[0:03] a delay. Uh our apologies, but 7:14

[0:05] we'll call the meeting of July 28th,

[0:08] 2026 to order. Jennifer, will you call

[0:10] roll?

[0:11] >> Council member Aberish?

[0:12] >> Here.

[0:12] >> Council member Brown?

[0:13] >> Here.

[0:14] >> Council member Gold?

[0:15] >> Here.

[0:15] >> Council member Wall? Mayor Domkalski?

[0:18] >> Here.

[0:18] >> Thank you. Uh Council member Aberish,

[0:20] will you lead us in the Pledge of

[0:21] Allegiance?

[0:41] Right, thank you, Hassan. Um

[0:44] before we uh open up public comment and

[0:47] start queuing up for that, we have

[0:48] received a number of uh requests to move

[0:51] agenda item E up earlier in the agenda.

[0:54] Uh so, I just like to see if any of my

[0:56] council colleagues would be amenable to

[0:58] that, if we could get a a motion and a

[1:00] second, we'd for sure entertain that

[1:02] opportunity.

[1:03] >> Yeah, I move to uh move item E up to

[1:06] earlier in the agenda.

[1:07] >> Second.

[1:09] >> Okay.

[1:09] >> You want to identify when the the first

[1:12] item?

[1:12] >> It'll be um the earliest we can do it is

[1:15] after the planning commissioner

[1:16] appointment. So, um pretty pretty early

[1:19] on. You have a pre-consent, pre-town

[1:20] manager report. So, we'll get that right

[1:22] out of the gates. I'm sorry. I apologize

[1:24] for those that are here for the public

[1:26] hearing. Um

[1:27] unfortunately, circumstances being what

[1:29] they are tonight, uh I think uh

[1:31] we need to make an adjustment to to the

[1:33] agenda. I apologize, Lisa.

[1:36] Uh okay, well, uh I I do we need a

[1:38] formal Let's take a formal vote on that

[1:40] real quick.

[1:40] >> Council member

[1:41] >> agenda to be right after the planning

[1:42] commission appointment.

[1:44] >> Council member Aberish?

[1:46] >> Yes.

[1:46] >> Council member Brown?

[1:47] >> Yes.

[1:48] >> Council member Gold?

[1:48] >> Yes.

[1:49] >> Council member Wall?

[1:50] >> Yes.

[1:50] >> Mayor Domkalski?

[1:51] >> Yes, thank you very much for that. And

[1:54] um we will move on to

[1:56] uh public comment. So, uh persons

[1:58] wishing to address the council on any

[2:00] matter that's not been agendized are

[2:02] invited to do so uh

[2:04] right now. Uh

[2:06] a lot of enthusiasm tonight. Uh but uh

[2:08] we're not able to undertake any extended

[2:10] discussions. Of course, we can refer

[2:11] things to staff for placement on a

[2:13] future agenda. And um

[2:16] I think with that, we typically would

[2:17] limit to five persons 3 minutes each,

[2:19] but uh we've had a a terrible tragedy up

[2:22] on uh Highway 35, and we have a number

[2:25] of people here that would like to speak

[2:26] on that issue. So, tonight we are um

[2:28] going to just have public comment open

[2:31] uh to work through all those issues

[2:32] beyond the five-person limit. And we

[2:35] already have a wonderful gentleman here

[2:36] ready to go, so we'll kick things off

[2:38] with you, sir.

[2:38] >> Thank you. Uh so, Darren Evans uh in

[2:41] Glens.

[2:42] Um I just want to bring up a policy

[2:44] question I'd like the council to perhaps

[2:46] charge the equestrian committee to do.

[2:48] We have a rule that involves the number

[2:51] of horses per acre. Um we had a

[2:54] uh planning commission variance recently

[2:56] that

[2:58] called that question or called the rule

[3:00] to question. Um it looks like it's an

[3:02] old rule based on grazing and hills and

[3:05] things. Um and there was a property that

[3:07] had half an acre that had plenty of

[3:09] space for the horse that with the horse

[3:10] was healthy and happy, and there was

[3:12] room for a second horse. Um and it may

[3:15] became a big neighbor issue. And I was

[3:17] in

[3:18] few of us in the planning commission

[3:19] afterwards spoke about it and thought

[3:21] perhaps we should change the rule to be

[3:23] more aligned with what the horse needs

[3:26] and not some archaic

[3:28] one acre issue or two acre issue. Uh

[3:30] because over time as some of these

[3:32] bigger lots perhaps get split, if we

[3:34] want to maintain our horsey nature, we

[3:37] should give people the ability to have a

[3:39] horse on less space. And there's a great

[3:41] model of a house on Glen Craig that has

[3:43] half an acre, but

[3:46] 45% is dedicated to horse, which

[3:48] actually is more space than some acre

[3:49] lots give their horse. Um and it made

[3:52] sense to approve the variance for two horses. Um so I think that if we

[3:55] could give the question committee some

[3:57] guidance or the ability to change the

[4:00] rules

[4:01] uh and make it more based on the health

[4:02] and happiness of horse and not some old

[4:05] big box rule, I think it'd be great to

[4:07] be able to then allow future maybe

[4:09] subdivisions to become horse divisions

[4:11] and you can have half lots and and you

[4:13] know, people who want to dedicate more

[4:15] of the land to the horses and make it

[4:17] easy. So, just plant that seed for

[4:18] later. Thank

[4:19] >> That's a wonderful idea. Thank you, Mr.

[4:21] Evans. We will Sage, I'll just throw

[4:23] that into your book.

[4:26] Uh yes, welcome.

[4:29] Oh, I know.

[4:30] Uh that works, too.

[4:37] » Hi town town council. Thank you for

[4:39] accommodating us this evening.

[4:41] Um I'm going to be speaking on Jacob

[4:44] Sulawaski's dusk death.

[4:47] My name is Deirdre Crome. I have lived

[4:49] in Palo Alto the past 25 years and

[4:51] served on the Palo Alto Parks and Rec

[4:53] Commission for 10 years.

[4:55] I'm a board member of the Western

[4:56] Wheelers Bicycle Club and have been

[4:58] biking all my life. I'm here to speak on

[5:00] the recent death of Jacob Sulawaski

[5:03] on Skyline Boulevard. Jacob was killed

[5:06] on his bike the morning of Saturday,

[5:08] July 11, 2026 by a speeding driver on

[5:12] Skyline Boulevard a half mile south of

[5:15] Fogarty Winery. This is also about 10

[5:18] miles south of um the four corners.

[5:22] Jacob was doing what he loved best,

[5:23] which was bicycling safely on beautiful

[5:26] mountain roads. The unnamed driver might

[5:28] have been doing what he liked best, too,

[5:30] but the difference is that this driver

[5:32] was not following the rules of the road

[5:33] and he was driving fast enough to lose

[5:35] control of his car such that he crossed

[5:38] the midline of the road and hit Jacob

[5:39] head-on.

[5:41] Jacob did not have a chance while the

[5:42] person who killed him survived. Jacob

[5:45] represented the best of us as a human

[5:47] being and endurance bike rider. He was

[5:50] skilled.

[5:51] He was safe. He chose biking over

[5:54] driving and he did not own a car. He was

[5:57] 34.

[5:58] Jacob was my friend. We rode together

[6:01] frequently. I was not as fast as him,

[6:04] but he slowed down for me to help me

[6:06] reach my goals as an endurance bike

[6:08] rider. He did this for many of us in his

[6:10] community of bike riders. He was

[6:12] generous and kind.

[6:14] We all benefited from him.

[6:16] For many of us, Skyline is a connecting

[6:19] road to other climbs where we are not as

[6:21] visible, but we are here. We are

[6:23] skilled. We are committed to bike riding

[6:26] and all the joy it brings us and deserve

[6:28] to share these roads as well. The roads

[6:31] will feel emptier without Jacob. Jacob

[6:34] was a remarkable human being all around.

[6:36] He worked as a mathematician on modeling

[6:39] ways to sequester carbon. His work had

[6:41] many applications to the petroleum

[6:43] industry and climate change research.

[6:46] His life and contributions to the world

[6:47] were tragically cut short. All the local

[6:51] residents see the speeding see the

[6:52] speeding cars all the time. The bikes

[6:55] bikers experience it equestrians

[6:58] hikers. This incident and others show

[7:01] again and again that we need to make

[7:03] changes. We need to make this road safer

[7:06] to benefit everyone. We must implement the changes so the deaths

[7:10] stop. We can honor Jacob's memory and

[7:12] the memories of others who have died by

[7:14] speeding motors on Skyline by

[7:16] implementing changes as soon as

[7:18] possible. The solutions are known. These

[7:21] are preventable deaths. Solutions

[7:23] require advocacy. We ask you to exert

[7:26] your considerable power with Caltrans

[7:29] and to

[7:32] um adopt the solutions identified by the

[7:36] South County Traffic Advisory Panel and

[7:39] expand them to all of Skyline. Thank

[7:42] you.

[7:42] >> Thank you, Deirdra. Um

[7:44] obviously first and foremost our

[7:46] heartfelt

[7:48] uh condolences to the friends and family

[7:50] of Mr. Solovsky. Um

[7:52] it's a terrible tragedy. Uh I have been

[7:54] in contact with Supervisor Mueller who

[7:57] whose office is uh you know, running

[7:59] that big stakeholder push on those

[8:01] advisory comments and um

[8:04] uh and obviously working on speed

[8:06] reduction and enforcement and um

[8:10] uh piloting even speed cameras up on

[8:12] Skyline, I know is a big part of that as

[8:13] well. Uh so, I know we're working with

[8:16] county and sheriffs and CHP and Lewis,

[8:19] you might have a little bit more detail

[8:20] on what if anything we we can also add

[8:22] to the mix uh from our

[8:25] coordination point here in Woodside.

[8:29] » Honorable mayor,

[8:31] uh we're absolutely working with

[8:32] Caltrans and the law enforcement

[8:34] agencies

[8:36] um in coordination on various projects,

[8:39] uh not just on 280, 4, also on Woodside

[8:41] Road and Cañada Road, Kings Mountain

[8:43] Road and uh Sand Hill Road.

[8:46] Um one of the things that we've been

[8:48] working with the uh law enforcement

[8:49] agency CHP and

[8:51] uh San Mateo County Sheriff's is that um

[8:54] they're working they're coordinating

[8:56] with us in terms of their joint um

[8:58] enforcement and they're they're going to

[9:00] be having another one coming up in

[9:01] August 8th.

[9:02] >> August 8th, yeah.

[9:03] >> Um and um what they told me is that they

[9:05] wanted to share that with council

[9:07] and they also wanted to let us know that

[9:09] they're working on having more of these

[9:11] joint um enforcement in the near future.

[9:15] >> Okay, thank you.

[9:16] >> Can I interject something here?

[9:18] >> Of course. Uh Council

[9:19] >> Because um I serve serve on the

[9:20] circulation committee with the with

[9:22] Lewis.

[9:23] And what's also going on and has been

[9:24] going on for some time now is that

[9:26] Caltrans has been working with Lewis

[9:29] and town on how to slow traffic, how to

[9:32] make it much safer up at Four Corners.

[9:35] And there's actually construction's

[9:36] going to start in about 1 month on the

[9:39] four corners. Um [snorts] that's going

[9:40] to address hopefully most of the

[9:42] concerns that you have. We're still

[9:44] asking them to go further than what

[9:45] they've already presented, but it's it's been underway for some time.

[9:50] We're aware of it and we're very sorry

[9:52] what's happened. We didn't get there

[9:53] quick enough apparently.

[9:56] » Thank you, Council [clears throat]

[9:57] members.

[9:59] Good evening, Mayor Dombrowski. I hope I

[10:03] said your name correctly.

[10:04] >> That's fine.

[10:05] >> I didn't say it right. It's Dombrowski.

[10:06] >> I appreciate the effort. Thank you.

[10:09] >> Thank you. And Council, my name is Cindy

[10:12] Azrar. I live a couple miles down the

[10:14] road uh off Woodside in Redwood City

[10:17] near the border of the town of Woodside.

[10:20] I also worked in Woodside for 3 and 1/2

[10:22] years and a member of the Woodside

[10:24] Village Church. I'm here a lot. In

[10:27] addition to being a community member, a

[10:29] mom, and an avid hiker, I'm also a

[10:32] cyclist and today I'm representing the

[10:34] Western Wheelers Cycling Club.

[10:37] A little over 2 weeks ago, as you heard,

[10:39] we lost our friend and our beloved club

[10:41] member,

[10:42] Dr. Jacob Sevallosky on Skyline.

[10:46] Jacob was killed, as you know, by a

[10:47] speeding driver who crossed into the

[10:49] other lane and hit Jacob head-on,

[10:51] killing him instantly.

[10:53] He was The driver was 26.

[10:56] You already heard about Jacob and how

[10:58] much he was loved by everyone in our

[11:00] bike club and the community. He was only

[11:02] 34 and brilliant. But due to this

[11:06] reckless driver, his life was cut far

[11:08] too short,

[11:10] robbing him of his chance to have a

[11:12] successful career, to contribute to

[11:15] society, to get married, or to have a

[11:17] family.

[11:19] For Jacob's sake and for everyone who

[11:20] has lost loved ones by these super

[11:23] speeders on Skyline, we're asking you to

[11:25] take action now to make Skyline safer

[11:28] for everyone.

[11:30] As you know, speeding drivers are an

[11:32] increasing problem on Skyline and other

[11:34] local roads like 84 and Highway 9.

[11:37] Cyclists are not the only impacted

[11:39] group.

[11:40] This has become a huge safety issue for

[11:42] law-abiding drivers, hikers,

[11:44] pedestrians, and local residents who

[11:47] often fear for their lives just by

[11:49] leaving their home.

[11:50] How many deaths will it take before we

[11:53] have any change?

[11:55] We thank the council for your efforts

[11:57] after another death and a community

[11:59] petition came before the council in

[12:00] February.

[12:01] We've heard that Caltrans has plans to

[12:03] rework the 84 Skyline Boulevard

[12:05] interchange.

[12:07] That's good, but we need more.

[12:09] You've advocated for a lower speed limit

[12:11] on Skyline. We agree with that, but more

[12:14] important than having a lower speed

[12:16] limit is having patrol cars on Skyline

[12:18] to enforce the existing speed limit.

[12:21] A 25 mph speed limit is useless if

[12:24] drivers can go 100 mph or more with no

[12:27] consequences.

[12:29] You as a town bordering and containing

[12:31] highways 84 and 35 can influence the

[12:34] Sheriff's Office, CHP, Caltrans, and the

[12:37] legislature.

[12:38] That's why we're asking you to adopt the

[12:40] recommendations made by the South Coast

[12:42] Traffic Advisory Panel in the report

[12:45] that was passed out.

[12:46] Your support could help pressure

[12:48] Caltrans to lower the speed limit, to

[12:50] install speed cameras, to create a

[12:52] safety corridor, and implement other

[12:55] traffic calming measures to stop the

[12:57] tragic loss of life.

[12:59] Skyline is a known raceway to drivers,

[13:02] most of whom do not even live here.

[13:04] We need to change this now to protect

[13:06] our community and so more lives are not

[13:09] senselessly lost.

[13:11] We've lost our friend and we're

[13:12] brokenhearted. Please take this

[13:14] situation seriously. We need the roads

[13:16] to be safer for everyone.

[13:18] Thank you.

[13:19] >> Thank you.

[13:21] >> [clears throat]

[13:24] » Yes, sir.

[13:25] >> Good evening, Council.

[13:26] >> Good evening.

[13:27] >> Um

[13:28] Give me a second. I'm not good at public

[13:30] speaking.

[13:31] Hi, my name is Shawn Reardon. I'm not

[13:34] only a cyclist, driver, husband, and

[13:36] father,

[13:37] but I'm also a local resident who has

[13:39] lived here in the mountains since 2005.

[13:42] I've seen the dangerous driving up along

[13:44] our roads go from concerning to

[13:46] dangerous to now what I would call

[13:48] consistent life-threatening.

[13:50] I ride these roads on my bike more than

[13:52] most people drive them in their cars,

[13:54] and I call them home as many of my

[13:55] cycling brothers and sisters also do.

[13:58] I personally known four riders in the

[14:00] past few years who have been hit by

[14:01] drivers on Skyline.

[14:03] One of them, Jacob Soloski, just this

[14:05] year lost his life to an out-of-control

[14:07] speed racer just south of Fogarty

[14:09] Winery.

[14:10] Also this year, there was a cyclist

[14:12] killed on Portola Road. Last August,

[14:14] there was a cyclist killed at the

[14:16] intersection of 35 and 84.

[14:18] A couple years ago, there was a cyclist

[14:20] who was killed on King's Mountain.

[14:22] It's not just cyclists. There was also a

[14:24] hit-and-run involving a single horse and

[14:25] a rider this year as well in Woodside

[14:27] area. Not to mention the numerous

[14:29] drivers and passengers that have been

[14:31] killed on these roads at the same time

[14:33] period.

[14:35] Pulling from my own experience, I was

[14:36] also in a very similar situation that

[14:38] ended up taking Jacob's life.

[14:40] It was in the same area, but just north

[14:42] of Fogarty Winery.

[14:43] I was headed north just over the rise

[14:45] near the winery. The car headed south

[14:47] around the corner at about 100 mph.

[14:50] He was already out of control. By the

[14:52] time his car came into sight,

[14:54] luckily he saw me and overcorrected. He

[14:56] ended up rolling his car across the lane

[14:58] just like Jacob's incident, but this

[14:59] time instead of hitting me, he passed

[15:01] only 50 ft in front of me.

[15:03] The difference between Jacob losing his

[15:04] life and me continuing mine

[15:07] was less than a minute of time.

[15:10] I'm not sure what can be done, but

[15:11] something has to be done. If not for

[15:13] cyclists, drivers, equestrians, hikers,

[15:16] or any other person on these roads,

[15:19] do it for your family, friends, and

[15:20] loved ones.

[15:22] This time it may have been Jacob that

[15:23] paid the price, but next time it could

[15:25] be the person sitting next to you

[15:27] or those you love most.

[15:29] Let's work together to make this last

[15:31] death on these roads because of insane

[15:33] drivers. I know as a local

[15:36] who has to drive these roads, I'd rather

[15:37] lose 5 minutes on my commute than have

[15:40] another life taken from these roads.

[15:42] Thank you for your time.

[15:43] I'd also like to say that I used to live

[15:45] at 34, 35, and 84. I now live at Kings

[15:49] Mountain community on Skyline.

[15:51] And the changes that are going to happen

[15:52] there will be really great,

[15:54] but they're not going to help further

[15:56] down on Skyline where I live.

[15:58] I don't know why, but the speed limit

[16:00] there is 50.

[16:01] There's so many houses, there's so many

[16:04] parks, there's so many trails, there's

[16:06] so many people that live there. And then

[16:08] you go just south of

[16:10] Sanitas and it's 40.

[16:13] There's less of everything down there,

[16:14] but yet the speed is lower. I don't

[16:16] understand why that is.

[16:18] There just has to be some common sense

[16:19] here. Thank you for your time.

[16:21] >> Thank you.

[16:23] for being here. You're doing

[16:24] something wonderful for Dr. Solovsky, so

[16:26] we really appreciate it.

[16:31] » Thank you for listening to us tonight.

[16:33] My name's Elaine Haye and I'm from the

[16:35] Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition. We

[16:37] represent the Santa Clara County as well

[16:39] as San Mateo County. And um a lot of

[16:42] recreational cyclists here with there

[16:44] are a lot, but I want to speak for the

[16:46] transportation cyclists.

[16:48] People that live up there and want to go

[16:50] to the store and pedestrians and

[16:53] horseback riders and dog walkers and

[16:56] everybody takes their life in their

[16:58] hands and there's no reason that the

[17:01] speeders should be the ones that went

[17:03] out and have no consequences when they

[17:05] go around and endangering everybody

[17:07] else's life.

[17:09] Um so I'm asking you to push very, very

[17:12] hard on Caltrans and the legislature

[17:15] uh to um adapt adopt the South County

[17:20] Traffic Advisory Panel recommendations

[17:23] as soon as possible. We're in an

[17:25] emergency situation here.

[17:27] All of us know someone who was killed up

[17:30] there.

[17:31] And it's you know, it's not a one-off.

[17:34] And hopefully you know that. Thank you

[17:35] very much.

[17:36] >> Thank you. Uh we have I mean I I did

[17:38] talk with uh Ray about bringing that as

[17:41] an agendaized item sometime later this

[17:43] year. So, thank you.

[17:47] I Any other uh

[17:49] public comments on this issue or any

[17:51] other issue?

[17:53] Yes, sir.

[17:54] >> Hi Council. Uh my name is Alan. I grew

[17:56] up here. Um I went to school in Boston.

[17:59] I just want to first commend the efforts

[18:01] you guys have done. I'm speaking for on

[18:02] behalf of myself, but I also echo a lot

[18:04] of the sentiments that residents have

[18:06] already gave. Uh my point I think would

[18:09] be that just with my experience

[18:12] uh growing up here

[18:14] um

[18:15] I think that I would really like to to

[18:16] see the town uh sort of be a leader in

[18:19] pushing this sort of

[18:21] uh important work that needs to be done.

[18:23] When I was in Boston, um I got involved

[18:25] a lot in transportation advocacy. And um

[18:29] in the city of Boston, uh there was a

[18:31] recent cyclist death of ironically a

[18:33] transportation

[18:35] uh planner that worked in the city. And

[18:37] in that uh situation, there was a

[18:39] quarter that was identified as unsafe

[18:41] and the city lacked to do any action for

[18:44] more than 2 years. And that led to a

[18:45] death. And I think that lack of urgency

[18:48] is what led to directly that uh terrific

[18:51] situation that terrible situation. And I

[18:53] would say that

[18:55] um

[18:56] you know, I think the city can really

[18:58] uh

[18:59] use its resources with I know you guys

[19:01] have already been in contact with

[19:03] Mueller. And I think that I I ran into

[19:06] uh Josh Becker recently. And I think if

[19:07] you guys put together efforts um across

[19:10] the entire legislator, you guys can

[19:12] really do real impact, and I just hope

[19:14] that you guys take this as serious as

[19:16] possible. Thank you so much.

