 1,444,866 f) Effect of re-amortizing existing bases due to Funding Risk Mitigation 0 g) Effect of Golden Handshake 0
h) Effect of plan changes 0
i) Effect of AL Significant Increase (Government Code section 20791) 0 j) Effect of assumption changes 0
k) Effect of adjustments to the amortization schedule (e.g., Fresh Start) 0 l) Effect of method change 0
m) Net effect of the changes above [sum of (a) through (l)] (977,907)

3. For Period 7/1/26 – 6/30/27 [(1) + (2m)] 31,802,552

The amounts shown for the period 7/1/25 – 6/30/26 may be different if a prepayment of unfunded actuarial liability is made or a plan change became effective after the prior year’s actuarial valuation was performed.

1 Includes scheduled escalation in individual amortization base payments due to the 5-year ramp and payroll grow th assumption used in the pre-2019 amortization policy.
2 The unfunded liability contribution for the investment (gain)/loss during the year prior to the valuation date is 20% of the “full” annual requirement due to the 5-year ramp. Increases to this amount that occur during the ramp period w ill be included in line c) for each of the next four years.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
38 Packet Pg. 236 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Employer Contribution History

The table below provides a 10-year history of the employer contribution requirements for the plan, as determined by the annual actuarial valuation. Changes due to prepayments or plan amendments after the valuation report was finalized are not reflected.

Valuation
Date
Contribution
Year
Employer
Normal Cost Rate
Unfunded Liability
Payment
06/30/2015 2017-18 10.039% $15,765,273
06/30/2016 2018-19 10.217% 18,392,618
06/30/2017 2019-20 10.716% 21,287,260
06/30/2018 2020-21 11.487% 23,432,860
06/30/2019 2021-22 10.95% 26,358,094
06/30/2020 2022-23 10.58% 29,715,229
06/30/2021 2023-24 11.73% 28,654,772
06/30/2022 2024-25 11.34% 32,190,210
06/30/2023 2025-26 10.90% 32,780,459
06/30/2024 2026-27 10.48% 31,802,552

Funding History

The table below shows the recent history of the actuarial accrued liability, market value of assets, unfunded accrued liability, funded ratio and annual covered payroll.

Valuation
Date

Accrued
Liability
(AL)
Market Value of
Assets (MVA)
Unfunded
Accrued
Liability (UAL)

Funded
Ratio

Annual
Covered
Payroll
6/30/2015 $696,699,220 $477,031,099 $219,668,121 68.5% $71,574,823 6/30/2016 730,382,476 468,702,245 261,680,231 64.2% 75,345,962 6/30/2017 772,526,669 511,805,893 260,720,776 66.3% 78,476,098 6/30/2018 831,958,865 547,102,617 284,856,248 65.8% 80,363,405 6/30/2019 868,716,440 574,012,871 294,703,569 66.1% 78,848,216 6/30/2020 909,429,635 592,313,289 317,116,346 65.1% 84,892,137 6/30/2021 956,179,582 720,145,626 236,033,956 75.3% 79,718,988 6/30/2022 996,201,108 655,682,370 340,518,738 65.8% 82,193,044 6/30/2023 1,037,247,281 687,419,176 349,828,105 66.3% 91,956,169 6/30/2024 1,085,448,984 745,630,783 339,818,201 68.7% 107,807,296 Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
39 Packet Pg. 237 of 510

Risk Analysis

• Future Investment Return Scenarios 26
• Discount Rate Sensitivity 27
• Mortality Rate Sensitivity 27
• Maturity Measures 28
• Maturity Measures History 29
• Funded Status – Termination Basis 30
• Funded Status – Low-Default-Risk Basis 31
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
40 Packet Pg. 238 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Future Investment Return Scenarios

Analysis using the investment return scenarios from the Asset Liability Management process completed in 2021 was performed to determine the effects of various future investment returns on required employ er UAL contributions. The CalPERS Funding Risk Mitigation Policy stipulates that when the investment return exceeds the discount rate by at least 2% , the board will consider adjustments to the discount rate. The projection s below use a discount rate of 6.8% for all scenarios even though an annual return of 10.8% is high enough to trigger a board discussion on the discount rate. The projections also assume that all other actuarial assumptions will be realized and that no further changes in assumptions, contributions, benefits , or funding will occur.

The employer normal cost rates are not affected by investment returns, and since no future assumption changes are being reflected, the projected employer normal cost rates for every future investment return scenario are the same as those shown earlier in this report. See Projected Employer Contributions for more information on projecting the employer normal cost.

The first table shows projected UAL contribution requirements if the fund were to earn either 3.0% or 10.8% annually. These alternate investment returns were chosen because 90% of long-term average returns are expected to fall between them over the 20-year period ending June 30, 2044.

Assumed Annual Return
FY 2024-25
through FY 2043-44
Projected Employer UAL Contributions
2027-28 2028-29 2029-30 2030-31 2031-32

3.0% (5th percentile) $33,676,000 $38,037,000 $40,578,000 $43,760,000 $44,730,000

10.8% (95th percentile ) $32,254,00 0 $33,678,000 $31,670,000 $28,583,000 $20,028,000

Required UAL contributions outside of this range are also possible. In particular, whereas it is unlikely that investment returns will average less than 3.0% or greater than 10.8% over a 20-year period, the likelihood of a single investment return less than

3.0% or greater than 10.8% in any given year is much greater. The following analysis illustrates the effect of an extreme, single year investment return.

The portfolio has an expected volatility (or standard deviation) of 12.0% per year. Accordingly, in any given year there is a 16% probability that the annual return will be -5.2% or less and a 2.5% probability that the annual return will be -17.2% or less. These returns represent one and two standard deviations below the expected return of 6.8%.

The following table shows the effect of one and two standard deviation investment loss es in FY 2024-25 on the FY 2027-28 contribution requirements. Note that a single -year investment gain or loss decreases or increases the required UAL contribution amount incrementally for each of the next five years, not just one, due to the 5-year ramp in the amortization policy. However, the contribution requirements beyond the first year are also impacted by investment returns beyond the first year. Historically, significant downturns in the market are often followed by higher than average returns. Such investment gains would offset the impact of these single year negative returns in years beyond FY 2027-28.

Assumed Annual Return for
Fiscal Year 2024-25
Required Employer
UAL Contributions
Projected Employer
UAL Contributions
2026-27 2027-28
(17.2%) (2 standard deviation loss) $31,802,552 $37,358,000 (5.2%) (1 standard deviation loss ) $31,802,552 $35,171,000

• Without investment gains (returns higher than 6.8%) in FY 2025-26 or later, projected contributions rates would continue to rise over the next four years due to the continued phase -in of the impact of the illustrated investment loss in FY 2024-25.
• The Pension Outlook Tool can be used to model projected contributions for these scenarios beyond FY 2027-28 as well as to model other investment return scenarios .

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
41 Packet Pg. 239 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Discount Rate Sensitivity

The discount rate assumption is calculated as the sum of the assumed real rate of return and the assumed annual price inflation, currently 4.5% and 2.3%, respectively. Changing either the price inflation assumption or the real rate of return assumption will change the discount rate. The sensitivity of the valuation results to the discount rate assumption depends on which component of the discount rate is changed. Shown below are various valuation results as of June 30, 2024, assuming alternate discount rates by changing the two components independently. Results are shown using the current discount rate of

6.8% as well as alternate discount rates of 5.8% and 7.8%. The rates of 5.8% and 7.8% were selected since they illustrate the impact of a 1.0% increase or decrease to the 6.8% assumption.

Sensitivity to the Discount Rate Due to Varying the Real Rate of Return Assumption

As of June 30, 2024
1% Lower
Real Return Rate
Current
Assumptions
1% Higher
Real Return Rate
Discount Rate 5.8% 6.8% 7.8%
Price Inflation 2.3% 2.3% 2.3%
Real Rate of Return 3.5% 4.5% 5.5%
a) Total Normal Cost 22.67% 17.93% 14.34%
b) Accrued Liability $1,223,262,430 $1,085,448,984 $971,255,802 c) Market Value of Assets $745,630,783 $745,630,783 $745,630,783 d) Unfunded Liability/(Surplus) [(b) - (c)] $477,631,647 $339,818,201 $225,625,019 e) Funded Ratio 61.0% 68.7% 76.8%

Sensitivity to the Discount Rate Due to Varying the Price Inflation Assumption

As of June 30, 2024
1% Lower
Price Inflation
Current
Assumptions
1% Higher
Price Inflation
Discount Rate 5.8% 6.8% 7.8%
Price Inflation 1.3% 2.3% 3.3%
Real Rate of Return 4.5% 4.5% 4.5%
a) Total Normal Cost 18.86% 17.93% 16.30%
b) Accrued Liability $1,120,247,466 $1,085,448,984 $1,012,531,819 c) Market Value of Assets $745,630,783 $745,630,783 $745,630,783 d) Unfunded Liability/(Surplus) [(b) - (c)] $374,616,683 $339,818,201 $266,901,036 e) Funded Ratio 66.6% 68.7% 73.6%

Mortality Rate Sensitivity

The following table looks at the change in the June 30, 2024, plan costs and funded status under two differe nt longevity scenarios, namely assuming rates of post-retirement mortality are 10% lower or 10% higher than our current mortality assumptions adopted in 2021. This type of analysis highlights the impact on the plan of a change in the mortality assumption .

