The Alma Plaza Learning Curve: Course Outline [Part 4 of 5]

The last few years have been critical for moving Palo Alto City Hall toward good government practices, and it all started with the council shakeup in 2009.

At the end of that year, four council members concluded their current service: two due to term limits, and two deciding not to run for a second consecutive four-year term.

Larry Klein, re-elected for his fourth term over two separate, two-term stints, remained as the only council member presiding at the April, 2007 Alma Plaza hearing in which last-minute changes to developer plans circumvented a normal, open, and fair process.

Newcomers to the council included Greg Scharff and Karen Holman. Each had run on campaign planks of transparency, reform of the Planned Community (PC) zoning process, and a much earlier release of staff reports to the city council. 

In March 2010, third-year council member Yiaway Yeh joined them in authoring a memo to their council colleagues. It called for an earlier release of the council packets, which at the time stood at 4 days prior to the meeting. The memo also echoed Council Member Larry Klein’s unanswered motion of the previous year, which directed staff to return with a policy regarding late submissions of planning application materials. This time, however, the lead for drafting the policy would rest with the council’s Policy & Services Committee. 

During the public comment period related to the memo, resident Tom Jordan spoke on behalf of Palo Alto Neighborhoods (PAN), an umbrella group for neighborhood associations, mostly involved in facilitating communication among those groups. He stated that these and other good government issues were high on the PAN agenda and that the group was fully prepared to pursue it.

A Mayor's Relevant History

The issue of private undisclosed council communications in PC zone applications, suspected in relation to the , was not included in the colleagues memo. 

When the item returned to the council two weeks later for final direction to the Policy & Services Committee, I raised the issue and called for the matter to be included and for adoption of a policy similar to that of the Planning Commission. The commission’s policy strongly discouraged communications outside of a public hearing on PC and quasi-judicial items and it significantly enhanced public trust in its decision-making process.

The council did, in fact, have a written policy discouraging outside communications as well as for reporting them and their significance if they occurred. These council policies, however, did not specifically apply to PCs, and for quasi-judicial matters, were generally ignored.

Pat Burt, in his third year on the council, was mayor and about to make an important decision.

He had served for almost a decade on the Planning Commission and for a number of years with Karen Holman concurrent with the commission’s policy strongly discouraging private communications in quasi-judicial and PC hearings. He was initially lukewarm toward the idea, followed the policy after it was approved, and came to appreciate and respect it.

As a planning commissioner, Burt was also mindful of a disheartening notion: if applicant team members were communicating privately with council members before or during the commission’s deliberations and they had counted enough noses in their favor, what the was the relevance of the commission’s work?

Later, as a second-year council member, and with the 2180 El Camino Real (“JJ&F block”) PC denial , he continued to follow the Planning Commission policy.

As mayor, would he advocate to extend that approach to his council colleagues?

Larry Klein, a powerful influence and close ally of Burt, was on record against eliminating private council communications with regard to PCs and quasi-judicial matters. He liked the interactions, and was confident in retaining his independent decision making ability. When disclosing these meetings, he consistently stated he had learned nothing that was not already in the staff report.  

A Influential Judgement 

Mayor Burt proposed a middle ground. Council members would not engage in outside communications on such matters until after the Architectural Review Board and Planning Commission had made their recommendations. This change was to support the work of the two council-appointed bodies in making independent recommendations to the council.

Burt did not specifically including PCs, but the intent to cover them seemed clear, and the Policy & Services Committee added the wording.

But once both board and commission decisions had been reached and the quasi-judicial or PC item headed to the council, each council member would decide his or her own path without concern of deviating from a council norm.

The essence of Mayor Burt’s recommendation was incorporated into the council's procedures handbook—an important step forward for good government in Palo Alto.

Tomorrow, we will turn to the fate of the other good government items discussed at the council’s Policy & Services Committee.

READ MORE:

• Part One of The Alma Plaza Learning Curve—The Late Submittal

• Part Two of The Alma Plaza Learning Curve—First Responders

• Part Three of The Alma Plaza Learning Curve—A Near Replay

For more news about Palo Alto and surrounding areas, follow us on Twitter and "like" us on Facebook.

Get Patch in your inbox by signing up for our morning newsletter here.