[19:17] >> Absolutely. Thank you.

[19:19] I know Assembly Member Berman is in the

[19:21] mix, too, as it relates to the piloted

[19:22] speed cameras.

[19:25] Other comments?

[19:27] Uh, oh.

[19:31] Okay.

[19:34] » Good afternoon, everybody. My name is

[19:35] Thomas Pema.

[19:37] Um, I've been a cyclist here for 50

[19:40] years now.

[19:41] Woodside High School,

[19:43] part of part of the cycling community.

[19:47] Without reiterating everything that's

[19:49] already been said in the same sense that

[19:50] I've said in this room,

[19:52] I think the one thing that needs to be

[19:53] added,

[19:55] um, there needs to be some

[19:56] accountability on the drivers that

[19:58] actually cause these. And when there's

[20:00] recklessness involved, it really needs

[20:03] to be upon the District Attorney to

[20:05] actually file charges and bring somebody

[20:07] bring one of these people to actually

[20:10] serve some time,

[20:12] as opposed to sweeping things under the

[20:13] rug.

[20:14] At this point, from my understand,

[20:17] Lester,

[20:18] um, the gal on Fidel Expressway,

[20:23] none of these cases have actually

[20:26] mhm, there were no accountability, even

[20:28] there was either negligence or high

[20:30] speed. So, I I did a bunch of reading

[20:33] today before I came here because it

[20:34] finally had to come.

[20:36] I've lost count of the amount of people

[20:37] that have died up here in 50 years.

[20:41] And I think it's what we can do. I think

[20:44] cameras, yes, has a possibility. Speed

[20:46] limits, yeah, has a possibility.

[20:47] Awareness, I think is the biggest one.

[20:50] But right now,

[20:51] from what I understand,

[20:53] the District Attorney hasn't filed

[20:54] charges. It is our responsibility to write your letters or talk get this

[21:00] District Attorney to look at this case

[21:02] as a serious case. And if we finally

[21:03] actually have one of these things that's

[21:05] a landmark case, it could be something

[21:06] that's used around the country, around

[21:09] the area of Santa Clara County,

[21:10] California, and the United States. We're

[21:12] not going to prevent further deaths.

[21:14] But, we just have to get some level of

[21:17] awareness that if people are negligent,

[21:19] people do take do something like this,

[21:21] they're going to be held accountable.

[21:23] Thank you for your time.

[21:24] >> Thank you.

[21:31] Are there

[21:33] remarks on the bicycle issue or others?

[21:38] You want to Okay.

[21:41] >> Um

[21:42] Good evening.

[21:43] >> Good evening.

[21:44] >> I'm I'm Good evening, Mayor Demkowski

[21:46] and council. I'm Ann Paulson.

[21:48] Um and I thank you for letting us speak.

[21:50] Thanks Thanks for letting us all talk.

[21:52] >> Of course.

[21:53] >> And also thank you for um what you've

[21:55] done so far with the Four Corners plan.

[21:57] That's a good start. It's not enough.

[22:01] Um we cyclists are here tonight because

[22:04] we lost one of our own.

[22:07] >> [sighs and gasps]

[22:07] >> But, this is not a cycling issue.

[22:10] This is Skyline residents, kids,

[22:12] visiting friends, hikers, walkers, legal

[22:15] drivers, and cyclists versus

[22:17] recreational lawbreakers

[22:21] menacing us.

[22:23] And that needs to stop.

[22:25] The folks at South County Traffic

[22:27] Advisory Panel,

[22:29] I guess which I guess is under Ray

[22:30] Maller, um after many meetings with

[22:33] after a lot of work, have come up with a

[22:35] long list of recommendations on how to

[22:37] deal with these super speeders

[22:40] on on our local state highways.

[22:42] We're asking you that you use your

[22:44] influence, your considerable influence,

[22:47] with Caltrans to get these

[22:49] recommendations put into effect,

[22:52] including all of Skyline.

[22:55] Thank you very much.

[22:56] >> Thank you.

[22:58] Um

[22:59] you know, maybe it's a good time if if

[23:00] the council agrees, I would ask that we

[23:03] direct staff to do everything we can to

[23:05] coordinate with the sheriff, CHP,

[23:08] Caltrans, the supervisor's office, and

[23:10] to play a coordinated and sustained role

[23:12] in this effort.

[23:14] We have surged before. We have put folks

[23:17] up there for the weekend, and then

[23:20] you know, things get back to business.

[23:22] We need sustained coverage on the

[23:24] weekend. We know that where the what the

[23:25] car clubs are doing, we know where they

[23:27] are and when they are.

[23:29] I know we have a limited budget. We I

[23:31] know we have $100,000 stored away

[23:33] somewhere for

[23:34] tough times like this, but

[23:36] we can certainly coordinate. And so, I

[23:37] don't know if the council would agree. I

[23:39] mean

[23:40] >> Yeah, absolutely. I would very much

[23:41] agree with all of that. I would add, I

[23:42] think

[23:44] I saw one of the the emails come through

[23:46] and there was a suggestion that we

[23:47] agendize a study session dedicated to

[23:50] addressing this dangerous issue, and I

[23:52] really liked what one of the um

[23:54] speakers just said that, you know, this

[23:55] isn't a Skyline issue. I think, you

[23:57] know, this issue impacts a lot of us,

[23:59] and this is definitely a Woodside issue.

[24:01] And so, as the council, I think we

[24:02] should have a sense of urgency and and

[24:04] agendize this as soon as we can to have

[24:06] a further discussion.

[24:10] » Very good.

[24:11] Others?

[24:13] >> Yeah, I'll just add to that um this

[24:15] committee that has been working with

[24:16] circulation and and Lewis

[24:18] has been homeowners of the live up

[24:21] there, so they're familiar with it, but

[24:23] I think we should expand

[24:25] the uh and they wanted to expand the the

[24:27] scope of what is being talked about by

[24:29] Caltrans into much broader

[24:32] um coverage of all the issues that are

[24:34] up there, and I think we need to get a

[24:36] maybe it's a workshop or something with

[24:38] all interested residents to come

[24:40] together,

[24:41] talk about what is needed um to fix it

[24:44] once and for all.

[24:46] >> Very good. Starting to build consensus

[24:48] on that. Others? Thoughts?

[24:50] >> Yeah,

[24:50] >> [clears throat]

[24:50] >> I would absolutely agree with everything

[24:52] you said, and thank you all for coming

[24:54] out and

[24:55] uh

[24:55] showing up for for this very important

[24:57] issue. I I live up off of 84 and

[25:00] regularly on Skyline and 84 and I it's dangerous and it's scary. And so I

[25:05] really appreciate you all

[25:07] coming through, you know, on your on

[25:08] your evening and

[25:09] um, and I absolutely support anything we

[25:11] can do to

[25:12] continue pushing the issue and

[25:14] uh, agendize it as soon as possible.

[25:16] >> Great.

[25:17] >> [clears throat]

[25:18] >> Yeah, I did again. Uh, again, so someone

[25:21] said, "Thank you for showing up

[25:22] tonight." I wish it was under better

[25:24] circumstances, but the best tribute we

[25:25] can have for Jacob is if something good

[25:28] comes of this. I think we would all

[25:29] agree to that. Um, we've been at this a

[25:32] long time and it's been very

[25:33] frustrating. And uh, to be perfectly

[25:35] frank with you, we've gotten

[25:38] very little

[25:39] coordination and um,

[25:42] any kind of the necessary enforcement

[25:45] from the powers that be. I mean, I can

[25:47] name them, Caltrans, CHP, whatever.

[25:49] Actually, the San Mateo County Sheriff

[25:51] has actually been pretty good um, with

[25:53] us. They could probably do better, but

[25:55] um, I know that they're somewhat limited

[25:57] on their resources.

[25:59] Um, I mentioned we've been at this a

[26:01] long time. I've been working with a

[26:02] group of neighbors. I mentioned this to

[26:03] some of you earlier tonight up at

[26:05] Cloud's Rest, which is not very far from

[26:07] where Jacob met his end.

[26:09] And uh,

[26:10] it's just a little bit further south of

[26:12] the Fogarty Fogarty Winery. And um,

[26:16] this is a very frustrated group of

[26:18] people. And these

[26:20] I I the term super speeders doesn't

[26:23] quite capture what they're doing. Um, I

[26:26] went up there last weekend at the

[26:28] request of some of the folks up there at

[26:29] Cloud's Rest, which by the way, isn't

[26:31] even in Woodside. It's not in my

[26:32] district. It's not even in our town. Um,

[26:34] but it's such a catastrophic problem for

[26:36] everybody up there. The noise, the

[26:38] speeding, the danger. And people live

[26:41] there and they try to cross the street

[26:42] to go to the open space area and they

[26:44] can't make it. Um, and it's just it it's

[26:47] a hazard that's really almost beyond

[26:48] description. And um, I went up there on

[26:51] a Sunday morning and

[26:54] I was shocked.

[26:56] by what There were cars going by

[26:58] four, five, six, seven, eight at a time

[27:00] 100 miles an hour.

[27:02] And they have their mufflers open, so

[27:04] they're really loud and noisy. And

[27:06] they're videoing themselves.

[27:08] And so the question that came up, I saw

[27:11] it in a post this just yesterday or the

[27:13] day before, why can't we prosecute

[27:15] somebody who's videoing themselves with

[27:16] 105 miles an hour on their on their

[27:18] speedometer? That would seem to make

[27:20] sense. So there's a lot of things that

[27:22] we could do. So I'm one of those all of

[27:23] the above, you know, I think Caltrans

[27:26] needs to help us with speed mitigation,

[27:28] you know, they they they do plenty of

[27:30] things that could slow people down. I We

[27:33] don't need to go into that. Enforcement,

[27:35] speed cameras, noise cam You know,

[27:37] there's all sorts of things that we can

[27:38] do. Whatever Whatever we can do to help

[27:40] is important.

[27:42] A lot of you don't know this, but we're

[27:43] here tonight for a very a very different

[27:45] reason, and which involves me, but

[27:48] somebody died

[27:51] here, and he's not coming back. And he

[27:54] was taken far too early at 34 years old,

[27:57] I think somebody said, which is just a

[27:59] tragedy. And I think that um that's a

[28:01] serious issue. And I think that this has

[28:03] gone on quite long enough. I

[28:05] corresponded with um

[28:06] uh we have we actually have very good

[28:08] relations with It's unusual for town

[28:10] councils. We have a great relationship

[28:12] with our

[28:13] uh county supervisor Ray Mueller. We

[28:15] have great relationships with our state

[28:17] officials, uh

[28:18] Mark Becker and um

[28:20] Josh Becker and Mark Berman. And um I corresponded with them just last

[28:25] week about this issue. And it's for some

[28:28] reason it just keeps getting shoved

[28:29] down, you know, it it keeps getting

[28:31] passed over. It's not urgent enough. And

[28:34] I think if anything, as I said at the

[28:35] beginning, if Jacob's death can do

[28:37] anything to at least bring these

[28:39] disparate groups together, there's

[28:41] several groups out here, not only the

[28:43] bicyclists, but there's hikers, there's

[28:44] open space people, the people who live

[28:46] there, the four corners people. These

[28:48] are all the Clouds Rest people. These

[28:50] are all different constituent groups and

[28:52] I'm really glad to see Channel 2 and the

[28:54] Almanac here tonight because this

[28:56] publicity will help. Because we've got

[28:58] to get their attention. And anything we

[29:01] can do, I'm obviously in agreement with

[29:02] my colleagues here about anything we can

[29:04] do to do it. But I think we have to up

[29:06] our games. We have to up the ante here.

[29:09] And

[29:10] I'd like to see us do that and take a

[29:12] much more serious view of this with our

[29:14] state officials and finally get

[29:16] something done. It shouldn't be that

[29:18] difficult to do. People shouldn't have

[29:20] to die get some

[29:22] relief for the people who bike up there

[29:24] and live up there.

[29:26] Thank you.

[29:27] >> Yeah, excellent. Thank you. So, I think

[29:29] we have consensus

[29:30] around coordinated efforts through us.

[29:33] Agree we can be.

[29:35] Study session, maybe around that study

[29:37] session is Raymu,

[29:38] the county supervisors set of

[29:40] recommendations and whether we would

[29:42] endorse those recommendations.

[29:44] And of course any advocacy that we can

[29:45] provide up the channel,

[29:47] we will do from our spots here on the

[29:49] dais.

[29:52] Thank you. Any other

[29:54] public comments on any item not Hello,

[29:57] Ms. Lubin.

[30:01] » Hi.

[30:03] Valia Lubin, History Committee.

[30:05] Uh on a slightly

[30:07] lighter note, I'd like to invite

[30:09] everybody to join us for our annual

[30:11] walking tours.

[30:13] Um it's about a 20-minute walk around

[30:16] town center looking at all our historic

[30:18] buildings.

[30:20] And it starts at the museum, which is

[30:21] across the open space, Saturday from

[30:25] 1:00 to 3:00.

[30:26] And we've been doing this in

[30:28] coordination with the San Mateo County

[30:30] Museum

[30:31] for several years and our

[30:33] enrollment or participation keeps

[30:36] increasing, so

[30:37] I'm sure all of you know about the

[30:38] historic buildings in town, but

[30:41] since I have a captive audience tonight,

[30:42] thought

[30:43] >> [laughter]

[30:43] >> Anyway, we'd love to see you, too, if

[30:45] you want to come. So,

[30:46] >> Sounds like a lot of fun. Thank you,

[30:47] Thalia.

[30:51] Other public comments

[30:53] on non-agendized items.

[30:56] Yes, sir.

[30:57] >> Here's the sign.

[31:00] Hello.

[31:00] >> Welcome.

[31:02] >> So, I would like to make a actionable,

[31:05] specific suggestion about specific

[31:07] measures we can take to reduce speed

[31:10] limits on Skyline Road and other roads

[31:12] and keep them low.

[31:14] So, my suggestion is rather than having

[31:16] police officers or CHP officers

[31:20] or speed cameras enforcing speed limits

[31:23] retroactively, we can modify the design

[31:26] of the road itself to reduce speed

[31:28] limits proactively.

[31:30] So, for example, one suggestion would be

[31:32] replacing four-way intersections that

[31:35] have stop signs with roundabouts. These

[31:37] will obstruct drivers' sight lines. I

[31:40] know that sounds

[31:42] a bit strange, but it will obstruct

[31:45] drivers from looking straight through

[31:47] the intersection and force them to slow

[31:49] down to go around it.

[31:51] Another suggestion is physical barriers

[31:54] to exiting the lanes. These These don't

[31:56] have to be big. They don't have to be

[31:57] frequent. Just like

[31:59] a curb

[32:01] on the edge of the road, like on the

[32:03] edge of the lane,

[32:05] to

[32:06] like make the lane more clearly defined,

[32:08] prevent cutting into the opposite lane,

[32:10] prevent cutting onto the shoulder, and

[32:12] to create a protected space

[32:14] for bicyclists and hikers

[32:17] on the side of the road that's separate

[32:18] from

[32:19] the cars.

[32:21] And

[32:22] the cars can still use the shoulder for

[32:24] like pulling off for emergencies. Like

[32:27] there don't There doesn't need to be a

[32:28] continuous curb. Just like every 10 yd,

[32:31] there's like a plastic bollard

[32:34] or something along the side of the road.

[32:39] » Okay, thank you. That's that's a good

[32:41] suggestion.

[32:43] Other

[32:44] we'll go to the Zoom room real quick.

[32:46] Mary Danko,

[32:48] you are good to go.

[32:52] >> Oh, hi. I'm Mary Danko as you said and I

[32:55] live in Woodside in District number

[32:57] four.

[32:58] I I feel bad with this is such a solemn

[33:01] meeting but I just wanted to

[33:04] voice my enthusiasm for Melinda Stolker

[33:08] for my representative as my

[33:09] representative.

[33:11] I'm I'm

[33:12] >> Hello Mary. Mary, I hate to cut you off.

[33:14] I just just for procedural reasons I got

[33:16] to wait till that agenda item

[33:18] take your comment but I but we're

[33:20] looking forward to it so we'll see you

[33:22] in a little bit.

[33:22] >> Thank you.

[33:23] >> It's right around the corner, I promise.

[33:24] >> Okay, thank you.

[33:25] >> Thank you.

[33:28] Any other public comments? Yes, sir.

[33:30] >> Thank you.

[33:31] >> Oh, thank you, sir. Yeah, thank you all

[33:33] for being here. It is very meaningful

[33:35] and and we're on it so we appreciate the

[33:37] advocacy and I'm we're very very sorry for your

[33:41] loss.

[33:42] >> Thank you. We'll be We'll be back.

[33:44] >> Thank you.

[33:48] sir.

[33:53] Any other public comments before we

[33:55] close public comment?

[33:58] Okay, hearing none we will officially

[34:00] close public comment and move on. We do

[34:02] have a lovely proclamation here tonight

[34:05] to celebrate the Almanac's 60th

[34:08] anniversary as a newspaper so

[34:10] I'm going to read a couple of the

[34:11] highlights here and we'll deliver these

[34:14] over to you, Jennifer, in just a moment

[34:15] so so this is a proclamation honoring

[34:18] the 60th anniversary of Almanac

[34:20] journalism.

[34:22] There's a lot of interesting facts in

[34:23] here, by the way. Whereas in August 1965

[34:26] three visionary Portola Valley residents

[34:28] laid the cornerstone of localized public

[34:30] oversight by assembling a humble

[34:32] four-page community newspaper

[34:34] on a neighborhood kitchen table.

[34:36] And whereas this grassroots publication

[34:38] blossomed over six decades into the

[34:40] Almanac evolving from its physical roots

[34:42] in a small office right here next next

[34:45] to the post office here in Woodside to

[34:47] dedicated offices in Menlo Park and

[34:49] eventually to Palo Alto.

[34:52] And whereas

[34:53] throughout its esteemed history the

[34:55] Almanac is fearlessly and faithfully

[34:57] protected the public interest by

[34:59] bringing vital news, investigative

[35:01] pieces, and cultural reporting to the

[35:02] residents of Menlo Park, Atherton,

[35:04] Woodside, and Portola Valley Portola

[35:06] Valley

[35:07] without fear nor favor.

[35:09] And whereas the publication has

[35:10] successfully navigated the changing

[35:12] tides of modern media by transitioning

[35:14] into a vital community-supported

[35:16] nonprofit asset.

[35:17] And whereas the exceptional merit of

[35:19] Almanac journalists continue to be

[35:20] recognized on the grandest stages.

[35:23] And whereas on August 13th the Almanac

[35:26] will cap off its landmark 60th year of

[35:28] service by gathering the community at

[35:30] Fremont Park co-sponsoring Menlo Park

[35:33] Summer Concert Series finale featuring

[35:35] the Sun Kings to distribute

[35:38] a special commemorative anniversary

[35:39] issue and connect face-to-face with the

[35:41] public they serve.

[35:43] Now therefore I Brian Demkowski, mayor

[35:45] of the town of Woodside on behalf of the

[35:47] town council and town residents,

[35:48] recognize and celebrate the Almanac on

[35:51] its 60th anniversary of journalism. We

[35:53] extend our profound gratitude to its

[35:55] reporters, editors, and foundation staff

[35:57] for their unwavering privilege

[35:59] of reporting on our town and we look

[36:01] forward with great anticipation to

[36:02] another 60 years of informed civil civic

[36:05] excellence. So thank you very much for

[36:08] your wonderful service to the community.

[36:20] » Brian

[36:21] picture with

[36:23] >> Jennifer

[36:24] >> Come on.

[36:26] >> I'm only going to sign one.

[36:27] >> I'll sign one.

[36:28] >> Okay.

[36:28] >> [laughter]

[36:28] >> I want to

[36:29] >> I'll sign one.

[36:31] >> I'm I'm the other alternate. I'm sorry.

[36:33] >> All right. That's fine.

[36:34] >> Yeah, no problem.

[36:39] » Oh, sitting there?

[36:42] No name for now.

[36:43] I feel like I could

[36:55] » Okay.

[36:57] Next up, we have the interview and

[36:59] appointment of a planning commissioner.

[37:02] Uh we Yes, sir.

[37:04] >> Can I please do one more comment or that

[37:06] is my chance?

[37:07] >> The public comment?

[37:08] >> Yes.

[37:09] >> Uh

[37:10] Sure, sir. Come on. Real quick. We It's

[37:12] on unusual, but

[37:14] >> Okay, sorry.

[37:15] >> Yes, sir.

[37:15] >> Okay. Bob,

[37:16] >> Bob, how are you?

[37:17] >> Hello, good.

[37:17] >> Yeah, I didn't recognize you there.

[37:19] >> Sorry about that. Um okay, so I wrote it

[37:21] out. Good evening. Thank you to the

[37:22] council. Several of you have generally

[37:24] helped me with a project of mine, and I

[37:26] appreciate that, but tonight I'm here

[37:27] for something else, separate.

[37:30] I want no more deals that are in back

[37:32] rooms. I don't want this town run by a

[37:34] law firm where key people aren't named

[37:37] uh to us and aren't accountable to us.

[37:40] Ty didn't even Ty, who is uh Jean's son,

[37:44] doesn't even name himself and uses legal

[37:47] name. Um legal power in this county is

[37:50] concentrated in one small firm, and I

[37:52] think it's hurting our best chance at

[37:54] bringing in a strong new town manager.

[37:56] We need transparency. When I spoke to

[37:58] people

[37:59] I was coming tonight when I told people

[38:01] I was coming tonight, several of them

[38:02] told me they could corroborate some of

[38:04] the concerns that have not been

[38:05] addressed addressed. I'm not here to

[38:08] relitigate the past. I'm here to ask you

[38:10] to move transparent transparently going

[38:13] forward

[38:14] and to take this concentration of power

[38:16] out of one firm's hands. Some of you

[38:18] believe keeping this arrangement

[38:19] preserves institutional knowledge.

[38:21] Respectfully, the institution looks

[38:23] broken right now. We need new blood.

[38:26] Jean hasn't been able to separate

[38:27] herself

[38:29] from her own past work on this. She's

[38:31] still standing behind a document

[38:33] presented this town that I know to be

[38:35] wrong, even though I personally asked

[38:37] her and Melissa to correct it. She since

[38:40] sent me a document She sent me a

[38:43] document improperly labeled as a

[38:45] property lease that was actually a full

[38:46] general release. When I asked her to fix

[38:48] it, they wouldn't. Um I caught it

[38:51] because I read contracts for a living.