As of June 30, 2024
10% Lower
Mortality Rates
Current
Assumptions
10% Higher
Mortality Rates
a) Total Normal Cost 18.24% 17.93% 17.64%
b) Accrued Liability $1,109,541,976 $1,085,448,984 $1,063,363,775 c) Market Value of Assets $745,630,783 $745,630,783 $745,630,783 d) Unfunded Liability/(Surplus) [(b) - (c)] $363,911,193 $339,818,201 $317,732,992 e) Funded Ratio 67.2% 68.7% 70.1%

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
42 Packet Pg. 240 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Maturity Measures

As pension plans mature , they become more sensitive to risks. Understanding plan maturity and how it affects the ability of a pension plan sponsor to tolerate risk is important in understanding how the pension plan is impacted by investment return volatility, other economic variables , and changes in longevity or other demographic assumptions.

One way to look at the maturity level of CalPERS and its plans is to look at the ratio of a plan’s retiree liability to its total liability.

A pension plan in its infancy will have a very low ratio of retiree liability to total liability. As the plan matures, the ratio increases.

A mature plan will often have a ratio above 60%-65%.

Ratio of Retiree Accrued Liability to
Total Accrued Liability June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Retiree Accrued Liability $653,009,459 $670,851,688

2. Total Accrued Liability $1,037,247,281 $1,085,448,984

3. Ratio of Retiree AL to Total AL [(1) ÷ (2)] 63% 62%

Another measure of the maturity level of CalPERS and its plans is the ratio of actives to retirees, also called the support ratio. A pension plan in its infancy will have a very high ratio of active to retired members. As the plan matures and members retir e, the ratio declines. A mature plan will often have a ratio near or below one.

To calculate the support ratio for the rate plan, retirees and beneficiaries receiving a continuance are each counted as one, even though they may have only worked a portion of their careers as an active member of this rate plan. For this reason, the support ratio, while intuitive, may be less informative than the ratio of retiree liability to total accrued liability above.

For comparison, the support ratio for all CalPERS public agency plans as of June 30, 2023, was 0.78 and was calculated consistently with how it is for the individual rate plan. Note that to calculate the support ratio for all public agency plan s, a retiree with service from more than one CalPERS agency is counted as a retiree more than once.

Support Ratio June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Number of Actives 757 833

2. Number of Retirees 1,348 1,364

3. Support Ratio [(1) ÷ (2)] 0.56 0.61

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
43 Packet Pg. 241 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Maturity Measures (continued)

The actuarial calculations supplied in this communication are based on various assumptions about long -term demographic and economic behavior. Unless these assumptions (e.g., terminations, deaths, disabilities, retirements, salary increases , investment return) are exactly realized each year, there will be differences on a year-to-year basis. The year-to-year differences between actual experience and the assumptions are called actuarial gains and losses and serve to lower or raise required employer contributions from one year to the next. Therefore, employer contributions will inevitably fluctuate, especially due to the ups and downs of investment returns.

Asset Volatility Ratio

Shown in the table below is the asset volatility ratio (AVR), which is the ratio of market value of assets to payroll. Plans that have a higher AVR experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to investment return. For example, a plan with an AVR of 8 may experience twice the contribution volatility due to investment return volatility than a plan with an AVR of 4. It should be noted that this ratio is a measure of the current situation. It increases over time but generally tends to stabilize as a plan matures.

Liability Volatility Ratio

Also shown in the table below is the liability volatility ratio (LVR), which is the ratio of accrued liability to payroll. Plans that have a higher LVR experience more volatile employer contributions (as a percentage of payroll) due to changes in liability. For example, a plan with an LVR of 8 is expected to have twice the contribution volatility of a plan with an LVR of 4 when there is a change in accrued liability, such as when there is a change in actuarial assumptions . It should be noted that this ratio indicates a longer -term potential for contribution volatility, since the AVR, described above, will tend to move closer to the LVR as the funded ratio approaches 10 0%.

Contribution Volatility June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Market Value of Assets without Receivables $686,907,124 $745,356,641

2. Payroll 91,956,169 107,807,296

3. Asset Volatility Ratio (AVR) [(1) ÷ (2)] 7.5 6.9

4. Accrued Liability $1,037,247,281 $1,085,448,984

5. Liability Volatility Ratio (LVR) [(4) ÷ (2)] 11.3 10.1

Maturity Measures History

Valuation Date
Ratio of
Retiree Accrued Liability
to
Total Accrued Liability Support Ratio
Asset
Volatility
Ratio
Liability
Volatility
Ratio

6/30/2017

57%

0.74 6.5

9.8 6/30/2018

57%

0.72 6.8

10.4 6/30/2019

61%

0.65 7.3

11.0 6/30/2020

60%

0.64 7.0

10.7 6/30/2021

62%

0.57 9.0

12.0 6/30/2022

64%

0.54 8.0

12.1 6/30/2023

63%

0.56 7.5

11.3 6/30/2024

62%

0.61 6.9

10.1 Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
44 Packet Pg. 242 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Funded Status – Termination Basis

The funded status measured on a termination basis is an estimated range for the financial position of the plan had the contract with CalPERS been terminated as of June 30, 2024 . The accrued liability on a termination basis (termination liability) is calculated differently from the plan’s ongoing funding liability. For the termination liability calculation, both compensation and service are frozen as of the valuation date and no future pay increases or service accruals are assumed. This measure of funded status is not appropriate for assessing the need for future employer contributions in the case of an ongoing plan, that is, for an employer that continues to provide CalPERS retirement benefits to active employees. Unlike the actuarial cost method used for ongoing plans, the terminatio n liability is the present value of the benefits earned through the valuation date.

A more conservative investment policy and asset allocation strategy was adopted by the board for the Terminated Agency Pool.

The Terminated Agency Pool has limited funding sources since no future employer contributions will be made. Therefore, expected benefit payments are secured by risk-free assets and benefit security for members is increased while limiting the funding risk. However, this asset allocation has a lower expected rate of return than the remainder of the PERF and consequently, a lower discoun t rate assumption. The lower discount rate for the Terminated Agency Pool results in higher liabilities for terminated plans.

The discount rate used for actual termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10-year and 30-year Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The discount rates used in the following analysis is based on 20-year Treasury bonds, which is a good proxy for most plans. The discount rate upon contract terminat ion will depend on actual Treasury rates on the date of termination , which varies over time, as demonstrated below.

Valuation 20-Year Valuation 20-Year
Date Treasury Rate Date Treasury Rate
06/30/2015 2.83% 06/30/2020 1.18%
06/30/2016 1.86% 06/30/2021 2.00%
06/30/2017 2.61% 06/30/2022 3.38%
06/30/2018 2.91% 06/30/2023 4.06%
06/30/2019 2.31% 06/30/2024 4.61%

As Treasury rates are variable, the table below shows a range for the termination liability using discount rates 1% below and above the 20-year Treasury rate on the valuation date. The price inflation assumption is the 20 -year Treasury breakeven inflation rate, that is, the difference between the 20-year inflation indexed bond and the 20-year fixed-rate bond.

The Market Value of Assets (MVA) also varies with interest rates and will fluctuate depending on other market conditions on the date of termination . Since it is not possible to approximate how the MVA will change in different interest rate environments, th e results below use the MVA as of the valuation date.

Discount Rate: 3.61%
Price Inflation: 2.45%
Discount Rate: 5.61%
Price Inflation: 2.45%

1. Termination Liability 1 $1,561,870,398 $1,198,572,890

2. Market Value of Assets (MVA) 745,630,783 745,630,783

3. Unfunded Termination Liability [(1) – (2)] $816,239,615 $452,942,107

4. Funded Ratio [(2) ÷ (1)] 47.7% 62.2%

1 The termination liabilities calculated above include a 5% contingency load. The contingency load and other actuarial assumptions can be found in Appendix A.