[38:53] Most people in this town don't.

[38:55] Um

[38:56] Melissa never disclosed to us that she

[38:58] worked as Jean's paralegal for a long

[39:00] time before she ended up actually

[39:02] running this town for a little bit.

[39:04] Um

[39:05] and that needs to be fixed. If Jean

[39:07] isn't capable of correcting the record

[39:09] when it's wrong, she isn't capable of

[39:11] doing her job.

[39:12] And this should be and should resign.

[39:15] I'm correct I'll correct something I got

[39:17] wrong earlier when I put this forward to

[39:19] the town. Um

[39:22] Uh I had the departure list mixed up. To

[39:25] those of you who are leaving this town

[39:27] council, this is exactly the kind of

[39:28] thing to use your last votes on. Leave

[39:31] the town better than you found it. Vote

[39:33] her out. To everyone staying, you owe

[39:35] this town a real competitive process for

[39:38] its legal services, not a renewal on

[39:41] autopilot because it's easier. Let's

[39:43] clean this up. Let's make it right.

[39:45] That's a full speech ready to deliver.

[39:48] >> Okay.

[39:49] Uh thank you, Mr. Wilson.

[39:51] Uh okay, moving on to the uh planning

[39:54] commissioner appointment. Uh we

[39:57] Thank you, Lewis. Um

[40:00] Uh we we did have uh uh Mr. Yu did pull

[40:04] his candidacy. So, uh

[40:06] Linda will be hearing from you tonight,

[40:09] uh which is wonderful. And uh

[40:11] I'll just start by saying we always have

[40:12] a tremendous amount of respect for

[40:14] anybody that's willing to step up and

[40:16] take on

[40:17] this responsibility and go through a

[40:19] public interview process. There's only

[40:20] two places that has to happen, Planning

[40:22] Commission and ASBR, and this is one of

[40:24] them, and uh uh thank you for stepping

[40:26] into the arena, and the floor is yours

[40:28] to talk about your interests and values

[40:30] and objectives uh with pursuing this

[40:32] position.

[40:33] >> Of course. Thank you so much.

[40:36] >> Um so, some of you probably recognize me

[40:38] from my previous experience with service

[40:42] here for the town. Um when I was chair

[40:46] of the uh Livestock and Equine

[40:48] Committee, uh my main objective was to

[40:52] improve uh communications and resources

[40:56] for people who had livestock, um not

[40:59] just horses, but there's all types of

[41:01] livestock here in this town. Um many of

[41:04] us on the committee uh

[41:06] were committed to creating uh emergency

[41:09] preparedness information that got

[41:11] distributed to uh all interested parties

[41:15] and all people who have barns. Um we

[41:18] also um

[41:20] provided some guidance when it came to

[41:23] uh safety and signage on trails and

[41:26] things like that. Um when I chose to

[41:29] leave the committee, I handpicked

[41:32] somebody to replace me that I knew would

[41:35] also be doing a very good job and would

[41:37] be passionate about the work. Um and I'm

[41:41] also very aware that many of these roles

[41:44] require a lot more time and commitment

[41:46] than you think it will, and I feel

[41:48] prepared to step up and do that um on

[41:51] the Planning

[41:53] Commission.

[41:55] Um

[41:56] many of you may not know, I grew up with

[41:59] a dad who was an architect.

[42:01] So, [snorts] I've been around planning

[42:04] and building um

[42:06] literally plans um pretty much my whole

[42:09] young adult life. And when we purchased

[42:13] a home here in Woodside, we needed to

[42:16] expand it and improve upon it and

[42:19] we submitted the plans and got the

[42:21] approvals and went through the

[42:23] permitting processes etc.

[42:26] And I'm very familiar with all of that

[42:29] and I think that that would help me lend

[42:32] some

[42:34] understanding and expertise to the

[42:35] process that any resident has to go

[42:37] through

[42:39] whether they're again doing some kind of

[42:42] home improvement expansion, doing an

[42:44] ADU.

[42:45] Currently there's some subdivisions

[42:48] as you know, that's another topic

[42:51] of this meeting this evening.

[42:53] So there's a lot of areas where I feel

[42:56] that I could support residents to meet

[43:00] their goals while at the same time

[43:03] ensure that we are

[43:06] supporting the general plan

[43:09] which is

[43:10] just as important now as it ever was. Um

[43:14] and in addition

[43:17] um

[43:19] I think that my 25 years of business

[43:23] experience as a vice president of

[43:25] marketing and a senior director at

[43:28] leading software companies gives me some

[43:31] very transferable skills. I had to take

[43:35] a 360 degree view of a lot of situations

[43:39] and pour through a lot of data

[43:41] to come up with strategic plans that

[43:45] were

[43:46] um

[43:47] then executed for measurable results and

[43:51] given the nature of the work which was

[43:54] very

[43:55] deadline driven, very sometimes a bit of

[43:59] a pressure cooker,

[44:00] working with a lot of

[44:03] extremely opinionated CEOs

[44:06] and other

[44:08] people who uh had a lot of investment in

[44:12] the companies

[44:13] um that I worked for. Um I I think that

[44:16] I have the skills required for working

[44:19] with a wide variety of people on a

[44:22] number of issues, right? Whether again,

[44:25] whether they're bringing to the table

[44:27] um

[44:29] a plan for an ADU or some other kind of

[44:31] a project um that requires

[44:35] um

[44:36] some analysis or any kind of, you know,

[44:39] variance kind of a situation, right?

[44:43] Um

[44:44] and I will just close by saying that,

[44:47] you know, I'm obviously I'm very

[44:49] passionate about living here. I've I've

[44:51] been here for a couple of decades and

[44:54] uh love so many things about Woodside

[44:56] and I'm very committed to

[44:59] um

[45:00] helping it helping it develop while also

[45:03] again, just maintaining the rural rural

[45:05] nature and the supporting the general

[45:08] plan. Um

[45:10] and I think nine of my peers who are in

[45:16] District 4

[45:18] um are supporting me on this because

[45:20] they've known me for decades and they

[45:22] trust um my commitment and my energy and

[45:26] my judgment to uh bring to the table

[45:29] uh for a role like this.

[45:32] >> Well, thank you. Uh questions for Ms.

[45:34] Stokke.

[45:37] » I I know her work well, so

[45:40] >> Yeah, sure.

[45:40] >> Um

[45:41] District 4, my district, I want to thank

[45:43] you for um

[45:45] tossing your hat in. Not everybody does

[45:47] and when uh

[45:49] um when the prior planning commissioner

[45:51] resigned, it kind of caught me by

[45:52] surprise. We canvassed the district.

[45:55] Um actually thrilled that you're here

[45:57] and um

[45:58] willing to take on that role. Um

[46:01] before I I I have a couple of questions

[46:04] for you, but before that, you mentioned

[46:05] and it's in your application as well,

[46:08] that you've done a remodel here. And um

[46:10] I was interested in your experience and

[46:12] uh what you did what you might do

[46:14] differently or what you think you bring

[46:16] to the party of the planning commission

[46:18] uh from that experience because we still

[46:20] get, even though I think we've made a

[46:22] lot of improvements, we still get a lot

[46:24] of complaints from property owners that

[46:26] uh the situation is un arduous and you

[46:29] know, whatever. I mean, and sometimes it

[46:30] is, but I'm just interested in your

[46:32] experience.

[46:33] >> Well, it it was a little while ago and

[46:36] the parties have changed, right? Some of

[46:38] the personalities have changed. Uh we

[46:41] had

[46:42] >> [laughter]

[46:42] >> we had an inspector that was kind of

[46:44] known

[46:45] for uh bringing back lots of lists of

[46:48] things that were not necessarily related

[46:51] to the project.

[46:52] So, um I think there was some uh

[46:56] frustration there where we had to do

[46:58] some things that were

[47:01] again, n- not at all related to the uh original um expansion of the home. Um

[47:10] and I think that the the time that it

[47:13] took

[47:14] to get the approval um was uh

[47:19] could definitely have been um shortened.

[47:22] Um so, I think that there are ways to

[47:25] try to expedite things a little bit

[47:28] better. Honestly, from what I've heard,

[47:30] I do think some things have improved

[47:32] since then.

[47:33] >> Oh, they definitely have. Our building

[47:34] and planning group is now

[47:36] >> Yeah, and I think that we're we're all

[47:38] very very aware that um

[47:43] in-

[47:44] increasing residential units is a

[47:48] mission that we all have to do. It's mandated. Um so, I think that

[47:55] again, being

[47:57] judicious yet expeditious

[48:00] is very important, right?

[48:05] >> Thank you. The only thing other thing I

[48:06] wanted to add is

[48:08] I served on the planning commission back

[48:09] in the olden days,

[48:11] two years before I joined the town

[48:13] council and it was easily the most

[48:16] enjoyable role I've ever played.

[48:18] More enjoyable than some some of these

[48:21] being on the town council sometimes. But

[48:23] it's the

[48:24] you get to see a lot of properties and

[48:26] meet a lot of homeowners. But the one

[48:27] thing I wanted to leave you with is town

[48:29] council is a legislative body. The

[48:31] planning commission is a quasi

[48:33] legislative body. I think that's the

[48:35] term for it. Or legislative body. What

[48:37] you guys say is law and

[48:39] that's unlike any of the other

[48:41] committees that we have

[48:42] or commission. So

[48:45] unless you do something completely

[48:46] ridiculous tonight, you're going to get

[48:48] the job. So I think that I'm just

[48:50] appreciate you throwing your hat in the

[48:52] ring here and thank you for offering

[48:54] your time and expertise to help our

[48:57] community.

[48:57] >> Well, thank you and you're welcome.

[49:02] » Well.

[49:03] >> Um.

[49:04] So thank you so much for your

[49:05] application to the planning commission.

[49:07] I definitely think like having a track

[49:09] record of service

[49:10] and you having been on the livestock and equestrian committee is a great kind

[49:15] of way to then you know, go on to the

[49:17] planning commission. So I think it's

[49:18] having that experience is really

[49:19] wonderful.

[49:21] Um I did have one question. One of the

[49:23] big topics as you know that the town has

[49:26] been contending with over the last

[49:28] several years is the housing element. So

[49:30] just wanted to hear a little bit on your

[49:31] views. How do you see the planning

[49:34] commission's role? Um what do you

[49:37] envision

[49:38] weighing in on vis-a-vis the housing

[49:40] element during your time on the planning

[49:42] commission? How do you see that

[49:44] contrasting with the town council's

[49:45] role?

[49:47] >> Well, as far as weighing in, um

[49:50] I I haven't seen a lot of plans yet.

[49:54] >> [laughter]

[49:55] >> So, I think that all of these

[49:58] um

[49:58] projects are unique, right? And I don't

[50:03] know that I could just have a blanket

[50:05] statement about how we would approach

[50:08] any and all of them. I think you have to

[50:10] look at each individual project uh for

[50:14] its specific um

[50:17] you know, numbers and uh whatever attributes as well as any

[50:22] negative impact, right? Um so, I think

[50:25] that

[50:27] I would just look at each individual

[50:31] plan and ask a lot of questions. Again,

[50:34] take that 360° view. You hear a lot

[50:37] about the number of units. I don't hear

[50:39] a lot about parking, for example, right?

[50:42] That's a big one. Or traffic impact,

[50:44] right? That's also a big one. So, I

[50:47] think you have to just take it one at a

[50:50] time and review all the details, and

[50:53] then bring up the questions and any

[50:56] concerns regarding community impact,

[50:59] and go from there.

[51:04] » Any other questions?

[51:06] Uh hearing none, I'm you answered my

[51:08] question earlier. Uh we'll just open to

[51:10] public comment briefly if there any

[51:12] members that would like to speak on

[51:14] behalf

[51:15] of Ms. Stoker.

[51:18] This is your chance, Mary.

[51:19] >> Oh, here you go.

[51:20] >> I'm here.

[51:20] >> Oh.

[51:20] >> You don't have to go away.

[51:21] >> Oh,

[51:22] uh

[51:22] >> Valerie Lubin, I just want to say we're

[51:24] friends and uh she's Linda's quite

[51:27] capable, and I think she'd make a fine

[51:29] addition to the planning commission.

[51:31] >> Right, thank you.

[51:31] >> I uh admire her courage.

[51:35] >> Yeah, right. Um and now off to to you

[51:38] now, Mary. This is your chance. Mary

[51:40] Danko.

[51:46] » Mary, I think you're on mute.

[51:50] » My goodness, I'm having troubles here.

[51:52] So sorry.

[51:53] I just um really wanted to encourage you

[51:56] to pick Melinda. Looks like you

[51:58] the other person already dropped out, so

[52:00] that's fine, but I am her neighbor, I've

[52:03] known her a very long time, and I've

[52:05] always been impressed by her love of

[52:07] Woodside. And she I think she will be an

[52:10] excellent asset to you guys. And that's

[52:12] it. Thank you.

[52:13] >> Thank you, Mary.

[52:15] And we have one more in the Zoom room

[52:18] entitled Zoom user.

[52:21] you have the floor.

[52:23] >> Hello, my name is Nola Masterson. I'm a

[52:26] neighbor of Melinda Stoker, and I just

[52:27] wanted to put a vote in for her and

[52:29] thank her very much for stepping up.

[52:31] It's very brave of her to do that.

[52:33] >> Yeah.

[52:34] >> [laughter]

[52:34] >> That's that's awesome. Thank you, Nola.

[52:37] >> To Tom O'Wheeler.

[52:39] >> Yeah. Okay. Um any further deliberation

[52:42] on this topic?

[52:44] I'll just

[52:45] I'm sorry, go ahead.

[52:46] >> I was going to make a motion.

[52:47] >> Oh, well, I just wanted to say that um

[52:50] uh you've received wonderful broad

[52:52] written support, and um

[52:54] uh I think you'll be a wonderfully

[52:56] complementary asset. I think we lost a

[52:58] little bit of the equestrian vibe when

[53:00] Aiden rolled off, and it's going to be

[53:02] nice to have you back on there to to

[53:03] bring that to to the to the

[53:05] organization. So, thank you again for

[53:07] your willingness to serve.

[53:09] Uh now uh Councilwoman Wall, sorry.

[53:10] >> echo that. Thank you so much for your

[53:12] willingness to serve. Um and with that,

[53:14] I would move to appoint Melinda Stoker

[53:17] to the Planning Commission uh for

[53:18] District 4.

[53:19] >> Second.

[53:21] >> Councilmember Robrish?

[53:22] >> Yes.

[53:22] >> Councilmember Brown?

[53:23] >> Yes.

[53:24] >> Councilmember Gold?

[53:25] >> Yes.

[53:25] >> Councilmember Wall?

[53:26] >> Yes.

[53:27] >> Mayor Domkowski?

[53:28] >> Yes. Thank you, and congratulations on

[53:30] your appointment.

[53:36] Very good. Well, thank you so much. Um

[53:38] as stated earlier, we did reorder the

[53:41] agenda to bring item E forward and um um

[53:45] which is a report from outside legal

[53:47] counsel on a personnel investigation is

[53:49] how it's titled.

[53:50] Uh yes, sir.

[53:52] >> an announcement to make.

[53:53] >> Okay.

[53:54] >> Before you go on, um I need to I must

[53:56] recuse myself from participating in

[53:58] agenda item E because under FPPC

[54:02] rules, I have a disqualifying personal

[54:03] interest, namely that the

[54:05] sustained allegation that will be

[54:07] discussed tonight concerns my conduct,

[54:09] which would be a clear conflict of

[54:11] interest. I am therefore required to

[54:13] leave the room

[54:14] and will not return until this matter is

[54:16] concluded. But before I do that, I did

[54:18] want to read this letter that I

[54:20] submitted to

[54:21] the mayor and town council members um

[54:24] uh earlier this evening. I submit this

[54:26] letter regarding finding six

[54:28] from the executive summary of

[54:30] confidential investigation dated April

[54:32] 20th, 2026.

[54:35] As you determine what corrective action

[54:37] may be appropriate, since this finding

[54:39] relates to me, I will not participate in

[54:42] your discussion or deliberation.

[54:44] Immediately upon receiving the

[54:46] complaint, Woodside's town council

[54:48] called for and approved by a unanimous

[54:50] vote an independent investigation of the

[54:53] allegations made by the former town

[54:55] manager. Citizens should know that the

[54:58] independent investigator had no prior

[55:01] experience with town officials and that

[55:04] he was identified and authorized by our

[55:06] employment liability insurance provider.

[55:09] Every town council member, including me,

[55:12] supported and fully cooperated with this

[55:14] investigation.

[55:15] Only one allegation was sustained,

[55:17] namely that I related a discussion from

[55:20] a closed session town council meeting to

[55:22] our former town manager.

[55:24] I never denied or concealed that

[55:26] conversation from anyone or from the

[55:29] independent investigator.

[55:31] I agree my disclosure was inappropriate

[55:33] and I regret that lapse of judgment. It

[55:36] will be up to the town council to

[55:37] determine what corrective action, if

[55:40] any, is required. It is my hope that

[55:42] this sincere acknowledgement of my

[55:45] accountability and this apology are

[55:47] acceptable and that no further action

[55:50] will be necessary. And I submitted that

[55:52] to the town council and the mayor

[55:53] earlier this evening and with that I

[55:55] need to leave the room. Thank you.

[55:58] >> Thank you very much, Councilmember Gold.

[56:16] Okay, Mr. Bolanos, the floor is yours,

[56:18] sir.

[56:19] >> Thank you.

[56:20] >> All right, in the microphone you just

[56:21] need to probably come a little closer

[56:22] there so folks on Zoom can hear.

[56:24] >> Thank you.

[56:25] Mayor, and good evening,

[56:26] council staff members, of the public.

[56:31] My name is Richard Bolanos. I'm with the

[56:33] law firm Liebert Cassidy Whitmore,

[56:35] San Francisco, and I serve as special

[56:38] counsel

[56:38] >> I think we're still having a little bit

[56:40] of a hearing issue there, yeah.

[56:42] >> I serve as special counsel appointed by

[56:44] the town's liability insurance carrier

[56:47] to represent the town in regard to that

[56:49] written allegations filed by former town

[56:52] manager Jason Ledbetter.

[56:55] Our remarks this evening are being

[56:57] presented to address the one allegation

[57:00] from Mr. Ledbetter's report found to

[57:02] have merit

[57:04] and to inform the public about the steps

[57:05] taken to address that particular

[57:08] allegation.

[57:10] Because this matter concerns threatened

[57:11] litigation, the council has been advised

[57:14] not to comment publicly about Mr.

[57:16] Ledbetter's employment or the town's

[57:18] investigation into his claims.

[57:21] To date, they have abided by this advice

[57:23] and this advice applies to this public

[57:25] meeting as well.

[57:27] Let me begin by briefly summarizing the

[57:30] events that brought us to this point.

[57:33] On February 20 On February 17, 2026,

[57:37] Mr. Ledbetter threatened to publish a

[57:39] purported whistleblower report which

[57:42] contained allegations directed at

[57:44] Council members Demkowlski, Gold, and

[57:47] Wall and Town Attorney Jean Savary

[57:50] unless he was paid an amount exceeding

[57:52] $400,000.

[57:54] Council declined to make the payment,

[57:56] and Mr. Ledbetter released the report.

[58:00] Immediately thereafter, Council directed

[58:02] that the report and Mr. Ledbetter's

[58:04] demand be referred to the San Mateo

[58:05] County District Attorney for

[58:07] investigation.

[58:10] In addition, the town's liability

[58:11] insurance carrier was advised of the

[58:14] situation

[58:15] and asked to investigate the

[58:17] allegations.

[58:18] In accordance with the insurance

[58:20] carrier's protocols, my office was

[58:23] retained to advise the town,

[58:25] and an independent investigator, David

[58:27] Stoliar, was appointed to conduct an

[58:29] investigation into Mr. Ledbetter's

[58:32] claims pursuant to state law and town

[58:35] policy.

[58:37] Mr. Stoliar had no previous affiliation

[58:40] with the Town of Woodside.

[58:42] He was empowered to conduct the

[58:43] investigation with complete independence

[58:46] and to issue findings and conclusions as

[58:48] to each of the 11 allegations

[58:51] in Mr. Ledbetter's report.

[58:54] On April 25th, 2026, the town released

[58:57] to the public an executive summary of

[59:00] the report

[59:01] and Mr. Stoliar's findings and

[59:03] conclusions.

[59:05] Only one of the 11 allegations was found

[59:07] to be supported by the evidence.

[59:10] In that one allegation, Mr. Ledbetter

[59:12] claimed that on July 10th, 2025,

[59:16] during a dinner with Council members

[59:18] Gold, Demkowlski,

[59:21] um

[59:22] Council members Gold and Demkowlski,

[59:24] Council member Gold shared closed

[59:25] session information

[59:28] regarding Mr. Ledbetter's hiring and

[59:30] gender bias concerns raised by Council

[59:32] Member Wall

[59:33] during Mr. Ledbetter's interview and

[59:35] hiring process.

[59:38] As noted in Mr. Stallard's report, this

[59:40] allegation was sustained because Council

[59:42] Member Gold admitted to Mr. Stallard

[59:45] that he had disclosed this information

[59:46] to Mr. Ledbetter.

[59:49] On May 5th, 2026, several days after

[59:52] receiving Mr. Stallard's report,

[59:55] the San Mateo County District Attorney

[59:56] responded to the town's request for an

[59:58] investigation,

[1:00:00] declining to file charges against Mr.

[1:00:02] Ledbetter or Council Member Gold.

[1:00:06] In regard to Mr. Ledbetter, the District

[1:00:08] Attorney found insufficient evidence to

[1:00:10] prove attempted extortion by Mr.

[1:00:12] Ledbetter in violation of Penal Code

[1:00:14] sections 518 and 524 beyond a reasonable

[1:00:18] doubt.

[1:00:20] In regard to Council Member Gold, the

[1:00:22] District Attorney cited Council Member

[1:00:24] Gold's admission

[1:00:25] regarding the disclosure of closed

[1:00:27] session information, but declined to

[1:00:29] file criminal charges because Government

[1:00:31] Code section 54963,

[1:00:35] otherwise known as the Brown Act,

[1:00:37] does not provide for criminal penalties.