In order to terminate the plan, first contact our Pension Contract Services unit to initiate a Resolution of Intent to Termin ate. The completed Resolution will allow a CalPERS actuary to provide a preliminary termination valuation with a more up-to-date estimate of the plan’s assets and liabilities. Before beginning this process, please consult with a CalPERS actuary.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
45 Packet Pg. 243 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Funded Status – Low-Default-Risk Basis

Actuarial Standard of Practice (ASOP) No. 4, Measuring Pension Obligations and Determining Pension Plan Costs or Contributions , requires the disclosure of a low-default-risk obligation measure (LDROM) of benefit costs accrued as of the valuation date using a discount rate based on the yields of high quality fixed income securities with cash flows that replicate expected benefit payments. Conceptually, this measure represents the level at which financial markets would value the accrued plan costs, and would be approximately equal to the cost of a portfolio of low -default-risk bonds with similar financial characteristics to accrued plan costs.

As permitted in ASOP No. 4, the Actuarial Office uses the Entry Age Actuarial Cost Method to calculate the LDROM. This methodology is in line with the measure of “benefit entitlements” calculated by the Bureau of Economic Analysis and used by the Federal Reserve to report the indebtedness due to pensions of plan sponsors and, conversely, the household wealth due to pensions of plan members.

As shown bel ow, the discount rate used for the LDROM is 5.35%, which is the Standard FTSE Pension Liability Index1 discount rate as of June 30, 2024 .

Selected Measures on a Low-Default-Risk Basis June 30, 2024 Discount Rate 5.35%

1. Accrued Liability – Low-Default-Risk Basis (LDROM)
a) Active Members $427,708,543
b) Transferred Members 67,059,167
c) Separated Members 29,975,511
d) Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments 769,883,438 e) Total $1,294,626,659

2. Market Value of Assets (MVA) 745,630,783

3. Unfunded Accrued Liability – Low-Default-Risk Basis [(1e) – (2)] $548,995,876

4. Unfunded Accrued Liability – Funding Policy Basis 339,818,201

5. Present Value of Unearned Investment Risk Premium [(3) – (4)] $209,177,675

The difference between the unfunded liabilities on a low -default-risk basis and on the funding policy basis represents the present value of the investment risk premium that must be earned in future years to keep future contributions for currently accrued plan costs at the levels anticipated by the funding policy.

Benefit security for members of the plan relies on a combination of the assets in the plan, the investment income generated f rom those assets and the ability of the plan sponsor to make necessary future contributions. If future returns fall short of 6.8%, benefit security could be at risk without higher than currently anticipated future contributions.

The funded status on a low-default-risk basis is not appropriate for assessing the sufficiency of plan assets to cover the cost of settling the plan’s benefit obligations (see Funded Status – Termination Basis ), nor is it appropriate for assessing the need for future contributions (see Funded Status – Funding Policy Basis ).

1 This index is based on a yield curve of hypothetical AA-rated zero-coupon corporate bonds whose maturities range from 6 months to 30 years. The index represents the single discount rate that w ould produce the same present value as discounting a standardized set of liability cash flow s for a fully open pension plan using the yield curve. The liability cash flows are reasonably consistent with the pattern of benefits expected to be paid from the entire Public Employees’ Retirement Fund for current and former plan members. A different index, hence a different discount rate, may be needed to measure the LDROM for a subset of the fund, such as a single rate plan or a group of retirees.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
46 Packet Pg. 244 of 510

Supplementary Information

• Normal Cost by Benefit Group 33
• Summary of Valuation Data 34
• Status of PEPRA Transition 35
• Plan's Major Benefit Options 36
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
47 Packet Pg. 245 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Normal Cost by Benefit Group

The table below displays the Total Normal Cost broken out by benefit group for FY 2026-27. The Total Normal Cost is the annual cost of service accrual for the fiscal year for active employees and can be viewed as the long -term contribution rate for the benefits contracted. Generally, the normal cost for a benefit group subject to more generous benefit provisions will exceed the normal cost for a group with less generous benefits. However, based on the characteristics of the members (particularly when the number of actives is small), this may not be the case. Future measurements of the Total Normal Cost for each group may differ significantly from the current values due to such factors as: changes in the demographics of the group, changes in economic and demographic assumptions, changes in plan be nefits or applicable law.

Rate
Plan
Identifier Benefit Group Name
Total
Normal
Cost
FY 2026-27
Offset due to
Employee
Contributions
FY 2026-27
Employer
Normal
Cost1
FY 2026-27
Number
of
Actives
Payroll on
6/30/2024
8 Miscellaneous First Level 23.09% 8.00% 15.09% 232 $34,593,373 30157 Miscellaneous Second Level 19.61% 7.00% 12.61% 88 14,389,852 26004 Miscellaneous PEPR A Level 14.59% 7.25% 7.34% 513 58,824,071 Plan Total 17.93% 7.45% 10.48% 833 $107,807,296

1 The employer normal cost for individual rate plans is provided for illustrative purposes only. The employer normal cost rate for contribution purposes is the blended rate show n in the Plan Total row and is the employer normal cost contribution rate that applies to the covered payroll of members in every rate plan show n above.

Note that if a Benefit Group above has multiple bargaining units, each of which has separately contracted for different benef its such as Employer Paid Member Contributions, then the Normal Cost shown for the respective benefit level does not reflect those differences. Additionally, if a Second Level Benefit Group amended to the same benefit formula as a First Level Benefit Group, their Normal Costs may be diss imilar due to demographic or other population differences. For questions in these situations, please contact a CalPERS actuary.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
48 Packet Pg. 246 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Summary of Valuation Data

June 30, 2023 June 30, 2024

1. Active Members
a) Counts 757 833
b) Average Attained Age

45.55 45.17
c) Average Entry Age to Rate Plan 35.29 35.61
d) Average Years of Credited Service 10.26 9.47
e) Average Annual Covered Payroll $121,474 $129,421
f) Annual Covered Payroll $91,956,169 $107,807,296
g) Projected Annual Payroll for Contribution Year $99,898,787 $117,119,039 h) Present Value of Future Payroll $829,447,506 $977,355,440

2. Transferred Members
a) Counts 392 393
b) Average Attained Age 45.76 46.08
c) Average Years of Credited Service 3.58 3.68
d) Average Annual Covered Payroll $137,723 $146,064

3. Separated Members
a) Counts 488 504
b) Average Attained Age 47.65 47.81
c) Average Years of Credited Service 3.03 3.03
d) Average Annual Covered Payroll $80,177 $80,559

4. Retired Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments a) Counts 1,348 1,364
b) Average Attained Age 71.13 71.49
c) Average Annual Benefits $40,011 $41,180
d) Total Annual Benefits $53,934,949 $56,169,453

5. Active to Retired Ratio [(1a) ÷ (4a)] 0.56 0.61

Counts of members included in the valuation are counts of the records processed by the valuation. Multiple records may exist for those who have service in more than one valuation group. This does not result in double counting of liabilities.

Average Annual Benefits represe nts benefit amounts payable by this plan only. Some members may have service with another agency and would therefore have a larger total benefit than would be included as part of the average shown here.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
49 Packet Pg. 247 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Status of PEPRA Transition
The California Public Employees' Pension Reform Act of 2013 (PEPRA), which took effect in January 2013, changed CalPERS retirement benefits and placed compensation limits on new members joining CalPERS o n or after January 1, 2013.

One of the objectives of PEPRA was to improve the ability of employers to manage the costs of retirement benefits for their members. While such changes can reduce future benefit costs in a meaningful way, the full impact on empl oyer contributions will not occur until all active members are subject to the rules and provisions of PEPRA. The table below illustrates the sta tus of this transition as of June 30, 2024.

Classic PEPRA
PEPRA
as a Percent
of Total
Active Members
Count 320 513 61.6%
Average Attained Age 52.82 40.41
Average Entry Age 34.43 36.34
Average Years of Credited Service 18.33 3.94
Average Annual Covered Payroll $153,073 $114,667
Annual Covered Payroll $48,983,225 $58,824,071 54.6%
Present Value of Future Payroll $338,328,246 $639,027,194 65.4%

Transferred Members
Count 245 148 37.7%

Separated Members
Count 305 199 39.5%

Retired Members and Beneficiaries Receiving Payments
Count 1,349 15 1.1%
Average Annual Benefit $41,507 $11,735
Total Annual Benefits $55,993,431 $176,022 0.3%

Accrued Liabilities
Active Members $294,722,928 $45,264,172 13.3%
Transferred Members 44,271,203 6,044,534 12.0%
Separated Members 21,456,422 2,838,037 11.7%
Retired Members and Beneficiaries 668,453,307 2,398,381 0.4% Total $1,028,903,860 $56,545,124 5.2%

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
50 Packet Pg. 248 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Plan's Major Benefit Options
Shown below is a summary of the major optional benefits for which the agency has contracted. A description of principal standard and optional plan provisions is in Appendix B.

Benefit Group
Member Category Misc Misc Misc Misc Misc Misc Misc
Demographics
Actives No Yes Yes No Yes No No
Transfers/Separated Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes No No
Receiving Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes Yes
Benefit Group Key 105391 105393 107485 111264 200040 200044 200045 Benefit Provision

Benefit Formula 2% @ 55 2.7% @ 55 2% @ 60 2% @ 62 2% @ 62 Social Security Coverage No No No No No
Full/Modified Full Full Full Full Full

Employee Contribution Rate 8.00% 7.00% 7.25%

Final Average Compensation Period One Year One Year One Year Three Year Three Year

Sick Leave Credit No No No No No

Non-Industrial Disability Standard Standard Standard Standard Standard

Industrial Disability No No No No No

Pre-Retirement Death Benefits
Optional Settlement 2 No No No No No
1959 Survivor Benefit Level Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Level 1 Special No No No No No
Alternate (firefighters) No No No No No

Post-Retirement Death Benefits
Lump Sum $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 $2,000 Survivor Allowance (PRSA) No No No No No No No

COLA 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2% 2%
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS Miscellaneous
Valuation as of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
51 Packet Pg. 249 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Plan's Major Benefit Options (Continued)
Shown below is a summary of the major optional benefits for which the agency has contracted. A description of principal standard and optional plan provisions is in Appendix B.

Benefit Group
Member Category Misc
Demographics
Actives No
Transfers/Separated No
Receiving Yes
200046
Benefit Provision

Benefit Formula
Social Security Coverage
Full/Modified

Employee Contribution Rate

Final Average Compensation Period

Sick Leave Credit

Non-Industrial Disability

Industrial Disability

Pre-Retirement Death Benefits
Optional Settlement 2
1959 Survivor Benefit Level
Special
Alternate (firefighters)

Post-Retirement Death Benefits
Lump Sum $2,000
Survivor Allowance (PRSA) No

COLA 2%

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS Miscellaneous
Valuation as of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
52 Packet Pg. 250 of 510

Appendix A - Actuarial Methods and Assumptions

• Actuarial Data 39
• Actuarial Methods 39
• Actuarial Assumptions 43
• Miscellaneous 63

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
53 Packet Pg. 251 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Actuarial Data

As stated in the Actuarial Certification, the data which serves as the basis of this valuation has been obtained from the various CalPERS databases. We have reviewed the valuation data and believe that it is reasonable and appropriate in aggregate. We are unaware of any potential data issues that would have a material effect on the results of this valuation, except that data does not always contain the latest salary information for former members now in reciprocal systems and does not recognize the potential for unusually large salary deviation in certain cases such as elected officials. Therefore, salary information in these cases may not be accurate. These situations are relatively infrequent, however, and generally do not have a material impact o n the required employer contributions.

Actuarial Methods

Actuarial Cost Method

With one exception, the actuarial cost method use d in this valuation is the Entry Age Actuarial Cost Method. This method is used to calculate the required employer contributions and the PEPRA member contribution rate. Under this method, the cost of the projected benefits is allocated on an individual basis as a level percent of earnings for the individual between entry age and retirement age. The portion allocated to the year following the valuation date is the normal cost. This method yields a total normal cost rate, expressed as a percentage of payroll, which is designed to remain level throughout the member’s career.

The actuarial accrued liability for active members is then calculated as the present value of benefits minus the present value of future normal cost , or the portion of the total present value of benefits allocated to prior years. The actuarial accrued liability for members currently receiving benefits and for members entitled to deferred benefits is equal to the present value of the benef its expected to be paid. No normal costs are applicable for these pa rticipants.

To calculate the accrued liability on termination basis, this valuation use d the Traditional Unit Credit Actuarial Cost Method. This method differs from the entry age method only for active members where the accrued liability is the present value of benefits assuming no future pay increases or service accruals.

Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability

The excess of the total actuarial accrued liability over the market value of plan assets is called the unfunded actuarial acc rued liability (UAL). Funding requirements are determined by adding the normal cost and a payment toward the UAL. The UAL payment is equal to the sum of individual amortization payments, each representing a different source of UAL for a given measurement period.

Amortization payments are determined according to the CalPERS Actuarial Amortization Policy. The board adopted a new policy effective for the June 30, 2019 , actuarial valuation. The new policy applies prospectively only; amortization bases (sources of UAL) established prior to the June 30, 2019 , valuation will continue to be amortized according to the prior policy.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
54 Packet Pg. 252 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (continued)

Prior Policy (Bases Established on or after June 30, 2013, and prior to June 30, 2019)

Amortization payments are determined as a level percentage of payroll whereby the payment increases each year at an escalation rate. Gains or losses are amorti zed over a fixed 30-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. All changes in liability due to plan amendments (other than golden handshakes) are amortized over a 20-year period with no ramp. Changes in actuarial assumptions or changes in actuarial methodology are amortized over a 20-year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning and a 5-year ramp down at the end of the amortization period. Changes in unfunded accrued liability due to a Golden Handshake are amortized over a period of five years (20 years prior to June 30, 2014). A summary is provided in the following table:

Driver
Source
(Gain)/Loss
Assumption/Method
Change
Benefit
Change
Golden
Handshake Investment
Non-
investment
Amortization
Period 30 Years 30 Years 20 Years
20 Years 5 Years
Escalation Rate
- Active Plans
- Inactive Plans

2.80%
0%

2.80%
0%

2.80%
0%

2.80%
0%

2.80%
0%
Ramp Up 5 5 5 0 0
Ramp Down 5 5 5 0 0

The 5-year ramp up means that the payments in the first four years of the amortization period are 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the “full” payment which begins in year five. The 5-year ramp down means that the reverse is true in the final four years of the amortization period.

Current Policy (Bases Es tablished on or after June 30, 2019)

Amortization payments are determined as a level dollar amount. Investment gains or losses are amortized over a fixed 20 -year period with a 5-year ramp up at the beginning of the amortization period. Non-investment gain s or losses are amortized over a fixed 20-year period with no ramps. All changes in liability due to plan amendments (other than golden handshakes) are amortized over a 20-year period with no ramps. Changes in actuarial assumptions or changes in actuarial methodology are amortized over a 20-year period with no ramps. Changes in unfunded accrued liability due to a Golden Handshake are amortized over a period of five years. A summary is provided in the table below:

Driver
Source
(Gain)/Loss
Assumption/
Method
Change
Benefit
Change
Golden
Handshake Investment
Non-
investment
Amortization
Period 20 Years 20 Years 20 Years 20 Years 5 Years
Escalation Rate 0% 0% 0% 0% 0%
Ramp Up 5 0 0 0 0
Ramp Down 0 0 0 0 0

The 5-year ramp up means that the payments in the first four years of the amortization period are 20%, 40%, 60% and 80% of the “full” payment which begins in year five.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
55 Packet Pg. 253 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Amortization of Unfunded Actuarial Accrued Liability (continued)

Exceptions for Inconsistencies

An exception to the amortization rules above is used whenever their application results in inconsistencies. In these cases, a “fresh start” approach is used. This means that the current unfunded actuarial liability is projected and amortized over a se t number of years. For example, a fresh start is needed in the following situations:

• When a negative payment would be required on a positive unfunded actuarial liability; or • When the payment would completely amortize the total unfunded liability in a very short time period, and results in a large change in the employer contribution requirement .

It should be noted that the actuary may determine that a fresh start is necessary under other circumstances. In all cases of a fresh start, the period is set by the actuary at what is deemed appropriate; however, the period will not be greater than 20 years.

Exceptions for Plans in Surplus

If a surplus exists (i.e. , the Market Value of Assets exceeds the plan’s accrued liability) any prior amortization layers shall be considered full y amortized, and the surplus shall not be amortized.

In the event of any subsequent unfunded liability, a Fresh Start shall be used with an amortization period of 20 years or les s.

Exceptions for Small Amounts

Where small unfunded liabilities are identi fied in annual valuations which result in small payment amounts, the actuary may shorten the remaining period for these bases.

• When the balance of a single amortization base has an absolute value less than $250, the amortization period is reduced to one year.
• When the entire unfunded liability is a small amount , the actuary may perform a Fresh Start and use an appropriate amortization period.

Exceptions for Inactive Plans

The following exceptions apply to plans classified as Inactive. These plans have no active members and no expectation to have active members in the future.

• Amortization of the unfunded liability is on a “level dollar” basis rather than a “level percent of pay” basis. For amortization layers, which utilize a ramp up and ramp down, the “ultimate” payment is constant. • Actuarial judgment will be used to shorten amortization periods for Inactive plans with existing periods that are deemed too long given the duration of the liability. The specific demographics of the plan will be used to deter mine if shorter periods may be more appropriate.