[1:00:41] In declining to file charges, the

[1:00:42] District Attorney directed the matter

[1:00:44] back to the town of Woodside.

[1:00:47] Upon this referral back to the town, an

[1:00:49] ethics inquiry was initiated as called

[1:00:51] for by the town's code of ethics and

[1:00:53] conduct.

[1:00:55] The Code of Ethics and Conduct section

[1:00:57] 111, core values, entitled

[1:01:00] responsibility/protecting

[1:01:02] the public's interests,

[1:01:05] provides in part that Council members

[1:01:07] are to refrain from disclosing

[1:01:09] confidential information

[1:01:11] concerning litigation, personnel,

[1:01:13] property, or other affairs of the town

[1:01:16] without proper legal authority,

[1:01:18] nor use such information to advance

[1:01:21] their financial or other personal

[1:01:22] interests.

[1:01:30] During the course of this inquiry,

[1:01:32] Council member Gold submitted to the

[1:01:34] council his apology for relating the

[1:01:36] discussion from closed session to the

[1:01:38] former town manager.

[1:01:41] And the public has just heard that

[1:01:42] apology.

[1:01:44] Council member Gold noted that he did

[1:01:46] not deny or conceal this conversation

[1:01:48] from the independent investigator

[1:01:51] and agreed that the disclosure was

[1:01:52] inappropriate and a lapse of hit a lapse

[1:01:55] in judgment

[1:01:56] that he regrets.

[1:02:00] The council agrees with Council member

[1:02:02] Gold that his discussion with the former

[1:02:04] town manager violated the

[1:02:06] above-referenced section of the town's

[1:02:08] code of ethics and conduct.

[1:02:11] The council has received Council member

[1:02:12] Gold's apology and accepted my

[1:02:15] recommendation that additional training

[1:02:17] be conducted in regards to the town's

[1:02:19] code of ethics and conduct.

[1:02:23] That complete This completes my remarks.

[1:02:26] The public should now be given an

[1:02:27] opportunity to comment, and if there are

[1:02:30] any questions posed by the public's

[1:02:32] comments, I will respond to those

[1:02:33] questions to the extent the law allows.

[1:02:37] As I stated earlier, because this matter

[1:02:39] does involve threatened litigation,

[1:02:41] the council is been has been advised not

[1:02:44] to comment publicly about the employment

[1:02:46] matters involving Mr. Ledbetter and his

[1:02:49] complaints.

[1:02:50] After receiving the public's comments,

[1:02:53] the council's review and response to Mr.

[1:02:55] Taliadoros' report will be completed.

[1:02:58] Thank you.

[1:03:00] » Thank you. So, we're opening public

[1:03:02] comment on this matter.

[1:03:04] >> Yes.

[1:03:05] >> Welcome.

[1:03:07] >> Hello.

[1:03:08] My name is Emma McCulloch and I'm a

[1:03:09] Woodside resident of this beautiful town

[1:03:11] for more than 5 years.

[1:03:13] For more than 25 years, I've led

[1:03:15] corporate communications and media

[1:03:17] relations for leading technology

[1:03:19] companies including HP and eBay.

[1:03:22] I've handled numerous crisis and issues

[1:03:24] management and I have personally advised

[1:03:27] many CEOs.

[1:03:29] I've read the reports on this issue and

[1:03:31] the media coverage.

[1:03:33] As a rule follower and someone who

[1:03:35] believes that people in office should be

[1:03:38] representing the people

[1:03:40] and they should be ethical and uphold

[1:03:42] their values. I believe that Woodside

[1:03:45] residents should be proactively updated

[1:03:47] and informed of the outcomes.

[1:03:49] I feel that tonight, the agenda item was

[1:03:51] buried and we weren't given clear enough

[1:03:54] guidance on what the agenda item was

[1:03:56] going to be.

[1:03:58] Based on the information that

[1:04:00] individuals have inappropriately

[1:04:02] disclosed information in an

[1:04:04] inappropriate setting

[1:04:06] which was discussed originally in a

[1:04:08] closed door setting.

[1:04:10] This is not the ethical behavior that we

[1:04:13] expect from our town council.

[1:04:16] This fundamentally impacts the trust and

[1:04:19] integrity that we have as residents in

[1:04:22] this leadership team.

[1:04:24] It shows poor leadership and reflects on

[1:04:27] the town's leadership.

[1:04:30] I heard the comment from

[1:04:33] Mr. Gold about a lapse of judgment.

[1:04:36] That worries me that he thinks that this

[1:04:38] issue behind closed doors and as this

[1:04:42] gentleman mentioned

[1:04:44] the fundamental ethics of this that he

[1:04:47] mentioned that this was just a lapse of

[1:04:49] judgment.

[1:04:51] And the only

[1:04:52] outcome that I'm hearing is training.

[1:04:56] I really don't think that that will

[1:04:58] address the matter.

[1:05:00] So, I think there should be consequences

[1:05:03] and there should be a reprimand of

[1:05:05] sorts.

[1:05:07] Woodside residents deserve to have a

[1:05:09] town management that are ethical, have

[1:05:12] integrity, and are held accountable.

[1:05:15] We deserve to have been proactively

[1:05:17] updated on this situation

[1:05:20] versus the last agenda item

[1:05:22] and it being discussed as a personnel

[1:05:24] update.

[1:05:26] Thank you.

[1:05:28] >> Thank you.

[1:05:32] Mr. Evans.

[1:05:35] » So, in most places they have the saying

[1:05:38] is where there's smoke there's fire.

[1:05:40] Um there's a whole lot of smoke here and

[1:05:43] that there's one little bitty fire to

[1:05:45] then hear that it's a training issue. Um

[1:05:48] I'm with my

[1:05:49] neighbor in this and that this is

[1:05:51] ridiculous.

[1:05:52] Um

[1:05:53] like

[1:05:54] why is this okay? What what is the town

[1:05:57] council, the ones in theory who are not

[1:05:59] having lapse of judgments doing about

[1:06:01] this? Uh is this going to be a slap on

[1:06:02] the wrist? Is it going to be oh, I'm

[1:06:03] sorry, it's all fine? Um what's up about

[1:06:06] a legal a legal counsel for the town?

[1:06:09] How many backroom dinners have we had?

[1:06:11] How often is this going on? This was

[1:06:13] one. Like is this the is this the way

[1:06:15] that the culture is? Like I think we

[1:06:17] need a whole change, a wholesale change.

[1:06:20] Starting with no way would uh

[1:06:24] Commissioner Gold be a good mayor for

[1:06:26] next year. He's mayor pro tem, if I'm

[1:06:28] not mistaken. That seems ridiculous.

[1:06:32] I wish he would step down.

[1:06:33] We should also have much more

[1:06:36] oversight on the Brown Act. It seems

[1:06:38] like one Brown Act violation out of all

[1:06:40] this.

[1:06:41] That seems really odd. So, I would

[1:06:43] question

[1:06:45] I have a lot of lack of faith right now.

[1:06:47] Um there's been more special meetings

[1:06:50] than council meetings in the last year.

[1:06:52] That seems weird, too.

[1:06:53] So, please be more transparent, please

[1:06:55] hold them accountable, and please

[1:06:57] rethink the town administration that's

[1:06:59] giving the council guidance because

[1:07:01] something is off. Thank you.

[1:07:04] >> Thanks, Darren.

[1:07:05] Uh we're going to connect

[1:07:07] I was just going to Someone's up their

[1:07:08] hand up in the zoom room. So, then

[1:07:10] you're next. Um,

[1:07:12] Heather King,

[1:07:13] uh, you're up.

[1:07:15] >> Okay, great. Can you hear me?

[1:07:16] >> We definitely can. Thank you.

[1:07:18] >> Okay, [laughter] great. All right, so

[1:07:20] yes, my name is Heather King. I'm a

[1:07:21] resident of Woodside. Just for context

[1:07:24] about some of what I'm going to say, I

[1:07:26] am I'm a concerned citizen, but I'm also

[1:07:29] a lawyer and I've had a lot of

[1:07:31] experience with investigations, HR

[1:07:33] matters, and just legal matters in

[1:07:35] general.

[1:07:36] And just as a side note to echo what

[1:07:38] somebody just said, I felt putting this

[1:07:41] on the agenda as personal investigation

[1:07:43] with some lawyers' names was

[1:07:46] purposely vague. I I hate to, um,

[1:07:49] cast aspersions, but there are notice

[1:07:52] requirements in the government code that

[1:07:53] exist for exactly this reason. And

[1:07:55] agendas are supposed to actually tell

[1:07:57] the public what's going to be discussed.

[1:08:00] But, moving on to the findings here.

[1:08:03] So,

[1:08:04] as Councilmember Gold

[1:08:07] acknowledged, he

[1:08:09] Okay, so I'm just going to say this out

[1:08:10] loud for myself, too, to make sure I'm

[1:08:12] understanding this. So, he disclosed

[1:08:15] confidential closed session information,

[1:08:18] specifically the Councilmember Walls'

[1:08:20] gender discrimination complaint from the

[1:08:23] town manager hiring process.

[1:08:26] He disclosed that to the town manager

[1:08:28] himself. And he's admitted this, so that

[1:08:31] is in dispute. And the only question is,

[1:08:33] what is the council going to do about

[1:08:35] it?

[1:08:36] So, I just want to say this out loud.

[1:08:38] This was not a minor disclosure.

[1:08:41] It was a confidential complaint by one

[1:08:44] city council member about gender

[1:08:46] discrimination to be kept confidential

[1:08:49] precisely because information like that

[1:08:52] causes real harm if it gets out.

[1:08:55] And it wasn't shared with just anyone.

[1:08:57] It went to the one person

[1:08:59] where the damage would be the greatest,

[1:09:01] the incoming town manager,

[1:09:03] who learned that a sitting council

[1:09:04] member had accused another council

[1:09:06] member of discriminating during his

[1:09:07] hiring process. So, that's not just like

[1:09:10] a broken confidence between Gold and

[1:09:12] Wall.

[1:09:13] And it's not just a potential Brown Act

[1:09:15] violation or a council ethics violation.

[1:09:18] It looks to me, looking at the totality

[1:09:21] here, like it was the seed of the exact

[1:09:23] conflict that the entire investigation

[1:09:25] grew out of.

[1:09:27] And if I'm following this correctly,

[1:09:29] Gold also never disclosed having shared

[1:09:31] it

[1:09:32] with the town manager, not to the

[1:09:34] council, not to Wall, not to the person

[1:09:36] it concerned. That that's not like a

[1:09:39] one-time lapse in judgment. It's an

[1:09:41] ongoing decision to let the disclosure

[1:09:43] sit quietly and do whatever damage it

[1:09:46] was going to do to the rest of the

[1:09:48] council and to the town.

[1:09:50] And then just one more point before I

[1:09:51] ask my question.

[1:09:53] The concern that council member raised

[1:09:55] wasn't about herself. It was, from what

[1:09:57] I gathered, about that women who applied

[1:09:59] for the town manager role were passed

[1:10:01] over because of their gender.

[1:10:03] And that there was a push to hire a man

[1:10:05] regardless of merit.

[1:10:07] That's exactly the kind of concern, if

[1:10:09] genuine, that Wall should be expected to

[1:10:11] raise.

[1:10:12] And in raising it,

[1:10:14] I will say she was speaking,

[1:10:16] intentionally or not, for something like

[1:10:17] half the population that this council

[1:10:19] represents.

[1:10:21] So, I've run several legal departments.

[1:10:23] Discrimination is a real thing. And

[1:10:25] that's worth each of you really sitting

[1:10:27] with for a second. Given her concern

[1:10:29] that it was apparently became something

[1:10:31] so casual

[1:10:33] that the person who's supposed to become

[1:10:34] our mayor passed it along to a candidate

[1:10:37] who got the job like it was a funny

[1:10:39] piece of gossip

[1:10:41] rather than a complaint that he needed

[1:10:43] to take seriously. So, here's my

[1:10:45] question.

[1:10:46] >> Thank you. Thank you, Heather.

[1:10:46] >> Not whether an unethical, inappropriate

[1:10:49] behavior happened, that part's settled.

[1:10:51] But what is it you're going to do about

[1:10:52] it? And I'm going to give you some

[1:10:53] advice, some free advice.

[1:10:56] I think you should at a formal censure

[1:10:59] through an actual recorded vote rather

[1:11:01] than a comment from the dais.

[1:11:04] There should be a direct apology from

[1:11:06] Gold to Wall specifically

[1:11:08] and to the public rather than just this

[1:11:11] general statement of regret, which is

[1:11:12] how I read what he just said.

[1:11:15] It sounds like there's training

[1:11:16] happening. That's That's good.

[1:11:19] And I think there should be a commitment

[1:11:21] from Gold that he won't take up the

[1:11:22] mayor's seat on the current timeline or

[1:11:24] commitment from this council that you

[1:11:25] won't allow him if you're allowed to

[1:11:27] keep that from happening because handing

[1:11:29] him the gavel is akin to the council

[1:11:31] willfully promoting a bad actor.

[1:11:34] And then I will just add as a little

[1:11:36] side note and then I'll be done.

[1:11:38] There is a practical exposure question

[1:11:40] here if you don't decide to take action

[1:11:43] that's recorded.

[1:11:44] If this does become litigation,

[1:11:47] the record will show that the council

[1:11:48] had actual knowledge from its own

[1:11:50] commissioned investigation and chose not

[1:11:52] to act.

[1:11:53] So, I'd like to think about this as an

[1:11:55] isolated lapse in judgment by one member

[1:11:57] of the council, not something that the

[1:11:59] rest of you would have done in his

[1:12:00] position

[1:12:02] as a legal matter and not just a

[1:12:03] political one. If you decline to act on

[1:12:05] a sustained finding that is

[1:12:07] this serious, it functions in practice

[1:12:10] as approval of the conduct. So, silence

[1:12:13] here isn't some type of like safe

[1:12:14] default

[1:12:15] >> Yeah.

[1:12:16] >> that you should all take comfort in.

[1:12:17] It's a decision and it's one this

[1:12:19] council should think carefully about

[1:12:21] having on the record.

[1:12:22] >> Okay. Thank you, Heather.

[1:12:24] >> Thank you, Heather.

[1:12:26] >> Uh yes.

[1:12:27] >> Yeah. Welcome.

[1:12:28] >> Thanks. My name is Lexi Reese. I've been

[1:12:31] Woodside resident for 12 years. Um I

[1:12:34] have some questions for special counsel

[1:12:36] since you offered. Is that okay?

[1:12:38] Three questions. Um So, one, you said

[1:12:41] the investigator was identified by the

[1:12:43] town's liability carrier and your office

[1:12:47] retained under the carrier's protocols.

[1:12:50] So, who determined the scope of the

[1:12:52] investigation? Was it the council, your

[1:12:54] office, or the carrier?

[1:12:56] >> The scope of the investigation was

[1:12:58] determined by my office.

[1:13:00] >> Okay. And the corrective action is being

[1:13:03] recommended by your office, correct?

[1:13:06] >> Correct.

[1:13:07] >> And that action is an accepted apology

[1:13:11] and additional training.

[1:13:13] Did the council consider censure,

[1:13:16] removal from the mayor pro tem, or

[1:13:19] referral to the civil grand jury, and

[1:13:21] reject them, and I'd like that on the

[1:13:24] record.

[1:13:25] >> I can't disclose what the council

[1:13:27] considered in closed session, but I can

[1:13:29] say that all available legal remedies

[1:13:32] were considered by the council.

[1:13:34] >> Okay. And does a a full written

[1:13:37] investigative report exist beyond the

[1:13:40] five-page summary?

[1:13:41] >> Yes.

[1:13:43] >> If it's being withheld because of

[1:13:45] threatened litigation, will the council

[1:13:47] commit to releasing it once the

[1:13:49] litigation concludes?

[1:13:51] >> The master report investigation report

[1:13:54] is being withheld as a confidential

[1:13:57] personnel document.

[1:13:58] And the executive summary was um issued

[1:14:02] to the public in order for the public to

[1:14:04] understand what the

[1:14:06] uh findings of the investigation were,

[1:14:08] but the master report itself

[1:14:11] um

[1:14:12] has privacy interests that are

[1:14:14] presented.

[1:14:15] >> Mhm.

[1:14:16] >> And as a matter of law, the report is a

[1:14:18] confidential document.

[1:14:19] >> Okay. So, will it be released after the

[1:14:22] litigation concludes?

[1:14:24] >> It would be released subject to legal

[1:14:27] requirements. There has not been um to

[1:14:30] date a uh formal public records act

[1:14:33] request for the report. If and when

[1:14:35] there was a request, the town would

[1:14:37] review it in accordance with the public

[1:14:40] records act to determine if the report

[1:14:42] is disclosable.

[1:14:44] >> Yeah. Okay. So, I just want to register

[1:14:47] in addition to the two comments that

[1:14:49] were earlier. This is such a huge matter

[1:14:52] of transparency and accountability. It's

[1:14:54] so disappointing that this was item E on

[1:14:58] the last session before before the

[1:15:00] summer. Number one, register

[1:15:03] disappointment, expect our council and

[1:15:06] the staff to do better in articulating

[1:15:08] fully what's on the agenda so that

[1:15:10] everyone can participate.

[1:15:13] Um number two, I did not appreciate Mr.

[1:15:16] Gold

[1:15:17] grandstanding on the death of a

[1:15:20] bicyclist

[1:15:22] taking advantage of the opportunity that

[1:15:24] there was television in the room and

[1:15:26] saying, "Hey, we're here because in part

[1:15:28] I know there's an item discussing

[1:15:30] myself." And then

[1:15:33] it felt to me a blatant play on the

[1:15:36] public sympathy to talk about how vocal

[1:15:40] an advocate he is for cycling. I I

[1:15:43] accept that he may be, but that just

[1:15:46] seemed too staged. And then finally to

[1:15:51] recuse oneself, but to give another

[1:15:53] impassioned plea for how deeply sorry he

[1:15:57] is for letting the details of a

[1:16:01] investigate or of a hiring process,

[1:16:03] which we all know as has been so well

[1:16:06] stated by the people before me, is just

[1:16:09] wrong on so many levels. It just feels

[1:16:13] like we're not transparent, we're not

[1:16:16] accountable, and we're not operating

[1:16:18] with a level of professionalism that I

[1:16:20] know that we would all expect if we were

[1:16:23] in our day jobs. Thanks so much.

[1:16:26] >> Thank you, Ms. Reese.

[1:16:27] I think we'll

[1:16:29] I just have to jump to um

[1:16:31] Isaan, and then we'll jump back. Uh so,

[1:16:33] Isaan in the Zoom room?

[1:16:35] Welcome.

[1:16:36] >> I'm in.

[1:16:38] >> Hello.

[1:16:39] >> Can you hear me?

[1:16:40] >> We can hear you. You're a little

[1:16:41] muffled, but we can hear you.

[1:16:42] >> Sorry, I'm on an airplane about to

[1:16:43] leave. I'll keep this very short. I sent

[1:16:45] in my letter. Thank you for moving the

[1:16:46] agenda item up. The only thing I will

[1:16:48] say to echo Daryn,

[1:16:50] the smoke and fire thing,

[1:16:52] when you guys did something wrong,

[1:16:53] happened. This appears like a cover-up

[1:16:55] is worse than a crime situation. Please

[1:16:58] work to gain the town's trust. There are

[1:17:00] clearly a lot of people worried about

[1:17:01] this. Thank you.

[1:17:03] >> Thank you, Ethan. Uh now back to the

[1:17:05] room.

[1:17:07] Welcome.

[1:17:14] » There we go.

[1:17:15] Maybe.

[1:17:17] >> Perfect.

[1:17:18] >> Hello everybody. I'm Stacia Garr. I am

[1:17:21] resident at 252 Raimundo. I've been in

[1:17:23] Woodside for 11 years and in full

[1:17:26] transparency, my husband is the chair of

[1:17:28] the Planning Commission, so very well

[1:17:30] familiar with a lot of things around

[1:17:32] here. Um but professionally, I actually

[1:17:36] do research on HR and on organizational

[1:17:39] behavior. And one of the things that

[1:17:41] concerns me the most

[1:17:44] from that perspective is we're saying,

[1:17:46] "Hey, we're just going to roll out some

[1:17:48] training and that's going to fix what I

[1:17:49] think is fundamentally a culture

[1:17:51] problem." That's what I see the worst

[1:17:53] corporations in the world do

[1:17:56] and I would hate to see our own town do

[1:17:58] that. There are cultural changes that

[1:18:02] need to be made to this Town Council to

[1:18:05] change how we talk about each other, how

[1:18:08] we talk about the issues, and the

[1:18:10] transparency that we share within our

[1:18:13] town to build trust.

[1:18:16] So, that's my first point. Um the second

[1:18:18] point is I appreciate the previous

[1:18:21] person's question about what determined

[1:18:23] the scope of this investigation because

[1:18:26] a wealth of material has come out since

[1:18:29] then that nobody has touched. And it

[1:18:33] only reinforces the the

[1:18:35] problems that the Town council currently

[1:18:38] has with regard to the previously

[1:18:40] mentioned items. I do not understand why

[1:18:44] we are not touching that. We have just

[1:18:46] now heard that this is a personnel

[1:18:48] issue.

[1:18:49] And so we can't see that report. But oh

[1:18:52] my, this is not a personnel issue. This

[1:18:55] is a much bigger issue and there is all

[1:18:57] sorts of data out there that people have

[1:18:59] been requesting and is publicly

[1:19:01] available through those requests that

[1:19:03] should be analyzed, should be

[1:19:05] investigated, and we should be doing

[1:19:06] something about it.

[1:19:08] Because this is not okay. This is not

[1:19:12] how we should be represented

[1:19:14] within each other and to the world. And

[1:19:16] that information is public, you guys.

[1:19:19] If we don't do something, what's that

[1:19:21] going to say about us?

[1:19:22] We've already been on the New York Times

[1:19:24] cover for

[1:19:25] ridiculousness. We can't do that again.

[1:19:28] Please,

[1:19:29] censure

[1:19:31] Mr. Gold. Do not let him represent us

[1:19:33] next. Do not.