Exceptions for Inactive Agencies

For a public agency with no active members in any CalPERS rate plan, the unfunded liability shall be amortized over a closed amortization period of no more than 15 years.

Asset Valuation Method

The Actuarial Value of Assets is set equal to the market value of assets. Asset values include accounts receivable.

PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology

Per Government Code section 7522.30(b), the “normal cost rate” shall mean the annual actuarially determined normal cost for the plan of retirement benefits provided to the new member and shall be established based on actuarial assumptions used to determine the liabilities and costs as part of the annual actuarial valuation. The plan of retirement benefits shall include any elements that would impact the actuarial determination of the normal cost, including, but not limited to, the retirement form ula, eligibility and vesting criteria, ancillary benefit provisions, and any automatic co st-of-living adjustments as determined by the public retirement system.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
56 Packet Pg. 254 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

PEPRA Normal Cost Rate Methodology (continued)

For purposes of setting member rates, it is preferable to determine total normal cost using a large active population so that the rate remains relatively stable. While each CalPERS non-pooled plan has a sufficiently large active population for this purpose, the PEPRA active population by itself may not be sufficiently large enough yet. The total PEPRA normal cost for each PEPRA benefit tier will be determined based on the entire active plan population (both PEPRA and Classic) only until the number of members covered under the PEPRA formula meets either:

1. 50% of the active population, or

2. 25% of the active population and 100 or more PEPRA members

Once one of these conditions is met , the total PEPRA normal cost for each PEPRA benefit tier will be determined using the entire active PEPRA population.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
57 Packet Pg. 255 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Actuarial Assumptions

In 2021, CalPERS completed its most recent asset liability management study incorporating actuarial assumptions and strategic asset allocation. In November 2021, the board adopted changes to the asset allocation that increased the expec ted volatility of returns. The adopted asset allocation was expected to have a long-term blended return that continued to support a discount rate assumption of 6.80%. The board also approved several changes to the demographic assumptions that more closely aligned wit h actual experience.

For more details and additional rationale for the selection of the actuarial assumptions, please refer to the 2021 CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions that can be found on the CalPERS website under: Forms and Publications. Click on “View All” and search for Experience Study.

All actuarial assumptions (except the discount rates and price inflation ass umption used for the accrued liability on a termination basis and the interest rate used for the low-default-risk obligation measure ) represent an estimate of future experience rather than observations of the estimates inherent in market data.

Economic Assumptions

Discount Rate
The prescribed discount rate assumption, adopted by the board on November 17, 2021, is 6.80% compounded annually (net of investment and administrative expenses) as of June 30, 2024. The discou nt rate is based on the long-term expected rate of return on assets using a building -block method in which expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense and inflation) are developed for each major asset class. The current assumption, originally based on capital market assumptions developed by the Investment Office in 2021, has been reviewed for this valuation based on capital market assumptions developed by the Investment Office in 2023.

Termination Liabilit y Discount Rate
The current discount rate assumption used for termination valuations is a weighted average of the 10 -year and 30-year U.S.

Treasury yields where the weights are based on matching asset and liability durations as of the termination date. The accrued liabilities on a termination basis in this report use discount rates that are based on the 20-year Treasury rate on the valuation date.

To illustrate the impact of the variability of interest rates, the accrued liabilities on a termination basis in this report use discount rates 1% below and 1% above the 20-year Treasury rate on the valuation date. The 20-year Treasury rate was 4.61% on June 30, 2024.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
58 Packet Pg. 256 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Salary Increases
Annual increases vary by category, entry age, and duration of service. A sample of assumed increases due to seniority, merit and promotion are shown below. Assumed wage inflation is combined with these factors to develop the total expected salary increase s.

Public Agency Miscellaneous
Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.0764 0.0621 0.0521
1 0.0663 0.0528 0.0424
2 0.0576 0.0449 0.0346
3 0.0501 0.0381 0.0282
4 0.0435 0.0324 0.0229
5 0.0378 0.0276 0.0187
10 0.0201 0.0126 0.0108
15 0.0155 0.0102 0.0071
20 0.0119 0.0083 0.0047
25 0.0091 0.0067 0.0031
30 0.0070 0.0054 0.0020

Public Agency Fire
Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1517 0.1549 0.0631
1 0.1191 0.1138 0.0517
2 0.0936 0.0835 0.0423
3 0.0735 0.0613 0.0346
4 0.0577 0.0451 0.0284
5 0.0453 0.0331 0.0232
10 0.0188 0.0143 0.0077
15 0.0165 0.0124 0.0088
20 0.0145 0.0108 0.0101
25 0.0127 0.0094 0.0115
30 0.0112 0.0082 0.0132

Public Agency Police
Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1181 0.1051 0.0653
1 0.0934 0.0812 0.0532
2 0.0738 0.0628 0.0434
3 0.0584 0.0485 0.0353
4 0.0462 0.0375 0.0288
5 0.0365 0.0290 0.0235
10 0.0185 0.0155 0.0118
15 0.0183 0.0150 0.0131
20 0.0181 0.0145 0.0145
25 0.0179 0.0141 0.0161
30 0.0178 0.0136 0.0179

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
59 Packet Pg. 257 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Salary Increases (continued)
Public Agency County Peace Officers
Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.1238 0.1053 0.0890
1 0.0941 0.0805 0.0674
2 0.0715 0.0616 0.0510
3 0.0544 0.0471 0.0387
4 0.0413 0.0360 0.0293
5 0.0314 0.0276 0.0222
10 0.0184 0.0142 0.0072
15 0.0174 0.0124 0.0073
20 0.0164 0.0108 0.0074
25 0.0155 0.0094 0.0075
30 0.0147 0.0083 0.0077

Schools
Duration of Service (Entry Age 20) (Entry Age 30) (Entry Age 40) 0 0.0275 0.0275 0.0200
1 0.0422 0.0373 0.0298
2 0.0422 0.0373 0.0298
3 0.0422 0.0373 0.0298
4 0.0388 0.0314 0.0245
5 0.0308 0.0239 0.0179
10 0.0236 0.0160 0.0121
15 0.0182 0.0135 0.0103
20 0.0145 0.0109 0.0085
25 0.0124 0.0102 0.0058
30 0.0075 0.0053 0.0019

• The Miscellaneous salary scale is used for Local Prosecutors. • The Police salary scale is used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police.

Price Inflation

2.30% compounded annually.

Termination Liability Price Inflation
The breakeven inflation rate for 20 -year Treasuries on the valuation date, 2.45%.

Wage Inflation

2.80% compounded annually . This is used in projecting individual salary increases.

Payroll Growth

2.80% compounded annu ally. This is used as the escalation rate of the amortization payments on level percent of payroll amortization bases , that is, on any amortization bases established prior to 2019 for plans that currently have active members.

Miscellaneous Loading Factors

Credit for Unused Sick Leave
Total years of service is increased by 1% for those plans that have adopted the provision of providing Credit for Unused Sick Leave.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
60 Packet Pg. 258 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) Total years of service is increase d by the Employee Contribution Rate for those plans with the provision providing for the Conversion of Employer Paid Member Contributions (EPMC) during the final compensation period.

Norris Decision (Best Factors)
Employees hired prior to July 1, 1982, have projected benefit amounts increased in order to reflect the use of “Best Factors” in the calculation of optional benefit forms. This is due to a 1983 Supreme Court decision, known as the Norris decision, which required males and females to be treated equally in the determination of benefit amounts. Consequently, anyone already employed at that time is given the best possible conversion factor when optional benefits are determined. No loading is necessary for employees hired after July 1, 1982.

Termin ation Liability
The termination liabilities include a 5% contingency load. This load is for unforeseen improvements in mortality.

Demographic Assumptions

Pre-Retirement Mortality
The mortality assumptions are based on mortality rates resulting from the m ost recent CalPERS Experience Study adopted by the CalPERS Board in November 2021. For purposes of the mortality rates, the rates incorporate generational mortality to capture ongoing mor tality improvement. Generational mortality explicitly assumes that members born more recently will live longer than the members born before them thereby capturing the mortality improvement seen in the past and expected continued improvement. For more details, please refer to the 2021 CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions report that can be found on the CalPERS website.

Rates vary by age and gender. This table only contains a sample of the 2017 base tab le rates for illustrative purposes. The non- industrial death rates are used for all plans. The industrial death rates are used for Safety plans , except for local Safety members described in Government Code section 20423.6 where the agency has not specifically contracted for industrial death benefits.

Miscellaneous Safety
Non-Industrial Death Non-Industrial Death Industrial Death (Not Job-Related) (Not Job-Related) (Job-Related)
Age Male Female Male Female Male Female
20 0.00039 0.00014 0.00038 0.00014 0.00004 0.00002
25 0.00033 0.00013 0.00034 0.00018 0.00004 0.00002
30 0.00044 0.00019 0.00042 0.00025 0.00005 0.00003
35 0.00058 0.00029 0.00048 0.00034 0.00005 0.00004
40 0.00075 0.00039 0.00055 0.00042 0.00006 0.00005
45 0.00093 0.00054 0.00066 0.00053 0.00007 0.00006
50 0.00134 0.00081 0.00092 0.00073 0.00010 0.00008
55 0.00198 0.00123 0.00138 0.00106 0.00015 0.00012
60 0.00287 0.00179 0.00221 0.00151 0.00025 0.00017
65 0.00403 0.00250 0.00346 0.00194 0.00038 0.00022
70 0.00594 0.00404 0.00606 0.00358 0.00067 0.00040
75 0.00933 0.00688 0.01099 0.00699 0.00122 0.00078
80 0.01515 0.01149 0.02027 0.01410 0.00225 0.00157

• The pre-retirement mortality rates above are for 2017 and are projected generationally for future years using 80% of the Society of Actuaries’ Scale MP-2020.
• Miscellaneous plans usually have industrial death rates set to zero unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial death benefits. If so, each non-industrial death rate shown above will be split into two components : 99% will become the non-industrial death rate and 1% will become the industrial death rate.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
61 Packet Pg. 259 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Post-Retirement Mortality
Rates vary by age, type of retirement, and gender. See sample rates in table below. These rates are used for all plans.

Service Retirement
Non-Industrial Disability Industrial Disability
(Not Job-Related) (Job-Related)
Age Male Female Male Female Male Female
50 0.00267 0.00199 0.01701 0.01439 0.00430 0.00311
55 0.00390 0.00325 0.02210 0.01734 0.00621 0.00550
60 0.00578 0.00455 0.02708 0.01962 0.00944 0.00868
65 0.00857 0.00612 0.03334 0.02276 0.01394 0.01190
70 0.01333 0.00996 0.04001 0.02910 0.02163 0.01858
75 0.02391 0.01783 0.05376 0.04160 0.03446 0.03134
80 0.04371 0.03403 0.07936 0.06112 0.05853 0.05183
85 0.08274 0.06166 0.11561 0.09385 0.10137 0.08045
90 0.14539 0.11086 0.16608 0.14396 0.16584 0.12434
95 0.24665 0.20364 0.24665 0.20364 0.24665 0.20364
100 0.36198 0.31582 0.36198 0.31582 0.36198 0.31582
105 0.52229 0.44679 0.52229 0.44679 0.52229 0.44679
110 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000 1.00000

• The post-retirement mortality rates above are for 2017 and are projected generationally for future years using 80% of the Society of Actuaries’ Scale MP-2020.

Marital Status
For active members, a percentage who are married upon retirement is assumed according to the member category as shown in the following table.

Member Category Percent Married
Miscellaneous Member 70%
Local Police 85%
Local Fire 85%
Other Local Safety 70%
School Police 85%
Local County Peace Officers 75%

Age of Spouse
It is assumed that female spouses are 3 years younger than male spouses. This assumption is used for all plans.

Separated Members
It is assumed that separ ated members refund immediately if non-vested. Separated members who are vested are assumed to retire at age 59 for Miscellaneous members and age 54 for Safety members.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
62 Packet Pg. 260 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Termination with Refund
Rates vary by entry age and service for Miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for Safety plans. See sample rates in tables below.

Public Agency Miscellaneous
Duration of
Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0.1851 0.1944 0.1769 0.1899 0.1631 0.1824 0.1493 0.1749 0.1490 0.1731 0.1487 0.1713 1 0.1531 0.1673 0.1432 0.1602 0.1266 0.1484 0.1101 0.1366 0.1069 0.1323 0.1037 0.1280 2 0.1218 0.1381 0.1125 0.1307 0.0970 0.1183 0.0815 0.1058 0.0771 0.0998 0.0726 0.0938 3 0.0927 0.1085 0.0852 0.1020 0.0727 0.0912 0.0601 0.0804 0.0556 0.0737 0.0511 0.0669 4 0.0672 0.0801 0.0616 0.0752 0.0524 0.0670 0.0431 0.0587 0.0392 0.0523 0.0352 0.0459 5 0.0463 0.0551 0.0423 0.0517 0.0358 0.0461 0.0292 0.0404 0.0261 0.0350 0.0230 0.0296 10 0.0112 0.0140 0.0101 0.0129 0.0083 0.0112 0.0064 0.0094 0.0048 0.0071 0.0033 0.0049 15 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Public Agency Safety
Duration of
Service Fire Police County Peace Officer
Male Female Male Female Male Female
0 0.1022 0.1317 0.1298 0.1389 0.1086 0.1284
1 0.0686 0.1007 0.0789 0.0904 0.0777 0.0998
2 0.0441 0.0743 0.0464 0.0566 0.0549 0.0759
3 0.0272 0.0524 0.0274 0.0343 0.0385 0.0562
4 0.0161 0.0349 0.0170 0.0206 0.0268 0.0402
5 0.0092 0.0214 0.0113 0.0128 0.0186 0.0276
10 0.0015 0.0000 0.0032 0.0047 0.0046 0.0038
15 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0023 0.0036
20 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
25 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
30 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000
35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

• The police termination and refund rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
63 Packet Pg. 261 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Termination with Refund (continued)

Schools
Duration of
Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Entry Age 45 Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 0 0.2054 0.2120 0.1933 0.1952 0.1730 0.1672 0.1527 0.1392 0.1423 0.1212 0.1318 0.1032 1 0.1922 0.2069 0.1778 0.1883 0.1539 0.1573 0.1300 0.1264 0.1191 0.1087 0.1083 0.0910 2 0.1678 0.1859 0.1536 0.1681 0.1298 0.1383 0.1060 0.1086 0.0957 0.0934 0.0853 0.0782 3 0.1384 0.1575 0.1256 0.1417 0.1042 0.1155 0.0829 0.0893 0.0736 0.0774 0.0643 0.0656 4 0.1085 0.1274 0.0978 0.1143 0.0800 0.0925 0.0622 0.0707 0.0542 0.0620 0.0462 0.0533 5 0.0816 0.0991 0.0732 0.0887 0.0590 0.0713 0.0449 0.0539 0.0383 0.0476 0.0317 0.0413 10 0.0222 0.0248 0.0200 0.0221 0.0163 0.0174 0.0125 0.0128 0.0094 0.0100 0.0063 0.0072 15 0.0106 0.0132 0.0095 0.0113 0.0077 0.0083 0.0058 0.0052 0.0040 0.0039 0.0021 0.0026 20 0.0059 0.0065 0.0050 0.0054 0.0035 0.0036 0.0021 0.0019 0.0010 0.0009 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0029 0.0034 0.0025 0.0029 0.0018 0.0020 0.0010 0.0012 0.0005 0.0006 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0012 0.0015 0.0011 0.0013 0.0011 0.0011 0.0010 0.0009 0.0005 0.0005 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0006 0.0007 0.0006 0.0007 0.0005 0.0006 0.0005 0.0005 0.0003 0.0002 0.0000 0.0000

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
64 Packet Pg. 262 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Termination with Vested Benefits
Rates vary by entry age and service for Miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by service for Safety plans. See sample rates in tables below.

Public Agency Miscellaneous
Duration of
Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 5 0.0381 0.0524 0.0381 0.0524 0.0358 0.0464 0.0334 0.0405 0.0301 0.0380 10 0.0265 0.0362 0.0265 0.0362 0.0254 0.0334 0.0244 0.0307 0.0197 0.0236 15 0.0180 0.0252 0.0180 0.0252 0.0166 0.0213 0.0152 0.0174 0.0119 0.0132 20 0.0141 0.0175 0.0141 0.0175 0.0110 0.0131 0.0079 0.0087 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0084 0.0108 0.0084 0.0108 0.0064 0.0076 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0047 0.0056 0.0047 0.0056 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0038 0.0041 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Public Agency Safety
Duration of
Service Fire Police County Peace Officer
Male Female Male Female Male Female
5 0.0089 0.0224 0.0156 0.0272 0.0177 0.0266
10 0.0066 0.0164 0.0113 0.0198 0.0126 0.0189
15 0.0048 0.0120 0.0083 0.0144 0.0089 0.0134
20 0.0035 0.0088 0.0060 0.0105 0.0063 0.0095
25 0.0024 0.0061 0.0042 0.0073 0.0042 0.0063
30 0.0012 0.0031 0.0021 0.0037 0.0021 0.0031
35 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

• After termination with vested benefits, a Miscellaneous member is assumed to retire at age 59 and a Safety member at age 54.
• The Police termination with vested benefits rates are also used for Public Agency Local Prosecutors, Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police.