[1:19:36] And create a body that is something we

[1:19:39] can all be proud of.

[1:19:41] Thank you.

[1:19:44] >> Thank you. Yes.

[1:19:46] Please.

[1:19:48] >> Good evening, Mr. Chair, fellow council

[1:19:50] members,

[1:19:51] >> Good evening.

[1:19:54] » Uh my name's Christina Kamra. Can you

[1:19:56] hear me?

[1:19:56] >> Uh yeah, if you could just get a little

[1:19:58] closer to microphone.

[1:19:59] >> Uh I've lived in the town of Woodside

[1:20:01] for over 37 years and uh full

[1:20:03] disclosure, I was appointed by you guys

[1:20:07] uh to be on the ASRB.

[1:20:09] I've served in that position for about 3

[1:20:11] years and I

[1:20:14] I've been following this very closely

[1:20:17] and doing a little bit of my own

[1:20:19] research knowing as many people as I do

[1:20:21] throughout the town and

[1:20:24] what I'm speaking today to formally

[1:20:27] address the comments made by both member

[1:20:30] Gold and by member Brian Dombrowski as the same.

[1:20:35] >> there's one time to mispronounce it,

[1:20:37] it's now.

[1:20:38] >> Um

[1:20:38] that were all outlined in the

[1:20:40] whistleblower's comments.

[1:20:42] Uh these were not offhanded slips or

[1:20:45] mistakes or matters of political

[1:20:47] disagreements. They were blatant

[1:20:50] racially racist remarks targeted at our

[1:20:53] newest council member

[1:20:55] um

[1:20:56] Hassan Aberouch and they were the most

[1:21:00] demeaning and misogynous comments

[1:21:02] imaginable at our only female town

[1:21:06] council member.

[1:21:13] These These disparaging remarks were

[1:21:15] made by sitting members of this council.

[1:21:19] A body whose job it is is to represent

[1:21:22] every resident of the town regardless of

[1:21:26] their race or gender. That is the basic

[1:21:29] condition of holding this office.

[1:21:32] I'm calling on this council to take the

[1:21:35] following steps. Number one, let's just

[1:21:38] start with an apology.

[1:21:41] Number two, there should be a formal

[1:21:43] reprimand or censure that's entered into

[1:21:47] the public record so that it is not

[1:21:49] treated as a private matter or forgotten

[1:21:52] altogether.

[1:21:54] There should be a pledge from the

[1:21:56] council to enforce our code of conduct.

[1:22:01] And finally, my preference would be for

[1:22:04] these two council members

[1:22:06] Paul Gould and Brian Dombrowski to start

[1:22:10] the proceedings for removal from this

[1:22:12] council. Not only are these racist and

[1:22:16] sexist remarks, you have put us in a

[1:22:18] difficult position with um

[1:22:22] our housing element. The staff here, I

[1:22:24] look Look the hours our staff has put

[1:22:27] together working on these things only to

[1:22:30] be undermined by your backroom efforts

[1:22:34] of trying to work it in different ways.

[1:22:37] And I I'm sadly disappointed and I just

[1:22:41] hope that

[1:22:43] more is done that this is just not swept

[1:22:46] under the rug and that

[1:22:48] you

[1:22:50] I I believe you're resigning but I would

[1:22:53] hope that um Mr. Gould would resign as

[1:22:55] well um because um I think we can do

[1:22:58] better as a town.

[1:23:01] >> Thank you. Rick, did you want to comment

[1:23:03] on any of those statements?

[1:23:04] >> Uh yes, Mr. Mayor. I just want to make a

[1:23:06] point of the public that allegations

[1:23:09] racial uh sexist allegations were in the

[1:23:13] report. There were many allegations in

[1:23:15] the report.

[1:23:16] Um none of the allegations other than

[1:23:19] the one allegation that we were

[1:23:20] addressing tonight were deemed by the

[1:23:22] investigator to be supported by the

[1:23:24] evidence. It's very easy to make

[1:23:26] allegations. The investigation

[1:23:28] determined that there was no support for

[1:23:31] those particular allegations.

[1:23:33] >> I you know, two things can be true. That

[1:23:35] can be very well true that your

[1:23:37] investigator never found these

[1:23:39] allegations. Another thing could be true

[1:23:41] that they did say these racist things

[1:23:43] and the people in town when you ask

[1:23:45] them, you say, "Oh my god, did they say

[1:23:47] these things?" They go, "Yeah, that's

[1:23:49] the way they talk." So, I think in some

[1:23:51] ways both things can be true.

[1:23:55] » Okay. Uh thank you.

[1:23:57] Um

[1:23:59] Mr. Lubin.

[1:24:01] >> We'll get to you next, Ned.

[1:24:02] >> Steve Steve Lubin um

[1:24:05] I would like an explanation as to why

[1:24:07] there was no written report submitted

[1:24:09] for the agenda. It seems something as

[1:24:12] important as this warrants some

[1:24:13] supporting analysis

[1:24:15] or description of what the presentation

[1:24:17] would include.

[1:24:19] This further raises suspicion that there

[1:24:22] is an attempt to dismiss Jason's letter.

[1:24:24] I find this investigation to be

[1:24:27] incomplete at best.

[1:24:29] The report omits analysis of some of

[1:24:32] Jason Ledbetter's accusations. The one I

[1:24:36] find most egregious is Jason's

[1:24:38] description and one that affects me

[1:24:40] personally is Jason's description

[1:24:42] regarding a meeting he had with former

[1:24:44] council member Chris Shaw which included

[1:24:46] Bill Butler, the property owner of 773

[1:24:49] Caniato Road. Jason alleges that Shaw

[1:24:52] was mediating on behalf of the applicant

[1:24:55] to pressure the town to move forward

[1:24:57] when the project when the submittal was

[1:24:59] incomplete.

[1:25:00] I see no mention of the project being

[1:25:02] addressed in the so-called independent

[1:25:04] investigation. Jason's allegation is

[1:25:07] supported by a conversation I had with

[1:25:09] Bill Butler. I asked Bill, why is he

[1:25:12] spending so much money on an application

[1:25:14] which includes an unprecedented rezoning

[1:25:17] and flagrant violation of town planning

[1:25:19] standards.

[1:25:20] Bill said, "They told me so."

[1:25:23] I can only assume this means that he had

[1:25:25] received assurances that his proposed

[1:25:27] project would be received favorably. Why

[1:25:30] wasn't this addressed?

[1:25:33] Jason also

[1:25:34] made known the existence of the

[1:25:36] builder's remedy project on Jefferson.

[1:25:38] Shouldn't a thorough independent

[1:25:40] investigation investigate address this

[1:25:43] issue?

[1:25:44] I encounter many people who want to know

[1:25:46] what's going on in Woodside. I'm

[1:25:48] embarrassed that I don't have the

[1:25:50] answer.

[1:25:51] It is shameful that the town is the

[1:25:53] object of so much suspicion. It is the

[1:25:55] council's responsibility to open this

[1:25:57] investigation to public input and to

[1:26:00] shed more light on what has and is

[1:26:03] occurring. It is up to council to clear

[1:26:06] things up to avoid lingering suspicion.

[1:26:10] Soon the town undertook this

[1:26:12] investigation, several of us as soon as

[1:26:15] the town undertook this investigation,

[1:26:17] several of us requested input into the

[1:26:19] subjects to be investigated. No

[1:26:22] opportunity for public input was

[1:26:24] allowed.

[1:26:25] Many of us have asked for a truly

[1:26:27] independent investigation done by

[1:26:29] someone chosen by the citizens, not by

[1:26:32] the council, town attorney, or staff.

[1:26:34] This has not been done, and we continue

[1:26:37] to make that request.

[1:26:41] » Rick, anything Thank you, Steve.

[1:26:43] Anything you wanted to um

[1:26:44] say there before I'm moving on?

[1:26:46] >> I I can speak again to the the

[1:26:49] investigation itself. The investigation

[1:26:52] was

[1:26:53] um

[1:26:54] to address all of the allegations that

[1:26:57] were made by Mr. Ledbetter.

[1:27:00] was interviewed twice by

[1:27:02] the investigator

[1:27:03] to be sure the town understood all of

[1:27:06] the allegations that he was making.

[1:27:09] And all of the witnesses that he

[1:27:12] believed were um supported or supporting

[1:27:16] his allegations, all of the documents

[1:27:17] that he believed supported his

[1:27:19] allegations.

[1:27:21] So, the um

[1:27:23] investigation, as I understand it, uh

[1:27:27] was designed around what Mr. Ledbetter

[1:27:29] was claiming to be

[1:27:30] uh

[1:27:31] the misconduct and the allegations of

[1:27:33] inappropriate conduct. And all of those

[1:27:35] allegations were fully investigated.

[1:27:38] >> Quick follow-up question, Rick. Um did

[1:27:40] the investigator

[1:27:42] request or look at any of the documents

[1:27:46] that were produced in connection with

[1:27:48] the public record act requests?

[1:27:52] >> The investigator would have been

[1:27:53] operating uh separate and apart from the

[1:27:56] public records act process, but the

[1:27:57] investigator did ask um

[1:28:01] Mr. Ledbetter for any information,

[1:28:04] including documents, that supported his

[1:28:06] allegations.

[1:28:11] » Thank you. We're going to go to the Zoom

[1:28:12] room. Uh Mr. Fluitt.

[1:28:15] Hello, Ned.

[1:28:17] >> Good evening.

[1:28:19] Uh yeah, so my my name is Ned Fluitt,

[1:28:21] former council member of the town of

[1:28:23] Woodside, and I served with nearly

[1:28:25] everyone but one on the dais tonight. Um

[1:28:29] like a lot of people here, I read the

[1:28:30] whistleblower report when it came out.

[1:28:33] And besides the claims against Council

[1:28:35] Member Wall, I was frankly not surprised

[1:28:37] by any of the allegations. Um but

[1:28:40] because the allegations of racist and

[1:28:42] sexist language were not sustained by

[1:28:44] the investigator,

[1:28:46] I'm here tonight just to talk about the

[1:28:48] one finding this council's own

[1:28:49] investigator did sustain.

[1:28:52] Uh that

[1:28:53] Mayor Pro Tem Gold disclosed confident

[1:28:55] confidential closed session information

[1:28:57] to the town manager. Uh

[1:29:01] Sounds like this disclosure took place

[1:29:02] sometime last year, July 2025.

[1:29:06] Um

[1:29:07] it was described

[1:29:09] at a meeting that was the town manager's

[1:29:11] 60-day performance review,

[1:29:13] which was conducted by the mayor and the

[1:29:15] mayor pro tem, which for some reason was

[1:29:17] taking place at an upscale

[1:29:19] Woodside restaurant. Um

[1:29:21] but I think importantly, and something

[1:29:23] that's kind of been missed here, is Mr.

[1:29:24] Gold made that disclosure while

[1:29:26] Mayor Domkowski listened. A council

[1:29:29] member disclosed sensitive confidential

[1:29:30] information in front of the mayor of

[1:29:32] this town,

[1:29:33] and nothing happened for 7 months until

[1:29:35] a whistleblower

[1:29:37] report forced it into daylight. Um

[1:29:40] And look at where the silence has left

[1:29:41] us.

[1:29:42] This council hired Jason Ledbetter.

[1:29:45] Um

[1:29:45] less than a year later, he was gone,

[1:29:47] fired for cause. In between that and

[1:29:49] outside investigator, an outside law

[1:29:51] firm, 10 weeks of paid leave, a district

[1:29:53] attorney's review, an acting town

[1:29:54] manager, and now an interim town

[1:29:56] manager, and all this the residents have

[1:29:58] paid for every hour of it.

[1:30:00] And you know, what kind of disappoints

[1:30:02] me through all of this is I've not heard

[1:30:03] anyone say

[1:30:04] I did something wrong. Something Someone

[1:30:06] didn't Someone on this town council

[1:30:08] Someone on this room did something

[1:30:09] wrong.

[1:30:10] I've heard the town disagree with the

[1:30:11] district attorney when he declined to

[1:30:12] file charges.

[1:30:14] I've read, you know, some hand-wringing

[1:30:16] about what to do, what kind of

[1:30:17] corrective action should happen.

[1:30:19] But, the only admission of error I've

[1:30:20] ever heard happened tonight from Mr.

[1:30:22] Gold himself.

[1:30:24] Um

[1:30:25] Closed sessions exist so five people can

[1:30:27] speak candidly about personnel.

[1:30:29] And so that the person being discussed

[1:30:31] is protected while they do.

[1:30:33] Council member Council member Wall

[1:30:35] raised a concern in a room that was

[1:30:36] supposed to be confidential. But, it was

[1:30:38] carried out the door to the man it was

[1:30:40] about.

[1:30:41] That is the harm. It's not just a

[1:30:43] technicality.

[1:30:44] It's a serious violation.

[1:30:47] Um

[1:30:48] And it was not reported by anyone

[1:30:49] despite it being known by multiple

[1:30:51] people.

[1:30:53] The DA declined to prosecute because

[1:30:54] disclosure isn't a crime under the Brown

[1:30:56] Act, but he did name some remedies that

[1:30:58] do exist.

[1:30:59] Disciplinary actions by the council,

[1:31:01] referral to a civil grand jury.

[1:31:04] So, tonight I ask at the very least

[1:31:07] if not more, adopt a written resolution

[1:31:09] of censure.

[1:31:10] Name this conduct. Put it in the record.

[1:31:13] And like other speakers, do not hand Mr.

[1:31:16] Gold the gavel in December.

[1:31:18] This body, if people don't know, chooses

[1:31:20] its own mayor. And elevating the one

[1:31:22] member with a sustained finding against

[1:31:24] him would tell every Westside resident

[1:31:26] here that our standards are simply

[1:31:28] decorative.

[1:31:29] And I have to say, like one of the prior

[1:31:31] speakers,

[1:31:33] I was profoundly disgusted by Mr. Gold's

[1:31:34] use of the cyclist's death to grandstand

[1:31:37] and try to diminish his own ethical

[1:31:39] violations.

[1:31:41] Um

[1:31:41] I also ask

[1:31:43] the new town attorney to look into what

[1:31:45] happened today cuz it appears

[1:31:46] Council member Gold violated the Brown

[1:31:48] Act again by emailing the whole council

[1:31:51] his apology

[1:31:52] um prior to this meeting, clearly in

[1:31:55] order to persuade the council on this

[1:31:57] agenda item. So, it's still It's still

[1:31:59] happening.

[1:32:00] Uh listen, I I don't think anyone up

[1:32:02] here is a villain.

[1:32:03] But I do think everyone has been slow,

[1:32:05] quiet, and is just hoping that this

[1:32:06] thing passes. It won't. It shouldn't.

[1:32:09] Own it and fix it. Thank you.

[1:32:13] >> Thanks, Ned.

[1:32:15] Uh, okay. I think Oh, um Mr. Wall.

[1:32:19] >> Thanks.

[1:32:19] >> Uh, James Wall,

[1:32:21] uh, town resident. Um, full disclosure,

[1:32:24] married to Councilmember Wall.

[1:32:26] Um, I think I would sort of challenge

[1:32:28] the council to look in the mirror and really think about the culture of

[1:32:31] respect that you have here or lack

[1:32:33] thereof.

[1:32:34] Um, I think when you look at the

[1:32:36] sustained allegation,

[1:32:38] clear lack of respect for Councilmember

[1:32:39] Wall, um, and disclosing her real

[1:32:42] concerns about how the town council

[1:32:45] evaluated the

[1:32:46] uh, next town council uh, the next um,

[1:32:48] town manager,

[1:32:50] uh, whether it was done fully on merit

[1:32:51] or not, I think was a reasonable thing

[1:32:53] to ask and to pass that on to the one

[1:32:55] person who could create the most harm

[1:32:57] with it. Uh, I agree was just

[1:32:59] really not a lapse of judgment.

[1:33:01] Um, so that's kind of respect point one

[1:33:04] number one.

[1:33:05] Then you look at the unsustained

[1:33:06] allegations. Um, they are unsustained.

[1:33:09] You can tell me that again.

[1:33:11] But, uh,

[1:33:12] to the point of where there's smoke,

[1:33:14] there's fire,

[1:33:15] I uh, I really wonder, um, sometimes

[1:33:19] about the people that

[1:33:21] Councilmember Wall has decided to to

[1:33:23] work with not being respectful

[1:33:25] uh, and doing it uh, in closed sessions.

[1:33:28] And then the last is

[1:33:31] uh, when you look just factually at the

[1:33:33] way this council's behaved and some of

[1:33:34] the members, um, count there's been kind

[1:33:36] of a tradition of rotating the mayorship

[1:33:38] and and a number of times, uh,

[1:33:40] Councilmember Wall was passed over.

[1:33:43] Maybe it was politics.

[1:33:44] Maybe it was something else. Uh, I don't

[1:33:46] have specifics, but I think that all of

[1:33:49] those are not just a single

[1:33:51] lapse in judgment. And all of that will

[1:33:54] not be fixed with training. So I would

[1:33:55] ask you to all look in the mirror and

[1:33:57] see if you can build a culture of

[1:33:59] respect where people want to serve and give their time to this council.

[1:34:03] Thank you.

[1:34:04] >> Thank you, Mr. Wall.

[1:34:06] We will go to the Zoom room.

[1:34:09] Uh

[1:34:10] Debbie, you have the floor.

[1:34:13] >> Actually, this is Kevin Greenwood using

[1:34:15] Debbie.

[1:34:15] >> Oh, hi, Kevin. Okay.

[1:34:17] >> Um

[1:34:18] >> Welcome.

[1:34:19] >> I've been a resident for 16 years. And

[1:34:22] what comes up for me initially is that

[1:34:24] the insurance company's interest is

[1:34:26] always in not paying claims. Having

[1:34:29] worked in insurance for 35 years, I'd

[1:34:31] say I'm an expert on that.

[1:34:33] So, the town having an insurer-appointed

[1:34:36] attorney representing the council is a

[1:34:38] way to avoid paying claims, not an

[1:34:40] investigation. And at the outset, it was

[1:34:44] said

[1:34:45] he's coming in to investigate our our

[1:34:49] position, not

[1:34:52] something that's unbiased. I have no

[1:34:54] reason to think the investigator got

[1:34:55] anyone on the council to admit anything

[1:34:58] in substance

[1:34:59] for which you'd be guilty or

[1:35:01] responsible, and for which the insurance

[1:35:04] company might have to pay.

[1:35:06] Uh

[1:35:08] in what I heard initially from your

[1:35:10] attorney, the DA didn't seem to address

[1:35:12] Mr. Ledbetter's allegations. Maybe that

[1:35:14] was just left out of the conversation.

[1:35:17] But, I have no reason to think that Mr.

[1:35:20] Ledbetter's detailed report was

[1:35:21] erroneous.

[1:35:23] Um merely that accusations were not

[1:35:25] subject to proper outside investigation.

[1:35:28] Between questions of ethics and covering

[1:35:30] up the housing element issues,

[1:35:33] there's a problem.

[1:35:34] Based on prior personal experience with

[1:35:37] the town council, I have no reason to

[1:35:39] think there were not backroom deals

[1:35:40] because we've seen it in the past.

[1:35:43] We've also seen the way that the council handles public

[1:35:48] comments is once they cut off public

[1:35:51] comment, the council's free to speak

[1:35:53] with each other and to have stuff in the

[1:35:56] record on their behalf, and it can be

[1:35:58] completely erroneous. But, the public

[1:36:01] has no way to come back and say, "Wait a

[1:36:02] minute, you got that completely wrong."

[1:36:04] So,

[1:36:06] it's same old, same old. And I'm I'm

[1:36:09] sorry to see this. I'm sorry to see Mr.

[1:36:11] Ledbetter go because he's the first town

[1:36:13] manager in a long time

[1:36:16] that had the guts to really look at

[1:36:18] things and say, "This isn't what we

[1:36:20] bargained for."

[1:36:22] Thank you.

[1:36:25] » Uh thank you, Kevin.

[1:36:28] Uh any other comments from the room here

[1:36:31] on this item? Mr. Wilson.

[1:36:33] >> I did.

[1:36:34] >> Hi again.

[1:36:35] >> No prepared comments. I've actually

[1:36:37] given a TED speech before, but every

[1:36:39] time I come up here, I'm kind of

[1:36:40] nervous. So, I'll just speak frankly.

[1:36:44] But, I've lived here 13 years. I've been

[1:36:46] to these town council meetings probably

[1:36:48] 30, 40 times. I've lived in a lot of

[1:36:50] towns, many rich. I've never been to any

[1:36:52] other town council meetings. Every time

[1:36:54] I leave here, I'm mad or upset. Um and I

[1:36:59] actually came once and got a lot out of

[1:37:01] you guys. You guys nailed it. Um and so,

[1:37:04] I appreciate all of that. I do look at

[1:37:06] this, however, and say there's

[1:37:08] definitely a lot wrong wrong here, and

[1:37:10] it's been broken um for many years.

[1:37:13] Like, Jean has fought me tooth and nail,

[1:37:16] but we wound up proving her wrong.

[1:37:17] Still, she doesn't admit to it or

[1:37:19] anything like that. Um Sage, same. I've

[1:37:22] dealt with him for years. Same kind of

[1:37:24] thing. Um

[1:37:25] and what I really am amazed by, like, I

[1:37:28] wrote a note to you guys asking for you

[1:37:30] to look at, you know, losing Jean. Um

[1:37:34] and I basically called out people on

[1:37:36] here that I thought were leaving, but it

[1:37:38] he's not, which is crazy to me. Like, he

[1:37:41] must leave. He should not be the mayor,

[1:37:43] definitely. Um

[1:37:45] it's crazy for us to have to deal with

[1:37:47] this as a town. Um I don't think any of

[1:37:49] us deserve it. It's embarrassing to live

[1:37:52] here because this stuff constantly comes

[1:37:54] up. You've conducted some sort of

[1:37:56] investigation. It doesn't sound

[1:37:58] thorough. It sounds fake to me.