Schools
Duration of
Service Entry Age 20 Entry Age 25 Entry Age 30 Entry Age 35 Entry Age 40 Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female Male Female 5 0.0359 0.0501 0.0359 0.0501 0.0332 0.0402 0.0305 0.0304 0.0266 0.0272 10 0.0311 0.0417 0.0311 0.0417 0.0269 0.0341 0.0228 0.0265 0.0193 0.0233 15 0.0193 0.0264 0.0193 0.0264 0.0172 0.0220 0.0151 0.0175 0.0123 0.0142 20 0.0145 0.0185 0.0145 0.0185 0.0113 0.0141 0.0080 0.0097 0.0000 0.0000 25 0.0089 0.0123 0.0089 0.0123 0.0074 0.0093 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 30 0.0057 0.0064 0.0057 0.0064 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 35 0.0040 0.0049 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000 0.0000

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
65 Packet Pg. 263 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Non-Industrial (Not Job-Related) Disability
Rates vary by age and gender for Miscellaneous plans. Rates vary by age and category for Safety plans.

Miscellaneous Fire Police County Peace Officer Schools
Age Male Female All All All Male Female
20 0.0001 0.0000 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0000 0.0002
25 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0000 0.0002
30 0.0002 0.0003 0.0001 0.0001 0.0001 0.0002 0.0002
35 0.0004 0.0007 0.0001 0.0002 0.0003 0.0005 0.0004
40 0.0009 0.0012 0.0001 0.0002 0.0006 0.0010 0.0008
45 0.0015 0.0019 0.0002 0.0003 0.0011 0.0019 0.0015
50 0.0015 0.0019 0.0004 0.0005 0.0016 0.0027 0.0021
55 0.0014 0.0013 0.0006 0.0007 0.0009 0.0024 0.0017
60 0.0012 0.0009 0.0006 0.0011 0.0005 0.0020 0.0010

• The Miscellaneous non -industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors. • The police non-industrial disability rates are also used for Other Safety, Local Sheriff, and School Police.

Industrial (Job -Related) Disability
Rates vary by age and category.

Age Fire Police County Peace Officer
20 0.0001 0.0000 0.0004
25 0.0002 0.0017 0.0013
30 0.0006 0.0048 0.0025
35 0.0012 0.0079 0.0037
40 0.0023 0.0110 0.0051
45 0.0040 0.0141 0.0067
50 0.0208 0.0185 0.0092
55 0.0307 0.0479 0.0151
60 0.0438 0.0602 0.0174

• The police industrial disability rates are also used for Local Sheriff and Other Safety. • 50% of the police industrial disability rates are used for School Police. • 1% of the police industrial disability rates are used for Local Prosecutors. • Normally, rates are zero for Miscellaneous plans unless the agency has specifically contracted for industrial disability benefits. If so, each Miscellaneous non -industrial disability rate will be split into two compone nts: 50% will become the non-industrial disability rate and 50% will become the industrial disability rate.

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
66 Packet Pg. 264 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement
Retirement rates vary by age, service, and formula, except for the Safety Half Pay at 55 and 2% at 55 formulas, where retirement rates vary by age only.

Public Agency Miscellaneous 1.5% at age 65
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.008 0.011 0.013 0.015 0.017 0.019
51 0.007 0.010 0.012 0.013 0.015 0.017
52 0.010 0.014 0.017 0.019 0.021 0.024
53 0.008 0.012 0.015 0.017 0.019 0.022
54 0.012 0.016 0.019 0.022 0.025 0.028
55 0.018 0.025 0.031 0.035 0.038 0.043
56 0.015 0.021 0.025 0.029 0.032 0.036
57 0.020 0.028 0.033 0.038 0.043 0.048
58 0.024 0.033 0.040 0.046 0.052 0.058
59 0.028 0.039 0.048 0.054 0.060 0.067
60 0.049 0.069 0.083 0.094 0.105 0.118
61 0.062 0.087 0.106 0.120 0.133 0.150
62 0.104 0.146 0.177 0.200 0.223 0.251
63 0.099 0.139 0.169 0.191 0.213 0.239
64 0.097 0.136 0.165 0.186 0.209 0.233
65 0.140 0.197 0.240 0.271 0.302 0.339
66 0.092 0.130 0.157 0.177 0.198 0.222
67 0.129 0.181 0.220 0.249 0.277 0.311
68 0.092 0.129 0.156 0.177 0.197 0.221
69 0.092 0.130 0.158 0.178 0.199 0.224
70 0.103 0.144 0.175 0.198 0.221 0.248

Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% at age 60
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.010 0.011 0.014 0.014 0.017 0.017
51 0.017 0.013 0.014 0.010 0.010 0.010
52 0.014 0.014 0.018 0.015 0.016 0.016
53 0.015 0.012 0.013 0.010 0.011 0.011
54 0.006 0.010 0.017 0.016 0.018 0.018
55 0.012 0.016 0.024 0.032 0.036 0.036
56 0.010 0.014 0.023 0.030 0.034 0.034
57 0.006 0.018 0.030 0.040 0.044 0.044
58 0.022 0.023 0.033 0.042 0.046 0.046
59 0.039 0.033 0.040 0.047 0.050 0.050
60 0.063 0.069 0.074 0.090 0.137 0.116
61 0.044 0.058 0.066 0.083 0.131 0.113
62 0.084 0.107 0.121 0.153 0.238 0.205
63 0.173 0.166 0.165 0.191 0.283 0.235
64 0.120 0.145 0.164 0.147 0.160 0.172
65 0.138 0.160 0.214 0.216 0.237 0.283
66 0.198 0.228 0.249 0.216 0.228 0.239
67 0.207 0.242 0.230 0.233 0.233 0.233
68 0.201 0.234 0.225 0.231 0.231 0.231
69 0.152 0.173 0.164 0.166 0.166 0.166
70 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200 0.200
Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
67 Packet Pg. 265 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement (continued)

Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% at age 55
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.014 0.017 0.021 0.023 0.024
51 0.013 0.017 0.017 0.018 0.018 0.019
52 0.013 0.018 0.018 0.020 0.020 0.021
53 0.013 0.019 0.021 0.024 0.025 0.026
54 0.017 0.025 0.028 0.032 0.033 0.035
55 0.045 0.042 0.053 0.086 0.098 0.123
56 0.018 0.036 0.056 0.086 0.102 0.119
57 0.041 0.046 0.056 0.076 0.094 0.120
58 0.052 0.044 0.048 0.074 0.106 0.123
59 0.043 0.058 0.073 0.092 0.105 0.126
60 0.059 0.064 0.083 0.115 0.154 0.170
61 0.087 0.074 0.087 0.107 0.147 0.168
62 0.115 0.123 0.151 0.180 0.227 0.237
63 0.116 0.127 0.164 0.202 0.252 0.261
64 0.084 0.138 0.153 0.190 0.227 0.228
65 0.167 0.187 0.210 0.262 0.288 0.291
66 0.187 0.258 0.280 0.308 0.318 0.319
67 0.195 0.235 0.244 0.277 0.269 0.280
68 0.228 0.248 0.250 0.241 0.245 0.245
69 0.188 0.201 0.209 0.219 0.231 0.231
70 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229

Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.5% at age 55
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.014 0.017 0.027 0.035 0.046 0.050
51 0.019 0.021 0.025 0.030 0.038 0.040
52 0.018 0.020 0.026 0.034 0.038 0.037
53 0.013 0.021 0.031 0.045 0.052 0.053
54 0.025 0.025 0.030 0.046 0.057 0.068
55 0.029 0.042 0.064 0.109 0.150 0.225
56 0.036 0.047 0.068 0.106 0.134 0.194
57 0.051 0.047 0.060 0.092 0.116 0.166
58 0.035 0.046 0.062 0.093 0.119 0.170
59 0.029 0.053 0.072 0.112 0.139 0.165
60 0.039 0.069 0.094 0.157 0.177 0.221
61 0.080 0.077 0.086 0.140 0.167 0.205
62 0.086 0.131 0.149 0.220 0.244 0.284
63 0.135 0.135 0.147 0.214 0.222 0.262
64 0.114 0.128 0.158 0.177 0.233 0.229
65 0.112 0.174 0.222 0.209 0.268 0.273
66 0.235 0.254 0.297 0.289 0.321 0.337
67 0.237 0.240 0.267 0.249 0.267 0.277
68 0.258 0.271 0.275 0.207 0.210 0.212
69 0.117 0.208 0.266 0.219 0.250 0.270
70 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229 0.229

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
68 Packet Pg. 266 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement (continued)

Public Agency Miscellaneous 2.7% at age 55
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.011 0.016 0.022 0.033 0.034 0.038
51 0.018 0.019 0.023 0.032 0.031 0.031
52 0.019 0.020 0.026 0.035 0.034 0.037
53 0.020 0.020 0.025 0.043 0.048 0.053
54 0.018 0.030 0.040 0.052 0.053 0.070
55 0.045 0.058 0.082 0.138 0.208 0.278
56 0.057 0.062 0.080 0.121 0.178 0.222
57 0.045 0.052 0.071 0.106 0.147 0.182
58 0.074 0.060 0.074 0.118 0.163 0.182
59 0.058 0.067 0.086 0.123 0.158 0.187
60 0.087 0.084 0.096 0.142 0.165 0.198
61 0.073 0.084 0.101 0.138 0.173 0.218
62 0.130 0.133 0.146 0.187 0.214 0.249
63 0.122 0.140 0.160 0.204 0.209 0.243
64 0.104 0.124 0.154 0.202 0.214 0.230
65 0.182 0.201 0.242 0.264 0.293 0.293
66 0.272 0.249 0.273 0.285 0.312 0.312
67 0.182 0.217 0.254 0.249 0.264 0.264
68 0.223 0.197 0.218 0.242 0.273 0.273
69 0.217 0.217 0.217 0.217 0.217 0.217
70 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227

Public Agency Miscellaneous 3% at age 60
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.015 0.020 0.025 0.039 0.040 0.044
51 0.041 0.034 0.032 0.041 0.036 0.037
52 0.024 0.020 0.022 0.039 0.040 0.041
53 0.018 0.024 0.032 0.047 0.048 0.057
54 0.033 0.033 0.035 0.051 0.049 0.052
55 0.137 0.043 0.051 0.065 0.076 0.108
56 0.173 0.038 0.054 0.075 0.085 0.117
57 0.019 0.035 0.059 0.088 0.111 0.134
58 0.011 0.040 0.070 0.105 0.133 0.162
59 0.194 0.056 0.064 0.081 0.113 0.163
60 0.081 0.085 0.133 0.215 0.280 0.333
61 0.080 0.090 0.134 0.170 0.223 0.292
62 0.137 0.153 0.201 0.250 0.278 0.288
63 0.128 0.140 0.183 0.227 0.251 0.260
64 0.174 0.147 0.173 0.224 0.239 0.264
65 0.152 0.201 0.262 0.299 0.323 0.323
66 0.272 0.273 0.317 0.355 0.380 0.380
67 0.218 0.237 0.268 0.274 0.284 0.284
68 0.200 0.228 0.269 0.285 0.299 0.299
69 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250
70 0.245 0.245 0.245 0.245 0.245 0.245

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
69 Packet Pg. 267 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement (continued)

Public Agency Miscellaneous 2% at age 62
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
51 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000 0.000
52 0.005 0.008 0.012 0.015 0.019 0.031
53 0.007 0.011 0.014 0.018 0.021 0.032
54 0.007 0.011 0.015 0.019 0.023 0.034
55 0.010 0.019 0.028 0.036 0.061 0.096
56 0.014 0.026 0.038 0.050 0.075 0.108
57 0.018 0.029 0.039 0.050 0.074 0.107
58 0.023 0.035 0.048 0.060 0.073 0.099
59 0.025 0.038 0.051 0.065 0.092 0.128
60 0.031 0.051 0.071 0.091 0.111 0.138
61 0.038 0.058 0.079 0.100 0.121 0.167
62 0.044 0.074 0.104 0.134 0.164 0.214
63 0.077 0.105 0.134 0.163 0.192 0.237
64 0.072 0.101 0.129 0.158 0.187 0.242
65 0.108 0.141 0.173 0.206 0.239 0.300
66 0.132 0.172 0.212 0.252 0.292 0.366
67 0.132 0.172 0.212 0.252 0.292 0.366
68 0.120 0.156 0.193 0.229 0.265 0.333
69 0.120 0.156 0.193 0.229 0.265 0.333
70 0.120 0.156 0.193 0.229 0.265 0.333

Public Agency Fire Half Pay at age 55 and 2% at age 55
Age Rate

Age Rate
50 0.016 56 0.111
51 0.000 57 0.000
52 0.034 58 0.095
53 0.020 59 0.044
54 0.041 60 1.000
55 0.075

Public Agency Police Half Pay at age 55 and 2% at age 55 Age Rate

Age Rate
50 0.026 56 0.069
51 0.000 57 0.051
52 0.016 58 0.072
53 0.027 59 0.070
54 0.010 60 0.300
55 0.167

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
70 Packet Pg. 268 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement (continued)

Public Agency Police 2% at age 50
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.018 0.077 0.056 0.046 0.043 0.046
51 0.022 0.087 0.060 0.048 0.044 0.047
52 0.020 0.102 0.081 0.071 0.069 0.075
53 0.016 0.072 0.053 0.045 0.042 0.046
54 0.006 0.071 0.071 0.069 0.072 0.080
55 0.009 0.040 0.099 0.157 0.186 0.186
56 0.020 0.051 0.108 0.165 0.194 0.194
57 0.036 0.072 0.106 0.139 0.156 0.156
58 0.001 0.046 0.089 0.130 0.152 0.152
59 0.066 0.094 0.119 0.143 0.155 0.155
60 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177
61 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134 0.134
62 0.184 0.184 0.184 0.184 0.184 0.184
63 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250 0.250
64 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177 0.177
65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

• These rates also apply to County Peace officers, Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety.

Public Agency Fire 2% at age 50
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.054 0.054 0.056 0.080 0.064 0.066
51 0.020 0.020 0.021 0.030 0.024 0.024
52 0.037 0.037 0.038 0.054 0.043 0.045
53 0.051 0.051 0.053 0.076 0.061 0.063
54 0.082 0.082 0.085 0.121 0.097 0.100
55 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.139 0.139
56 0.129 0.129 0.129 0.129 0.129 0.129
57 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085 0.085
58 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119 0.119
59 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167 0.167
60 0.152 0.152 0.152 0.152 0.152 0.152
61 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179
62 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179
63 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179
64 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179 0.179
65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
71 Packet Pg. 269 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857

Service Retirement (continued)

Public Agency Police 3% at age 55
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.019 0.053 0.045 0.054 0.057 0.061
51 0.002 0.017 0.028 0.044 0.053 0.060
52 0.002 0.031 0.037 0.051 0.059 0.066
53 0.026 0.049 0.049 0.080 0.099 0.114
54 0.019 0.034 0.047 0.091 0.121 0.142
55 0.006 0.115 0.141 0.199 0.231 0.259
56 0.017 0.188 0.121 0.173 0.199 0.199
57 0.008 0.137 0.093 0.136 0.157 0.157
58 0.017 0.126 0.105 0.164 0.194 0.194
59 0.026 0.146 0.110 0.167 0.195 0.195
60 0.155 0.155 0.155 0.155 0.155 0.155
61 0.210 0.210 0.210 0.210 0.210 0.210
62 0.262 0.262 0.262 0.262 0.262 0.262
63 0.172 0.172 0.172 0.172 0.172 0.172
64 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227 0.227
65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

• These rates also apply to County Peace officers, Local Prosecutors, Local Sheriff, School Police, and Other Safety.

Public Agency Fire 3% at age 55
Duration of Service
Age 5 Years 10 Years 15 Years 20 Years 25 Years 30 Years 50 0.003 0.006 0.013 0.019 0.025 0.028
51 0.004 0.008 0.017 0.026 0.034 0.038
52 0.005 0.011 0.022 0.033 0.044 0.049
53 0.005 0.034 0.024 0.038 0.069 0.138
54 0.007 0.047 0.032 0.051 0.094 0.187
55 0.010 0.067 0.046 0.073 0.134 0.266
56 0.010 0.063 0.044 0.069 0.127 0.253
57 0.135 0.100 0.148 0.196 0.220 0.220
58 0.083 0.062 0.091 0.120 0.135 0.135
59 0.137 0.053 0.084 0.146 0.177 0.177
60 0.162 0.063 0.099 0.172 0.208 0.208
61 0.598 0.231 0.231 0.231 0.231 0.231
62 0.621 0.240 0.240 0.240 0.240 0.240
63 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236
64 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236 0.236
65 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000 1.000

Item 4
Attachment B - CalPERS
Miscellaneous Valuation as
of June 30, 2024

Item 4: Staff Report
Pg.
72 Packet Pg. 270 of 510

CalPERS Actuarial Valuation - June 30, 2024
Miscellaneous Plan of the City of Palo Alto
CalPERS ID: 6373437857