[1:38:02] And you know, I speak freely and just say

[1:38:06] I can't I don't can't believe you can

[1:38:08] look us in the eye and tell us that

[1:38:10] you've actually done your job. And

[1:38:12] whatever your money got paid, you know,

[1:38:16] you were brought in by them. And so it's

[1:38:19] just really disappointing to sit here. I

[1:38:21] wish I was done. You know, I told you

[1:38:22] guys I was done and here I am again and

[1:38:25] it's like

[1:38:27] it drives me crazy.

[1:38:29] A lot of people have come up to me and

[1:38:30] these are substantiated claims. They

[1:38:32] didn't get picked up by you. But there's

[1:38:35] a number of people that are ready to

[1:38:36] come in and talk about it all. And I

[1:38:39] think maybe what might be best is we

[1:38:40] come in and speak with you, the new town

[1:38:42] manager and and take time to walk

[1:38:45] through it, but like

[1:38:48] clean house. That's that's the directive

[1:38:50] I think from most people in this town

[1:38:53] and sitting there and letting it

[1:38:54] continue is ridiculous.

[1:38:57] Um

[1:38:59] she put forward a fake report to you.

[1:39:01] The report that came to you from her

[1:39:04] she said it was all my fault at my

[1:39:06] house.

[1:39:07] The engineering report and she blamed it

[1:39:09] on my shed. The engineering report

[1:39:12] basically said

[1:39:13] it wasn't even in the scope. So I've

[1:39:15] come to her and asked her to fix it and

[1:39:17] she just looks at me like that. Every

[1:39:19] time I see her, she looks at me like

[1:39:20] that.

[1:39:21] >> Bob Bob, just make sure you direct most

[1:39:23] of your comments this way.

[1:39:23] >> Okay. Well, I want to just kind

[1:39:25] >> Okay. I know.

[1:39:25] >> Yeah. I'm over it. And you know, that's

[1:39:28] the thing. Come talk to us. Come talk to

[1:39:31] us. No, I'm not over it. It just keeps

[1:39:33] coming up and it keeps coming up. And so

[1:39:35] like stop embarrassing us. Do what you

[1:39:37] got to do. Cut people loose.

[1:39:40] We don't want them around.

[1:39:43] Thank you.

[1:39:44] >> Thank you, Mr. Wilson.

[1:39:46] >> Last one.

[1:39:47] >> Uh

[1:39:48] >> Okay. Can I just ask, what's the purpose

[1:39:50] of tonight?

[1:39:52] What are What are we Like, what's the

[1:39:53] purpose of this agenda? We We heard your

[1:39:57] recommendation, and now do we accept the

[1:40:00] recommendation? Do you guys vote on the

[1:40:02] recommendation? What happens now?

[1:40:05] >> Rick, I'm going to again toss it to you

[1:40:07] on this.

[1:40:08] >> The The purpose of the item to

[1:40:12] present to the public the actions taken

[1:40:14] by the council to close out the

[1:40:16] investigation.

[1:40:17] >> So, do you consider it closed, or given

[1:40:20] the public comments, can we, the public,

[1:40:25] open the matter of censuring

[1:40:28] Mr. Gold,

[1:40:30] or take further action? Cuz I think what

[1:40:32] you're hearing is no one believes that

[1:40:35] training by itself is the right measure,

[1:40:37] no one here at least. So, I know that

[1:40:39] was your recommendation, but

[1:40:42] I having not spoken at the council

[1:40:43] meeting, I don't know what it is, but

[1:40:45] I'd like to formally, on behalf of

[1:40:47] everyone who spoke, say we don't accept

[1:40:49] the recommendation, and we want to take

[1:40:52] a different corrective action.

[1:40:55] >> So, the The corrective action to be

[1:40:57] taken is by the council?

[1:40:59] >> Okay.

[1:40:59] >> So, the It's the recommendation is just

[1:41:01] that, a recommendation to the council

[1:41:03] for the council to decide.

[1:41:05] >> Okay. And they decide tonight?

[1:41:08] Or can we calendar the

[1:41:12] decision?

[1:41:13] Can we agendize? That's a new word I've

[1:41:15] learned.

[1:41:16] >> The council um has decided on the

[1:41:20] recommendation that I presented tonight.

[1:41:23] This is That's the point of the report

[1:41:24] is to advise to advise the public on what the council

[1:41:29] has decided.

[1:41:34] » I don't I don't I don't

[1:41:36] >> I don't agree with that that

[1:41:38] characterization.

[1:41:39] >> I thought

[1:41:41] then why did we have public comment?

[1:41:44] >> The council can always reconsider and

[1:41:47] based on the public's comment is free to

[1:41:50] do that. You asked me what the council's

[1:41:51] what the point of the

[1:41:53] item was on the agenda for tonight and

[1:41:55] that was the point to report to the

[1:41:57] public the actions to be taken by the

[1:42:00] council based on the one sustained

[1:42:02] finding.

[1:42:03] >> I'm not trying to be a gadfly. I'm just

[1:42:04] saying did the council hear your

[1:42:07] recommendation before and has the

[1:42:08] council voted on and accepted this

[1:42:11] recommendation?

[1:42:13] >> Council has heard the recommendation

[1:42:15] before [clears throat]

[1:42:16] tonight and supported the the

[1:42:19] report and the recommendation.

[1:42:22] >> By majority?

[1:42:24] >> I'm not I'm not free to disclose what

[1:42:26] the council how the council voted.

[1:42:28] >> Okay. So I guess logged

[1:42:31] undissatisfaction by members of the

[1:42:33] public for

[1:42:35] process conclusion and ask for a public

[1:42:38] agenda first meeting first item when

[1:42:42] council's back from recess to reopen

[1:42:45] what is the corrective action for Mr.

[1:42:47] Gold and don't have Mr. Gold in the

[1:42:49] meeting to start that. We just discuss

[1:42:52] that and get through it and then

[1:42:54] if he's here then he comes for the rest

[1:42:57] request.

[1:42:59] Noted. Is it in the agenda?

[1:43:02] Does that go in the agenda or does that

[1:43:03] go in the notes?

[1:43:06] >> Your comments are part of the public

[1:43:07] record.

[1:43:08] >> Okay.

[1:43:08] >> But we'll have to figure out what we

[1:43:10] want to do as a council. But we

[1:43:11] appreciate your comments.

[1:43:12] >> The recommendation is noted. Okay. Thank

[1:43:14] you.

[1:43:15] >> I thank you. We're going to go to uh

[1:43:17] Thomas

[1:43:20] >> Yeah.

[1:43:21] >> We all still

[1:43:27] Yeah. So um

[1:43:29] uh

[1:43:30] just if if uh

[1:43:31] if you have comments we'll keep making

[1:43:33] sure everybody gets a chance to come to

[1:43:35] the microphone, but it's we just we do

[1:43:38] this in a orderly way, so everybody can

[1:43:40] be respectful and you

[1:43:42] the microphone is there when you're

[1:43:44] ready. Thank you.

[1:43:45] >> Yeah, but I just don't think it's

[1:43:46] respectful to have decided it's just

[1:43:49] training without the input of the public

[1:43:52] and to have had an agenda item as you

[1:43:54] did to sweep it under the carpet. That

[1:43:56] is not okay and that is not respectful

[1:43:58] and that is not transparent and which is

[1:44:00] why we're all saying this.

[1:44:02] >> Okay, thank you.

[1:44:03] >> This needs to change. The culture needs

[1:44:05] to change and even how you're handling

[1:44:07] this now

[1:44:09] is a is an indicative of the culture.

[1:44:14] » Hey but Bob, I got to take Can I just

[1:44:17] Can I take Tom Johnson is next on the

[1:44:19] list and I'm sure you'll enjoy the

[1:44:21] comments, so Tom.

[1:44:24] Mr. Johnson, you're live.

[1:44:27] >> Hello, good evening.

[1:44:29] >> Sir.

[1:44:29] Hello.

[1:44:31] We can hear you.

[1:44:32] >> Thank you.

[1:44:34] Council members,

[1:44:35] yeah, this is just a continuing story.

[1:44:39] Um, makes us wonder as citizens of the

[1:44:41] community how many other times things

[1:44:43] like this have slipped through because

[1:44:45] of quote, excuse me Jan, old boys club

[1:44:48] of wanting to protect each other versus

[1:44:51] the citizens of the town.

[1:44:53] You voted as a council to give

[1:44:55] yourselves money, a salary without even

[1:44:59] giving the community, the citizens of

[1:45:02] the town of Woodside that you supposedly

[1:45:04] swore an oath or two

[1:45:07] an opportunity to decide if town council

[1:45:10] members should get paid. This continues

[1:45:12] your whole concept of supporting each

[1:45:16] other and not the community.

[1:45:19] Um, it's just the insurance company

[1:45:22] is to their benefit to make sure that

[1:45:26] nothing was found in Mr. Ledbetter's

[1:45:29] report. That's obvious. Anyone can see

[1:45:32] what's going on there. The fact that

[1:45:35] there's been no full report and it's

[1:45:37] disguised under an HR issue to make it

[1:45:41] more difficult for transparency to the

[1:45:44] public. I agree with the other speakers

[1:45:47] here this evening that if the town

[1:45:49] council decides just oh, we're just

[1:45:51] going to have training that that'll take

[1:45:53] care of the issue. That this is not the

[1:45:56] appropriate solution. The town council

[1:45:59] needs to look at themselves in a mirror

[1:46:03] and be able to see what the truth is

[1:46:06] because we as citizens are not seeing

[1:46:09] the truth that we deserve

[1:46:12] from our town council.

[1:46:14] Thank you very much.

[1:46:17] >> Thank you, Mr. Johnson. Um

[1:46:19] Sure. Miss Miss Lubin.

[1:46:25] » Hi, I just want to um

[1:46:28] say that I I agree the report is

[1:46:30] incomplete.

[1:46:32] Um it did not address

[1:46:34] the item on Kenyatta Road and the fact

[1:46:37] that a former council member

[1:46:39] was having secret meetings with a

[1:46:42] developer. So, that allegation was not

[1:46:46] addressed.

[1:46:47] And

[1:46:49] maybe

[1:46:50] No, not maybe.

[1:46:52] Most of these are not considered

[1:46:55] criminal, but they are most certainly

[1:46:57] unethical.

[1:46:59] And that

[1:47:01] is icky.

[1:47:03] And it makes everybody feel bad. And it

[1:47:06] it's almost a higher bar

[1:47:09] to correct an unethical behavior. With

[1:47:12] criminal, it's much more clear-cut.

[1:47:16] We want the council to succeed. We want

[1:47:18] the town to be better. We're all here

[1:47:20] tonight asking for your advice and

[1:47:24] whether you participate any of you

[1:47:26] participated in any of this, I don't

[1:47:28] care.

[1:47:29] We're asking you to fix it.

[1:47:32] And that's that Kensico Road project is

[1:47:35] just one example and the Jefferson

[1:47:37] project is another example and and the

[1:47:40] allegations for for Jen.

[1:47:43] Please

[1:47:46] do something and do it right.

[1:47:48] You know, don't leave us with this

[1:47:50] lingering suspicion. Okay, it just

[1:47:54] I agree with Steve. I'm at the market.

[1:47:56] I'm all over town. People ask me what

[1:47:58] the hell is going on with Woodside and I

[1:48:01] as you know, have lived here for a long time and I don't have an answer and

[1:48:06] that makes me feel icky. Okay?

[1:48:11] » Thank you Mr. Mayor. Let me just speak

[1:48:13] to that. Um, the

[1:48:15] executive summary of the report and all

[1:48:17] of the findings and the conclusions

[1:48:20] that you're referring to

[1:48:22] were made public on April 25th, 2026.

[1:48:25] To my knowledge, there wasn't any

[1:48:28] uh, request from the public that

[1:48:31] allegations needed to be looked at or

[1:48:34] allegations were not looked at or to my

[1:48:36] knowledge and correct me if I'm wrong,

[1:48:38] there were no public requests for the

[1:48:40] investigation to be conducted a

[1:48:43] different way, to be expanded.

[1:48:45] And that's and the the reason why the

[1:48:48] executive summary was made a public

[1:48:50] document was to provide the public that

[1:48:53] information

[1:48:55] as soon as it was received by the town.

[1:48:58] >> One quick follow-up. Brooke, can you

[1:48:59] remind us how the executive summary was

[1:49:02] made available to the public?

[1:49:06] » It was Yes, it was um,

[1:49:09] posted as the town posted public

[1:49:12] documents or public notices.

[1:49:14] >> So, it It

[1:49:15] >> For a press release.

[1:49:16] >> It was posted on the website.

[1:49:18] >> I believe so. It was issued as a press

[1:49:20] release.

[1:49:22] And the town followed

[1:49:24] protocols it normally follows for a

[1:49:25] press release.

[1:49:30] » I believe someone was trying to speak

[1:49:31] on the Zoom.

[1:49:32] >> Yeah, I've got two. I just I balanced my

[1:49:34] out, but thank you. Um

[1:49:37] we're on second bites of the apple for

[1:49:38] everybody here. So, Heather King, we're

[1:49:40] back to you again.

[1:49:43] >> Yeah, I just wanted to offer up some

[1:49:45] suggestions because if I'm hearing

[1:49:48] correctly

[1:49:49] I feel like I'm hearing that there

[1:49:50] aren't actions that you can take and

[1:49:52] there's a range of actions that I can

[1:49:54] come I can think of. So, let me just

[1:49:55] list some of them out, all right?

[1:49:58] One is that you could actually one of

[1:50:00] the council members could raise a motion

[1:50:02] to censure Gold

[1:50:04] or to a formal reprimand. I guess

[1:50:06] somebody would have to second it.

[1:50:08] If you're not prepared to do that

[1:50:09] tonight, you could do a motion directing

[1:50:12] the town attorney or outside counsel

[1:50:15] to return with additional disciplinary

[1:50:17] recommendations including Brown Act

[1:50:19] disclosure exposure if that hasn't been

[1:50:22] ruled out.

[1:50:23] You could do um

[1:50:26] a motion to condition or pause the

[1:50:29] mayoral transition

[1:50:31] pending resolution of the matter that's

[1:50:33] been discussed tonight.

[1:50:35] You could do a motion to refer the

[1:50:37] closed session um disclosure for

[1:50:39] additional determination.

[1:50:42] You could do a motion to continue the

[1:50:43] item to a date certain meeting.

[1:50:46] There's there's various things that the

[1:50:48] council members have

[1:50:51] at hand.

[1:50:53] I would urge you to do something.

[1:50:59] » Thank you, Heather. Heather

[1:51:01] We are back to this room again. So, any

[1:51:04] other

[1:51:05] bites at the apple?

[1:51:09] Okay.

[1:51:09] Is that

[1:51:10] Okay. [clears throat] We're definitely

[1:51:12] not We're not do three, but come on,

[1:51:14] Bob.

[1:51:14] >> All right, cool.

[1:51:15] Um I'll keep it short. Um

[1:51:17] but it's it's just definitely one of

[1:51:19] these things where

[1:51:21] it separates itself from the normal

[1:51:23] world, the way we operate at other

[1:51:25] places. When we operate at startups, I

[1:51:27] worked for Bloom Energy, KR would have

[1:51:29] fired me had I done anything from a

[1:51:32] confidential information perspective. It

[1:51:34] seems like what's really bothered me is

[1:51:37] it's sort of this above the law

[1:51:40] thing. And then what I also see is like

[1:51:43] people are afraid of you. People are

[1:51:44] afraid of you, big time. So, if people

[1:51:47] come

[1:51:48] they they want to get their house built,

[1:51:49] but they know if they don't if they talk

[1:51:51] bad about that guy, it's not going to

[1:51:53] happen. So, I think that's where you get

[1:51:55] a lot of

[1:51:57] stuff where people are pretty hesitant.

[1:51:59] But, I mean what I would suggest is

[1:52:01] maybe we do another investigation. We

[1:52:03] got We got to spend some more money and

[1:52:05] actually have other people speak to this

[1:52:07] gentleman.

[1:52:09] Um

[1:52:09] It's just

[1:52:11] something has to happen. Um

[1:52:13] and just trying to push this under the

[1:52:15] rug, act like it's nothing. Um it's

[1:52:19] There's just so many people around this

[1:52:20] town that know about so many different

[1:52:23] things, and they're afraid to come up

[1:52:24] here. I'm not cuz I have Asperger's and

[1:52:26] I don't care. But,

[1:52:29] >> [laughter]

[1:52:29] >> but people need to come and speak

[1:52:31] freely. I mean, it's brutal to watch all

[1:52:34] this happen and just sit here and have

[1:52:37] to think, you know, we're powerless, and

[1:52:40] we shouldn't be. Um

[1:52:42] Our thoughts should be respected. We

[1:52:44] should be treated well. Um people

[1:52:47] shouldn't say bad things about us or

[1:52:48] other people. It This should be a normal

[1:52:51] town. It's just not. It's just so not.

[1:52:53] It's like it's a SNL skit or something

[1:52:56] like that. We're in the newspaper.

[1:52:58] There's all these crazy accusations that

[1:52:59] always come out. Just

[1:53:01] it needs to be done. Off with its head,

[1:53:04] basically. So, I'll stop talking, but

[1:53:07] >> Okay.

[1:53:08] >> I think more needs to happen.

[1:53:11] >> Thank you, Bob.

[1:53:13] Uh

[1:53:14] All right, any other Yes, couple

[1:53:17] Oh, well, first time wins, of course.

[1:53:20] Please.

[1:53:23] » Pat Elgavio, 35-year resident, ASRB.

[1:53:26] I also believe that a slap on the wrist

[1:53:28] and a good uh little bit of training is

[1:53:31] not ample for for this situation. If it

[1:53:33] was the private uh industry, there's no

[1:53:36] way that he would be able to continue

[1:53:37] with his position. And I think both of

[1:53:40] you gentlemen should consider stepping

[1:53:41] down. Thank you.

[1:53:44] >> Thanks, Pat.

[1:53:47] And yes.

[1:53:50] » So, I just wanted to make clear cuz some

[1:53:53] other folks have made some requests very

[1:53:54] clear. My request is that we

[1:53:58] reopen the investigation, take into

[1:54:00] account all of the new information and

[1:54:02] data that has come to light, and that

[1:54:05] decisions are made that will reflect

[1:54:08] ethical behaviors that set a standard

[1:54:12] for all of us moving forward. And if

[1:54:14] that means that some portion, maybe a

[1:54:17] large portion of the council decides to

[1:54:20] leave,

[1:54:21] that is probably what's going to be

[1:54:22] best. You've got a lot of people who

[1:54:24] really care, and who, if not afraid to

[1:54:28] speak up, as Bob mentioned, cuz I know

[1:54:29] some of those folks, too.

[1:54:31] Um

[1:54:33] you know, people who will serve.

[1:54:35] You had Melinda earlier. She's serving.

[1:54:38] She's tried before. She's done other

[1:54:40] things. There's people who will serve.

[1:54:42] So, please don't let ego get in the way

[1:54:45] of doing the right thing for this town,

[1:54:48] and giving space for people who really,

[1:54:51] truly believe that we should have an

[1:54:53] ethical,

[1:54:55] high-quality council we can be proud of.

[1:54:57] Thanks.

[1:54:59] >> You?

[1:55:01] And we'll jump uh

[1:55:03] right to the Zoom room. Uh Maggie Ma, Mrs. Ma.

[1:55:11] » Yes, good evening.

[1:55:12] >> the floor. Good evening.

[1:55:14] >> Thank you. Um I I would just like to say

[1:55:16] that with all of this serious

[1:55:19] allegations that

[1:55:21] uh I think a lot of people are unsettled

[1:55:23] with the resolution that has been

[1:55:26] presented to us.

[1:55:28] Um I think a lot of us are uncomfortable

[1:55:30] with that. And I would like to suggest

[1:55:34] that

[1:55:35] um the idea that the only action to come out of this

[1:55:43] to have Paul Geld be the person who

[1:55:49] is censured or whatever action is deemed

[1:55:52] to be taken

[1:55:53] is is really not right.

[1:55:56] There's an awful lot here and I I don't

[1:55:59] feel comfortable

[1:56:01] with that being a resolution of all of

[1:56:05] this. So, that is my hope that that that

[1:56:09] there be

[1:56:10] um

[1:56:12] a very

[1:56:13] equitable

[1:56:15] honest

[1:56:16] and just

[1:56:17] situation and that we can move forward

[1:56:19] from that, but I don't feel that he

[1:56:21] should be the scapegoat for this and

[1:56:23] that it be decided

[1:56:26] and passed over

[1:56:28] in in that in that regard. I just don't

[1:56:30] think that's right. Thank you.

[1:56:34] >> Thank you.

[1:56:35] Okay, any last comments on public

[1:56:38] comment?

[1:56:43] Okay, seeing none

[1:56:46] we will close public comment.

[1:56:48] Uh do any members of the council have

[1:56:50] any further comments?

[1:56:53] >> No.

[1:56:58] >> I

[1:57:00] I'm stunned that my fellow council

[1:57:01] members have no further comment.

[1:57:04] I'm absolutely stunned and speechless

[1:57:07] to hear all of that public comment from

[1:57:09] residents and to say nothing. Maybe we can go down the dais and give

[1:57:13] people one more opportunity.

[1:57:16] » Well, what do you want me to say?

[1:57:18] >> It's disrespectful to us.

[1:57:19] >> I mean, anything I say can go on the

[1:57:21] record

[1:57:22] >> [clears throat]

[1:57:23] >> and and potentially affect our our

[1:57:25] credibility with the uh

[1:57:27] justice for the um lawsuit.

[1:57:30] Am I correct?

[1:57:33] » The uh

[1:57:35] the matter is uh considered threatened

[1:57:37] litigation and as a matter of

[1:57:41] law, anything that the council speaks to

[1:57:44] publicly chaining to the litigation, Mr.

[1:57:47] Ledbetter's employment would be a matter

[1:57:50] of record in that litigation. That's why

[1:57:52] as a matter of threatened litigation,

[1:57:53] the council has been advised not to

[1:57:55] speak publicly on Mr. Ledbetter's

[1:57:57] employment or the allegations in his

[1:58:00] complaint.

[1:58:02] >> So, it's true.

[1:58:07] » I'd I'd be happy to speak. Um

[1:58:11] uh while considering the advice of

[1:58:13] counsel not to speak,

[1:58:15] um

[1:58:16] I I really appreciate all of your

[1:58:18] comments today

[1:58:19] and I

[1:58:21] uh

[1:58:22] it's been eye-opening for me.

[1:58:24] Um

[1:58:25] and

[1:58:26] I share a lot of the same thoughts and

[1:58:28] feelings as many of you about

[1:58:30] accountability

[1:58:32] of public figures and the importance of

[1:58:34] transparency.

[1:58:36] And so, sitting up here, uh I'm a bit

[1:58:38] torn.

[1:58:40] As one as a lawyer um and

[1:58:43] regularly telling my clients don't talk

[1:58:46] about things and hoping that they listen

[1:58:48] to my advice

[1:58:49] and then

[1:58:50] um being advised not to talk

[1:58:53] and being in a position where I'd like

[1:58:54] to talk

[1:58:56] and

[1:58:57] um

[1:58:59] So,

[1:59:00] I wasn't planning to talk. So, this is

[1:59:05] um

[1:59:09] But, I I I absolutely agree that things

[1:59:11] need to be taken seriously.

[1:59:12] Um

[1:59:13] and that we as a council need to explore

[1:59:17] uh what more we can do.

[1:59:20] Um

[1:59:21] and I think uh selection of the next

[1:59:24] mayor

[1:59:25] is something that will be decided by the

[1:59:28] incoming town council.

[1:59:30] I believe in

[1:59:31] December.

[1:59:33] And so, that is uh but I I hear you all

[1:59:36] loud and clear.

[1:59:37] Um

[1:59:39] and uh

[1:59:49] And I I

[1:59:50] Yeah, I um

[1:59:53] I'm not ready to I don't know where to

[1:59:55] go from here exactly, but I do agree and

[1:59:57] appreciate every all of your comments

[1:59:59] and I agree to work towards everything

[2:00:01] that you've said and I've made lists a

[2:00:03] full list of your recommendations and requests and

[2:00:07] I

[2:00:08] um

[2:00:09] I definitely intend to to do what I can

[2:00:12] to work towards this.

[2:00:16] » Yeah, I mean, this is an interesting one

[2:00:18] where we've been advised not to talk. Um

[2:00:22] you know,

[2:00:25] the investigation

[2:00:27] uh

[2:00:30] determined that

[2:00:31] the issues tied to me were unfounded and

[2:00:33] not sustained. Uh and that said, um

[2:00:37] like others on this council that have

[2:00:38] said things

[2:00:40] we're taking

[2:00:42] this very very personally. I'm very

[2:00:43] humbled

[2:00:45] uh by this process uh and all the

[2:00:47] conversations I've had with folks

[2:00:50] uh, in the community, um,

[2:00:52] the degree we could have those

[2:00:53] conversations, uh, and I just first and

[2:00:56] foremost, um,

[2:00:59] you know, there's this old saying that

[2:01:00] experience is what you get right after

[2:01:02] you need it. And, um,

[2:01:04] uh, in in hindsight, there are things,

[2:01:07] um,

[2:01:08] uh, I don't think I would have spent 1

[2:01:10] oz of time outside of any regular

[2:01:12] meeting, uh,

[2:01:15] than than than than than I would have,

[2:01:17] right? Uh, but I did. And, um,

[2:01:21] I apologize for that, and I apologize

[2:01:23] for any statements that I've ever made,

[2:01:25] uh, that were insensitive in any way or

[2:01:28] hurtful. I hope I hope they I have not

[2:01:30] made those statements, but, uh, if if

[2:01:33] anything is perceived that way, uh, it

[2:01:36] is completely against

[2:01:39] who I am and the actions that I take,

[2:01:41] uh, to,

[2:01:43] you know, be better for the town and be

[2:01:45] as productive as I can for the town.

[2:01:46] This has been an awful experience, uh,

[2:01:49] for all of us. Um,

[2:01:51] I know the council as a whole is very

[2:01:53] committed,

[2:01:55] uh, [snorts]

[2:01:55] to making sure that we do safeguard

[2:01:57] confidential information, and that uh,

[2:02:00] we have integrity in our processes, and

[2:02:02] we treat people with respect. And I I

[2:02:05] hope everybody that's ever come to this,

[2:02:06] I hope in a public setting has seen

[2:02:10] at least a culture that I

[2:02:12] truly thought was very respectful. And,

[2:02:15] um,

[2:02:17] you know, it's a terrible thing to go through.

[2:02:22] And, um,

[2:02:23] uh, I you know, I I would just say that

[2:02:26] we all take the matter very seriously. I

[2:02:28] know, uh, that Councilmember Gold takes

[2:02:30] the matter very seriously. Uh,

[2:02:33] we've had a recommendation to accept the

[2:02:35] apology. Uh, that is a recommendation

[2:02:38] that I, um,

[2:02:40] I concur with.

[2:02:42] Uh and so uh that's that's where I stand

[2:02:46] on this and um I'm very committed to

[2:02:50] integrity. I won't be here for the

[2:02:52] mayor-ship decision. Um

[2:02:56] but

[2:02:57] that's that's an interesting question as

[2:02:58] well.

[2:03:05] » Um I'm going to start with process. So

[2:03:11] when I went and picked up my agenda

[2:03:12] packet on Friday

[2:03:14] I was

[2:03:16] so surprised to see the way that this

[2:03:19] item was described on our agenda.

[2:03:22] No reasonable person would have it any

[2:03:26] clue

[2:03:27] what the agenda item was meant to be

[2:03:29] about. And I think that's a glaring

[2:03:33] example of lack of transparency and lack

[2:03:37] of accountability.

[2:03:39] Um

[2:03:43] And I And I had a different expectation.

[2:03:45] Um I expected that

[2:03:48] the item would be described as a

[2:03:52] you know, I I did I don't know what

[2:03:54] specific words I envisioned but I

[2:03:56] absolutely envisioned that it was going

[2:03:59] to be described as a discussion

[2:04:01] centering around

[2:04:03] the

[2:04:04] sustained allegation against Allgold so

[2:04:08] that the public would be able to

[2:04:11] hear

[2:04:12] um and to show up and express their

[2:04:15] concerns. So process point number one.

[2:04:18] Um

[2:04:20] I also asked for but did not receive the

[2:04:24] uh

[2:04:25] our the oral report. Um so had no time

[2:04:30] to really process it or prepare for that

[2:04:32] and I think um

[2:04:35] I think that's also a a big process error.

[2:04:39] We cannot be expected as council members

[2:04:41] to

[2:04:43] digest an oral report night of

[2:04:47] and react to it

[2:04:50] and and and be up here and to be able to

[2:04:54] substantively

[2:04:56] engage and so I think that was a real

[2:04:57] process lapse as well.

[2:05:01] Um

[2:05:02] I'm a former litigator.

[2:05:04] I am a lawyer. I I spent five years as a

[2:05:07] litigator.

[2:05:09] I fully appreciate the advice

[2:05:12] not to

[2:05:14] discuss more than is necessary. A

[2:05:17] personnel matter and this one

[2:05:21] is a very disturbing personnel matter

[2:05:24] that created a lot of chaos at the town.

[2:05:28] And so while I do appreciate that

[2:05:30] advice,

[2:05:32] um

[2:05:33] the facts are out there.

[2:05:35] The investigation

[2:05:38] led to some factual conclusions

[2:05:41] that are not going to be disputed at

[2:05:43] litigation and that is that Paul Gold

[2:05:46] did in fact

[2:05:47] make the disclosure to the town manager

[2:05:51] and then that had very serious

[2:05:53] consequences.

[2:05:57] And

[2:05:58] I think that more needs to be done. I

[2:06:02] don't think I do accept Paul's apology

[2:06:06] and I'm really glad that he owned up to

[2:06:09] a lapse in judgment

[2:06:12] and that he What was the words that he

[2:06:15] used? Um that it was inappropriate and

[2:06:18] it was a lapse of judgment but you know,

[2:06:20] I think as a council the apology is just

[2:06:23] one piece of this and I absolutely think

[2:06:26] more needs to be done

[2:06:28] and I I think there was uh due process

[2:06:32] tonight in terms of giving uh notice

[2:06:35] that this is what we were going to be

[2:06:36] discussing. Um I I hear loud and clear

[2:06:41] from the members of the public that um

[2:06:43] there is a clear demand, a clear signal

[2:06:46] for more repercussions.

[2:06:48] Um

[2:06:49] and so I do believe as a council we

[2:06:52] could deliberate that this evening.

[2:06:54] Um or we could agendize it for a future time. Um

[2:06:59] Uh I've heard a number of suggestions, a

[2:07:02] censure, a reprimand.

[2:07:04] Um

[2:07:05] and uh for you know, a commitment by Mr.

[2:07:09] Gold not to um try to become mayor next

[2:07:12] year. I think those are all really good

[2:07:13] suggestions.

[2:07:14] Um I guess I would be interested to hear

[2:07:16] from my fellow council members if they

[2:07:18] would be open to deliberation on that or

[2:07:20] if they have already made up their mind

[2:07:21] that um the recommendation to accept the

[2:07:25] apology and to um undertake additional

[2:07:28] training is um

[2:07:30] is all that they're going to to to

[2:07:33] consider.

[2:07:37] » Thank you.

[2:07:38] Um any response to that or

[2:07:41] further commentary from council?

[2:07:46] » I'm open to it.

[2:07:50] Uh

[2:07:51] is that the two the two suggestions if

[2:07:53] that's what you're you would move to?

[2:07:55] >> Open to let me see more.

[2:07:59] >> Okay. Yeah, great. Do you want to say

[2:08:01] open to to uh what exactly?

[2:08:04] >> Further proceeding or or adjusting it

[2:08:05] tonight if you wanted to put up a vote.

[2:08:08] Uh or

[2:08:09] if you had something specific in mind.

[2:08:11] Um

[2:08:12] further deliberation.

[2:08:17] What's on the table?

[2:08:19] What are you asking for?

[2:08:21] I need a refresher on what you just were

[2:08:23] asking for. Apologies.

[2:08:25] >> Yeah.

[2:08:27] I think at a minimum a reprimand

[2:08:30] a formal reprimand that goes on the

[2:08:31] record is appropriate.

[2:08:33] Um

[2:08:35] and I think that

[2:08:38] we as a council should and I'm not sure

[2:08:40] how to go about this procedurally.

[2:08:42] Um but I think we need new leadership in this town and I don't

[2:08:48] think that um and at the end of

[2:08:54] And I I really I really would hate to

[2:08:56] see us have to have a similar

[2:08:58] conversation like this should Paul try

[2:09:01] to put himself up for mayor when we do

[2:09:03] the council reorganization. So if there

[2:09:06] would be a way to short circuit that and

[2:09:08] say that you know as a council we don't

[2:09:11] want that to happen that he'll just be a

[2:09:12] regular if he chooses to stay on the

[2:09:13] council um I had you know I have I have

[2:09:16] heard I I have been made aware that he

[2:09:18] was um considering retiring before this

[2:09:21] all went down and would decided to stay

[2:09:23] on the council

[2:09:25] um to see um

[2:09:27] the conclusion of the investigation out.

[2:09:30] Um so there's a question in my mind you

[2:09:32] know we are entering an election season.

[2:09:35] Um you know

[2:09:37] is council member Gold interested in in

[2:09:40] pursuing his retirement like he had

[2:09:41] considered in the past. Um that would

[2:09:44] make it possible for somebody new to run

[2:09:45] for his seat. Um that of course is his

[2:09:48] decision so um and I don't think there's

[2:09:50] appetite on the council to remove him.

[2:09:52] Um so I think at a minimum um

[2:09:56] a commitment that he um will

[2:10:00] not be um in a position to be mayor in

[2:10:04] December. Um we've heard that from a

[2:10:06] number of people. I think that would be

[2:10:07] an important part of um

[2:10:10] what more we could do here.

[2:10:15] » I'm not

[2:10:16] >> Uh

[2:10:16] >> I'm not sure what we have the power to

[2:10:18] do uh with that part. I don't I we can

[2:10:20] remove him as a council member

[2:10:22] even if we wanted to, but not saying

[2:10:24] that's on the table, but

[2:10:25] >> I think we could, but you'd have to

[2:10:26] agendize that.

[2:10:28] >> I don't think we have that power, but um

[2:10:31] for the the

[2:10:32] >> You're not able

[2:10:33] >> the mayor

[2:10:34] uh question um if you are are open would

[2:10:38] be interested in

[2:10:40] putting your name in the hat for mayor,

[2:10:41] I would support that. I think I'm going

[2:10:42] to be the only person sitting here next

[2:10:45] in December that's still on the

[2:10:47] >> I

[2:10:48] very much appreciate that vote of

[2:10:49] confidence, but I think that's something

[2:10:51] that the the new council I mean I think

[2:10:53] they would have to figure out who they

[2:10:54] would want to nominate. So that I think

[2:10:55] that's that's a question for December,

[2:10:57] but I think tonight and again maybe need

[2:11:01] some advice from legal counsel like

[2:11:02] could we structure

[2:11:04] um a reprimand to include a direction

[2:11:06] that um we would not um

[2:11:09] we would not like Councilmember Gold to

[2:11:11] we would like him to to be a a regular

[2:11:13] councilmember

[2:11:15] um and not as is typical a seat um from

[2:11:18] vice mayor to mayor in December.

[2:11:20] >> I need some color on this.

[2:11:22] >> So uh a couple of things um under

[2:11:25] California law you're not able to uh

[2:11:28] only the electorate can remove a elected

[2:11:32] um councilmember. So

[2:11:34] um

[2:11:34] that's always an option for people in

[2:11:37] the community, but the council agendized

[2:11:39] or not you can't remove a councilmember.

[2:11:42] The second thing is that if

[2:11:46] So we're here at this juncture because

[2:11:49] the council previously directed

[2:11:52] that there wasn't an appetite for such a

[2:11:56] hearing.

[2:11:57] If you um

[2:11:59] would like to make a motion

[2:12:01] to do a hearing, then there's a

[2:12:03] procedural way that the

[2:12:06] uh legal counsel can tell you to have

[2:12:08] it's a hearing

[2:12:10] um etc. So

[2:12:14] um

[2:12:15] >> Thank you, Pam. Appreciate that. I think

[2:12:17] um so I just to be clear, I wasn't I

[2:12:19] wasn't suggesting that we remove

[2:12:20] Councilmember Gold.

[2:12:22] Um, and thank you for that

[2:12:23] clarification.

[2:12:24] Um, what I heard from our outside

[2:12:26] counsel is that it's it's up to this

[2:12:28] body, to the town council, to figure out

[2:12:30] what to do about the sustained

[2:12:31] allegation. And that does not require,

[2:12:34] as a matter of law, an another

[2:12:35] agendaized session. That we can, you

[2:12:38] know, having, um, heard the report out

[2:12:40] from Rick, having, uh, heard commentary

[2:12:44] from lots of people in the community,

[2:12:47] um, that we can decide tonight, um, what

[2:12:50] if anything more we would want to do.

[2:12:54] » So, uh, again, let me just speak to

[2:12:58] procedure. So, the point of the agenda item tonight was

[2:13:03] to present to the public the steps

[2:13:07] to address the steps the council had

[2:13:09] determined to take

[2:13:11] to address the one sustained allegation.

[2:13:15] The council can certainly, um,

[2:13:18] take all of the comments and all of the

[2:13:20] information received today, this

[2:13:23] evening, under consideration for a

[2:13:25] future

[2:13:26] council,

[2:13:27] um, meeting, decision, and meeting.

[2:13:30] Um, the point of tonight's

[2:13:33] matter was to present to the public the

[2:13:35] steps the council decided on.

[2:13:38] Can further steps be taken or

[2:13:39] considered? Of course, but

[2:13:42] at this evening's meeting, this was what

[2:13:44] the council decided to do, and that's

[2:13:47] what's been agendaized.

[2:13:50] » I would have been nice to have that

[2:13:51] articulated in the in the agenda. That

[2:13:53] was not my understanding.

[2:13:58] » Okay, so based on what you just said,

[2:14:01] uh, we are here,

[2:14:02] uh, with the report and the

[2:14:04] recommendation to accept the apology,

[2:14:08] to undertake training, and then the only

[2:14:10] secondary issue that we could really get

[2:14:13] into tonight is whether or not

[2:14:15] at some point we would want to open up

[2:14:18] a hearing or further action at some

[2:14:22] point in the future. Is that

[2:14:24] Am I hearing what you're saying?

[2:14:26] >> I would say that all of the information presented by the

[2:14:31] public can be considered by the council

[2:14:33] and the council can in a

[2:14:35] future hearing address

[2:14:38] uh those

[2:14:40] um

[2:14:42] comments and recommendations after the

[2:14:44] council's had an opportunity to

[2:14:45] deliberate on

[2:14:48] that information to determine if any

[2:14:49] additional steps beyond those that

[2:14:51] you've uh

[2:14:52] identified here this evening that you

[2:14:54] wish to take.

[2:14:56] >> What can you clarify? Why can't that

[2:14:58] deliberation happen right now?

[2:15:00] What I mean, I'm just not understanding

[2:15:02] the legal advice.

[2:15:05] >> So, well, first of all, I think the

[2:15:07] council

[2:15:08] um

[2:15:09] brought forward recommended

[2:15:11] brought forward steps that they were

[2:15:12] prepared to take and if they're going if

[2:15:15] the council wishes to take additional

[2:15:16] steps, then that would have to follow

[2:15:18] council deliberation.

[2:15:20] That would be in closed session. You're

[2:15:22] not

[2:15:24] I mean, it hasn't been agendized.

[2:15:27] My recommendation would be the council

[2:15:28] can take it under consideration the

[2:15:30] information the public presented and the

[2:15:32] council can report back at a future

[2:15:34] meeting if it is going to add to

[2:15:36] subtract from the steps that you've

[2:15:39] identified.

[2:15:46] » Yeah, okay.

[2:15:48] So, yeah, um thank you. Uh public

[2:15:51] comment right now is closed as we

[2:15:53] determine next steps here.

[2:15:55] Um

[2:16:00] So, what

[2:16:01] um just coming back one more time.

[2:16:04] So, tonight uh what was agreed upon was

[2:16:08] acceptance of apology

[2:16:10] and additional training. There were a

[2:16:12] lot of nice ideas brought up tonight

[2:16:14] about pledge of conduct and all sorts of

[2:16:15] things that we could also look at as a

[2:16:17] group.

[2:16:19] And to your point, because of the way

[2:16:21] the matter is, if we wanted to talk more

[2:16:24] about it, we would be going back into

[2:16:25] closed session to talk more about it and

[2:16:27] then coming back out again and

[2:16:29] potentially either agendizing or

[2:16:30] reporting out. Is that

[2:16:32] >> I'm going to defer

[2:16:34] my belief is that is uh available to the

[2:16:37] council. I'm going to defer to the town

[2:16:38] attorney.

[2:16:47] » So, what you had on your uh agenda for

[2:16:49] tonight was a report. If the council

[2:16:51] wishes to do anything other than what we

[2:16:53] believed we were directed to bring

[2:16:54] forward to you

[2:16:56] uh and you wish to consider this further

[2:16:57] or to consider any other corrective

[2:16:59] action, you cannot do that this evening.

[2:17:01] You would need to agendize that at at a

[2:17:03] subsequent hearing. Um and that hearing

[2:17:07] um

[2:17:08] uh Councilmember Gold has a due process

[2:17:10] right uh to appear and say anything he

[2:17:13] wishes to say in his own defense and

[2:17:15] that has not occurred tonight because

[2:17:17] that is not what we understood the

[2:17:18] council was asking us to do.

[2:17:20] >> Okay. That makes actually

[2:17:23] that makes a lot of sense. Thank you.

[2:17:26] So, that's where we are.

[2:17:28] accepting the report and

[2:17:29] recommendation tonight and

[2:17:32] we will as a committee here

[2:17:35] um

[2:17:36] continue this discussion in closed

[2:17:38] session

[2:17:40] at a future date.

[2:17:42] This is This is personnel in in in

[2:17:46] public.

[2:17:47] >> It's kind of like you guys are

[2:17:49] >> Yeah, so

[2:17:50] ha ha

[2:17:52] Yeah, okay. So, again, I'm sorry, public comment is

[2:17:57] closed. We've been

[2:17:59] we're We're the best we can up here,

[2:18:01] Bob.

[2:18:02] Uh any other

[2:18:04] I know, to all of you. I'm sorry.

[2:18:07] Thank you.

[2:18:07] >> And you might have commented about nice.

[2:18:09] If that was dismissive.

[2:18:11] That was so dismissive.

[2:18:14] » I don't know what you were referring to

[2:18:15] there, but um but

[2:18:17] >> ideas.

[2:18:18] Those were nice ideas.

[2:18:19] >> Yeah. Oh, because I thought they were

[2:18:21] nice ideas. They're good ideas.

[2:18:23] >> extremely dismissive.

[2:18:23] >> Okay. Well, thank you. Thank you.

[2:18:26] All right. Well, we are accepting the

[2:18:28] report unless there's I'm I'm I don't

[2:18:30] know You're saying we're not taking a

[2:18:32] vote, so I'm sort of confused how to

[2:18:33] even close this piece. Um Jane, can you

[2:18:36] give some color?

[2:18:39] >> Yes, tonight was a report and we

[2:18:41] understood that

[2:18:42] uh the direction from council was to

[2:18:44] accept an apology from Council Member

[2:18:46] Gold and to

[2:18:48] uh agree with the recommendation for

[2:18:49] training. If the council wishes to do

[2:18:51] anything further, um you should give us

[2:18:53] some direction this evening as to what

[2:18:55] it is you're asking us to do.

[2:19:02] » Are there anything that we are asking

[2:19:03] them to do? I can start with you.

[2:19:05] >> I I my my thought We're going to talk

[2:19:07] more about this before we make a

[2:19:08] decision that goes beyond where we are

[2:19:10] right now.

[2:19:11] I'm not prepared to do that tonight.

[2:19:15] I've heard We've heard what they've

[2:19:16] said. There's a lot of implications to

[2:19:18] what's been said. A lot of subjects been

[2:19:20] covered besides just that one instance.

[2:19:23] So, I want to cover it thoroughly, not

[2:19:25] just

[2:19:26] Wait, let's make a decision and go.

[2:19:28] >> If we could have some direction by way

[2:19:30] of a motion and a vote, that would be

[2:19:31] very helpful from the staff table.

[2:19:36] » Yeah, I mean

[2:19:38] like I said, I was

[2:19:40] totally surprised about how this item

[2:19:42] was described on the agenda. I thought

[2:19:44] it was meant to be the hearing where we

[2:19:47] would deliberate and uh make a decision

[2:19:50] on what to do. So, the fact that it's

[2:19:52] now being presented as an oral report

[2:19:53] that I learned about on Friday is

[2:19:55] totally stunning to me.

[2:19:57] Um I I

[2:19:59] fully believe that we would be able to

[2:20:01] deliberate, hear from the public, and as

[2:20:04] a council make a decision on what to do,

[2:20:06] um whether it was to just uh accept an

[2:20:09] apology and training or based on what we

[2:20:12] heard from citizens, uh do something

[2:20:15] different. Like that's how every agenda

[2:20:17] item works. We present the agenda item.

[2:20:21] We have an opportunity to ask questions.

[2:20:24] We hear from the public. We deliberate,

[2:20:27] and then we make a decision. Like I it is unfathomable to me that that's

[2:20:31] like not what's happening. Um and so to

[2:20:34] kick the can down the road, you know, I I just do not understand. Um

[2:20:41] you know, I guess who am I? I'm only a

[2:20:43] former litigator and a now general

[2:20:45] counsel. Like I guess I have to accept

[2:20:47] the legal advice cuz

[2:20:49] I you know, I I

[2:20:51] couldn't, you know, I'm not prepared to say anything different. Um

[2:20:57] but yeah, I guess we need to get some

[2:20:59] direction. I don't think um training is

[2:21:02] enough.

[2:21:03] Um

[2:21:05] so

[2:21:06] you know, I'd

[2:21:07] love to hear from my fellow council

[2:21:08] members if they agree additional

[2:21:10] direction is needed and what their

[2:21:12] suggestions are on what that direction

[2:21:13] would be.

[2:21:16] Not a motion.

[2:21:18] >> Just trying to see if we have

[2:21:20] anything.

[2:21:21] Yeah, Sun, do you have any thoughts?

[2:21:27] » Um

[2:21:30] Are Are

[2:21:32] Jen, are you proposing uh

[2:21:34] Council member Wall, are you proposing

[2:21:37] uh

[2:21:39] a hearing, an actual hearing?

[2:21:41] >> proposed anything. I'm wondering what

[2:21:42] your what your thoughts are.

[2:21:46] » I'm open.

[2:21:48] I mean, it feels like um

[2:21:52] constituents are not happy with the you

[2:21:54] know, with what happened here tonight

[2:21:56] with the

[2:21:57] way it was presented. Um

[2:21:59] I can understand. I

[2:22:02] feel like some really good points were

[2:22:03] made. So, um

[2:22:06] but I hadn't really thought and I I I'm

[2:22:08] not sure where we go from here.

[2:22:10] Uh cuz it

[2:22:11] doesn't seem appropriate to just close

[2:22:13] it here and

[2:22:14] we all go on our way and

[2:22:16] I don't see that resolving this.

[2:22:19] So, um

[2:22:21] I don't know if we continue it if we can

[2:22:23] continue it to

[2:22:25] uh

[2:22:27] another evening and then have but I but

[2:22:29] I'm not sure what's what would be the

[2:22:32] proposal uh a hearing or a further

[2:22:34] conversation of this. I don't want to

[2:22:36] just kind of come back and

[2:22:37] without further direction. Um

[2:22:44] But, I'm also not prepared cuz I haven't

[2:22:45] really

[2:22:47] had a chance to think about where we go

[2:22:48] from here. So, um

[2:22:52] >> I know the public is still Could the

[2:22:54] public just help the council out? Like,

[2:22:56] you want to call

[2:22:57] >> Actually,

[2:22:59] okay. It's very kind of you, but

[2:23:01] No, no, no. No, you can't We're not

[2:23:03] going to do that, but um

[2:23:06] So, I'm in Yeah.

[2:23:08] >> So, so really

[2:23:10] you have a choice to provide us

[2:23:12] direction for something at a future

[2:23:14] agenda. But, somebody has to make a

[2:23:16] motion and a second and you have to vote

[2:23:18] on it to ask us to continue it or to

[2:23:20] schedule something in the future.

[2:23:24] So,

[2:23:25] um

[2:23:28] if someone wants to make a motion or to

[2:23:30] continue it or if somebody wants to make

[2:23:32] a motion to

[2:23:35] schedule a session and then go through

[2:23:37] how the procedures would work for a

[2:23:39] hearing,

[2:23:40] um that would be what you would need to

[2:23:42] do next.

[2:23:43] >> I think I mean, if I might just jump in.

[2:23:45] This is an evolving situation and um

[2:23:51] you know, we were trying to bring this

[2:23:52] into the public to try to be

[2:23:54] transparent. Um the timing of this is

[2:23:58] just not ideal. It's just not. And to

[2:24:00] have a big conversation

[2:24:02] with all these moving parts right now

[2:24:04] outside of us is

[2:24:07] it's very difficult to do. So, if you're

[2:24:08] registering like, what are they doing up

[2:24:10] here? They're all processing uh

[2:24:13] a couple layers here. Um

[2:24:16] Tonight, I'm in the position uh myself

[2:24:19] as I stated earlier of accepting the

[2:24:21] apology and the recommendations uh by

[2:24:23] our outside counsel.

[2:24:25] Um it doesn't mean uh that we can't

[2:24:28] continue as the world evolves to cover

[2:24:31] this in closed session and and think

[2:24:32] about next steps, which I'm

[2:24:36] which I haven't thought about because I

[2:24:38] didn't get there in my thinking yet. Uh

[2:24:41] so, right now where I am is accepting

[2:24:43] the apology and the recommendations from

[2:24:45] our counsel.

[2:24:47] >> And I'm in agreement with you on that.

[2:24:50] >> Awesome.

[2:24:51] >> So,

[2:24:52] I think

[2:24:53] I would I and I you know, if we need a

[2:24:55] vote, if some if you'd like to make a

[2:24:57] motion to see if it can

[2:24:59] uh you know,

[2:25:01] you the motion the floor is yours if

[2:25:02] you'd like to make a a motion otherwise,

[2:25:04] of course.

[2:25:09] » Yes, I very much would like to make a

[2:25:10] motion. I I'm really struggling here

[2:25:12] because again, my understanding

[2:25:16] of the procedural aspects of this is

[2:25:19] that it's the town council's decision

[2:25:22] what to do.

[2:25:24] And that yes, a censure motion can be

[2:25:27] made and seconded and then agendized.

[2:25:31] But I If my understanding is that a

[2:25:34] reprimand can be issued without that

[2:25:36] additional procedural step.

[2:25:39] >> That's incorrect because any sort of

[2:25:41] disciplinary action which you take as a

[2:25:42] council uh council member who is the

[2:25:44] subject of that has a right to due

[2:25:46] process.

[2:25:47] And that would be a hearing at which he

[2:25:49] can appear and make a case for his

[2:25:51] position as well. That has not occurred

[2:25:53] because that is not what we understood

[2:25:55] you were asking us to bring forward to

[2:25:56] you.

[2:26:02] » Okay.

[2:26:03] >> We're not set up for it.

[2:26:04] >> Okay.

[2:26:04] >> Yep.

[2:26:05] >> Okay.

[2:26:06] >> And and how would you articulate a motion like

[2:26:10] that? Would you Is it a motion for a

[2:26:12] hearing on a censure or a reprimand? Is

[2:26:14] it something

[2:26:15] >> Right.

[2:26:16] >> and or other remedies that the town

[2:26:18] council may choose to take?

[2:26:20] >> Correct.

[2:26:22] >> Okay. I'll make a motion to to have a

[2:26:24] hearing to consider whether a censure, a

[2:26:27] reprimand, or other remedies that the

[2:26:30] council may choose to take.

[2:26:33] >> Second.

[2:26:34] >> Okay. Councilmember Obritsch?

[2:26:36] >> Yes.

[2:26:37] >> Councilmember Brown?

[2:26:38] >> No.

[2:26:39] >> Councilmember Long?

[2:26:40] >> Yes.

[2:26:41] >> Mayor Domkalski?

[2:26:44] » No.

[2:26:47] No, that's not We can have further

[2:26:50] discussions, figure out what are our

[2:26:52] next steps, but

[2:26:54] uh

[2:26:56] I'm not I'm not there today.

[2:27:01] >> Yeah.

[2:27:02] >> Okay.

[2:27:04] Are there any any other motions before

[2:27:05] closing this item?

[2:27:09] All right, item is closed. Is there any

[2:27:12] item in the Moving on, we'll May Why

[2:27:13] don't we take a 5-minute break actually?

[2:27:16] Yeah, 5-minute break and we'll go get

[2:27:17] Paul.

[2:27:19] the council or public to pull an item

[2:27:21] for further discussion.

[2:27:23] Are there any items by the council that

[2:27:25] you would like to have pulled for

[2:27:26] further discussion?

[2:27:29] Any items from the public that you would

[2:27:30] like to hear

[2:27:32] have pulled?

[2:27:34] Hearing none, I will entertain a motion.

[2:27:37] >> Yeah, I don't have time. I don't have

[2:27:38] that in front of me.

[2:27:41] Do you have a report we can give him?

[2:28:06] All good?

[2:28:07] Okay, great. Uh is there someone on the

[2:28:10] council that can make a motion for these

[2:28:11] six items?

[2:28:14] » I move I move that we approve the uh

[2:28:18] six items on the consent calendar.

[2:28:22] >> Councilmember Aberish?

[2:28:23] >> Yes.

[2:28:24] >> Councilmember Brown?

[2:28:24] >> Yes.

[2:28:25] >> Councilmember Gold? Councilmember Wall?

[2:28:28] Mayor Domkeowski?

[2:28:29] >> Yes, thank you. Um

[2:28:30] and with great apology to Ms.

[2:28:33] Putnam, I apologize um for having to

[2:28:35] restructure the agenda this evening, but

[2:28:37] as you saw, it was important to do. Um

[2:28:39] well, so we'll we're jumping to item B,

[2:28:42] and uh which is an approval for a final

[2:28:44] map on 1101 Kenyatta, and that

[2:28:46] subdivision.

[2:28:49] >> Um so, thank you, Mayor. Um good

[2:28:51] evening, councilmembers. I'll just give

[2:28:53] a brief introduction. Um so,

[2:28:56] what you have before you tonight is an

[2:28:58] application for a final map. Uh this is

[2:29:01] a technical procedure in which the

[2:29:02] council

[2:29:03] uh ensures uh through staff review that

[2:29:07] all of the conditions of approval from

[2:29:09] the tentative map have been implemented

[2:29:12] um or in process uh for the final map.

[2:29:15] Um we're happy to go further into a a

[2:29:17] little bit more of a presentation

[2:29:18] Sarah's prepared. Um given the time of

[2:29:20] the evening, we can just answer

[2:29:22] questions. All the information is in the

[2:29:24] packet, um but we can go into Sarah has

[2:29:27] a very brief presentation if you'd like

[2:29:28] to hear it.

[2:29:29] >> [snorts]

[2:29:30] >> I think it would make sense to see the

[2:29:31] brief presentation. Don't worry.

[2:29:35] >> Thank you.

[2:29:36] Good evening, Mayor Domkowski

[2:29:38] and council members.

[2:29:39] Um as H mentioned, I'm just going to

[2:29:41] give a brief overview of the subdivision

[2:29:43] and roadway project at 1101 Kenyatta

[2:29:45] Road.

[2:29:47] Uh tonight, the council will be

[2:29:48] reviewing the final map for approval

[2:29:51] prior to recordation at San Mateo

[2:29:53] County.

[2:29:55] In November uh 2023, the town council

[2:29:58] approved the tentative map for a

[2:30:00] seven-lot subdivision including the

[2:30:03] construction of a new private road.

[2:30:06] Uh there is no development for the lots

[2:30:09] proposed at this time.

[2:30:11] The final map review by the council

[2:30:13] shall determine if the final map

[2:30:15] conforms with the approved tentative map

[2:30:17] and its conditions of approval.

[2:30:19] The staff report outlines all of the

[2:30:21] conditions of approval of the tentative

[2:30:23] map and how the project complies.

[2:30:26] Uh the final map meets the technical

[2:30:28] requirements of the subdivision chapter

[2:30:31] and was reviewed by planning and

[2:30:32] engineering staff.

[2:30:34] The applicant included a tree and

[2:30:36] roadway

[2:30:38] um plan which was included in their

[2:30:40] improvement plans and the applicant

[2:30:42] provide prepared a restrictive covenant

[2:30:45] that will be recorded on the property

[2:30:47] ensuring all future development complies

[2:30:49] with the conditions for future

[2:30:51] development of the lots.

[2:30:54] Uh so, staff recommends approval of the

[2:30:56] final map and restrictive covenant and

[2:30:59] if the council approves the final map,

[2:31:01] the applicant will work with staff to

[2:31:02] obtain necessary signatures and the

[2:31:05] final map and restrictive covenant will

[2:31:07] be recorded at the San Mateo County

[2:31:09] Recorder's Office after completion of

[2:31:12] the construction permits.

[2:31:14] Um and that concludes my presentation

[2:31:16] and I'm happy to answer any questions.

[2:31:17] Thank you.

[2:31:18] >> Ms. Sarah, any questions for staff?

[2:31:24] Okay, we will ask if there are questions

[2:31:27] from the public on this matter. Item B,

[2:31:29] final approval of a final map for 1101

[2:31:33] Kenyatta. Yes, Mr. Lubin.

[2:31:35] >> Mr. Lubin, um I would like to

[2:31:37] congratulate Lisa Putnam on a really

[2:31:40] great job of designing the subdivision.

[2:31:42] Her love for the natural landscape and

[2:31:46] the vegetation really comes through and

[2:31:48] she's overcome the bad instincts of her

[2:31:51] engineers to do that and I really

[2:31:53] applaud her for that and think it's

[2:31:55] going to be a great addition to the

[2:31:57] town.

[2:31:58] >> Thank you for that lovely comment,

[2:31:59] Steve.

[2:32:01] Sir.

[2:32:08] » Hi, Ken Ogden, uh resident 45 years,

[2:32:12] live adjacent to the property.

[2:32:14] If you read through the packet, there's

[2:32:15] an encroachment permit that's in there

[2:32:17] uh that was put on my property uh when

[2:32:20] they put a drain system in years ago.

[2:32:23] Uh my complaint or my concern is the

[2:32:26] maintenance of that.

[2:32:28] Uh

[2:32:28] when it was originally done as the

[2:32:30] permit, the encroachment permit, that

[2:32:32] the Putnams would be taking care of it

[2:32:33] for perpetuity.

[2:32:35] Uh I've requested that that go into

[2:32:37] their CC&Rs.

[2:32:39] Um to me, it's not quite adequate what's

[2:32:41] been in there. I've gone to the town a

[2:32:43] couple of times, uh spoken to them

[2:32:46] multiple times, don't get much of a

[2:32:48] response. Here's some my current emails

[2:32:51] from when this packet came out to try to

[2:32:53] address that. So, I have a hard time

[2:32:55] with them um with you

[2:32:58] finalizing the permit or the the uh plan

[2:33:01] without rectifying this issue

[2:33:04] uh cuz there is a large drainage catch

[2:33:06] basin there and there's no access to get

[2:33:08] in and clean it, although they're

[2:33:10] responsible for cleaning it.

[2:33:12] If you I was just looking through cuz I

[2:33:13] hadn't seen these documents before,

[2:33:16] that the encroachment permit in section

[2:33:18] 13 talks about uh defending indemnity

[2:33:22] and everything else.

[2:33:23] Um

[2:33:25] and I'm curious which of these lots or

[2:33:28] the CCNRs is going to indemnify everyone

[2:33:31] down the road should uh there's an

[2:33:33] equestrian trail come

[2:33:35] >> Mhm.

[2:33:36] >> on right next to it. Someone falls into

[2:33:38] the permit into the pit, gets hurt.

[2:33:40] Who's Who's Who's legally liable for

[2:33:43] that? So, I don't think we've addressed

[2:33:46] all the issues with this.

[2:33:47] Um so, I would encourage you to take a

[2:33:49] look at some of my notes of what I've

[2:33:51] requested. Um I'm would also request if

[2:33:55] you guys even know where this is located

[2:33:57] on the property

[2:33:58] because it traps quite a bit of debris.

[2:34:02] Um for years it was never cleaned. Uh

[2:34:05] half the time when it Well, couple of

[2:34:06] times it was cleaned, all they did was

[2:34:08] take the debris out and put it on my

[2:34:10] property rather than haul it away.

[2:34:13] Um which I really don't want it there.

[2:34:15] I've been maintaining it myself most of

[2:34:17] the time, which it wasn't my

[2:34:18] responsibility.

[2:34:20] Um so, there's there's no way to access

[2:34:23] it in this plan. They said they've got a

[2:34:26] I went to the town and they said they've

[2:34:27] got an easement, uh 20-ft easement down

[2:34:31] their side of the property.

[2:34:32] Uh that has quite a steep embankment to

[2:34:34] it. It's got trees all over it. I don't

[2:34:36] know how you're going to get a truck in

[2:34:38] to haul debris away and everything else

[2:34:40] cuz there's not a wheelbarrow full. It's

[2:34:42] a lot more than that.

[2:34:44] So, um they've made no allowance in

[2:34:46] their design to access this. Currently,

[2:34:49] since it was a 7-acre parcel, they have

[2:34:51] a gate right next to it and have easy

[2:34:53] access through one of the lots, but do

[2:34:55] you even see where this is on the

[2:34:57] development plan?

[2:34:58] >> I I would actually If we could Can we

[2:35:00] pull up that plate, man?

[2:35:03] The

[2:35:05] » Cuz I think it should be, you know,

[2:35:07] outlined as part of the development

[2:35:09] where it is.

[2:35:25] » So this is this is the final map.

[2:35:28] The

[2:35:29] drainage improvements uh Mr. Dr. Hoffman

[2:35:32] is is referring to is on his property so

[2:35:34] it's it's on just north of the property.

[2:35:38] And that's where the encroachment permit

[2:35:39] is because there is an equestrian trail

[2:35:41] easement there.

[2:35:43] And so the improvements are there. This

[2:35:45] includes

[2:35:46] a a utility and drainage easement that

[2:35:48] can be accessed from the roadway as well

[2:35:50] as from one of the adjacent properties.

[2:35:54] CCNRs include the encroachment permit by

[2:35:59] reference as as an attachment and it

[2:36:01] requires that the HOA maintain this so

[2:36:04] that anybody who purchases the property

[2:36:06] from the current owner will have to

[2:36:09] ensure that that

[2:36:11] drainage facility is maintained pursuant

[2:36:14] to that encroachment permit.

[2:36:15] >> But it doesn't say carry away the

[2:36:16] debris.

[2:36:20] It just says we're going to clean it and

[2:36:22] cleaning it is

[2:36:24] not very well defined.

[2:36:27] » Well it'll have to

[2:36:29] keep the the interest so this is the

[2:36:32] part in which the CCNRs reference the

[2:36:36] encroachment permit. So the way the the

[2:36:38] encroachment permit has always been

[2:36:40] enforced and will continue to be

[2:36:42] enforced.

[2:36:43] I mean it is attached to this as exhibit

[2:36:45] D to the CCNRs.

[2:36:47] >> And the indemnification?

[2:36:52] » I'll speak to that.

[2:36:56] » Yeah the CC the CCNRs apply to the

[2:37:00] original developer and then when they

[2:37:02] are sold they these um

[2:37:05] obligations transfer to the owners who

[2:37:07] will then be subject to these CCNRs. So

[2:37:10] that's who we're talking about when

[2:37:11] we're talking about indemnification.

[2:37:14] >> So, is this a definitional definitional

[2:37:17] issue to you in terms of caretaking it

[2:37:19] versus hauling it away? Is that

[2:37:21] >> I I want to know that it's going to be

[2:37:22] taken care of. I mean, originally I

[2:37:24] didn't want it on my land to begin with

[2:37:26] since they had 7 acres and I don't have

[2:37:27] 7 acres and why they had to put it on me

[2:37:30] was beyond me. And now that I wouldn't

[2:37:33] have to be here if we had done it

[2:37:35] correctly originally. But, my goal is

[2:37:38] how are they going to get to it and

[2:37:39] access it? There is no access in the

[2:37:42] map.

[2:37:43] None. You say what? 20 ft down the side?

[2:37:47] >> The equestrian easement, right? So,

[2:37:49] >> What what easement are we talking about

[2:37:51] that we're going to access it through?

[2:37:52] >> There's an equestrian easement on the

[2:37:54] eucalyptus properties. There's also a a

[2:37:56] drainage easement that runs along the

[2:37:58] properties here on the store side.

[2:38:00] >> Right. And there's trees all over them.

[2:38:02] So, you're going to get a truck you're

[2:38:04] going to cut down all the

[2:38:05] >> also access it through the properties

[2:38:08] themselves.

[2:38:10] So, in this example, whoever buys lot

[2:38:12] five would have these responsibilities

[2:38:14] attached to lot five.

[2:38:17] Yes. Okay.

[2:38:18] >> Do we get that in somewhere that there's

[2:38:21] going to be access through lot five?

[2:38:24] >> How does that work?

[2:38:28] Or it is what it it is what it is. The property owner simply has to abide

[2:38:32] by those issues.

[2:38:33] >> That's it.

[2:38:34] >> out how to do it.

[2:38:35] >> Yes, the the language which you saw on

[2:38:37] the screen before said um had the word

[2:38:39] clear.

[2:38:41] I'm sorry, there we go.

[2:38:42] >> Right, but does lot five know there they got this they got trucks are

[2:38:46] going to drive through there they're

[2:38:47] going to have a driveway through the

[2:38:48] middle of their lot?

[2:38:53] » So, remind me, we're not at a place

[2:38:55] where we're talking about

[2:38:57] building any properties and having

[2:38:59] things approved, but in that process

[2:39:01] would that be coming up in terms of

[2:39:02] access to an approval

[2:39:05] of a building permit on this issue?

[2:39:10] Isn't that when it would be coming up?

[2:39:12] Not at

[2:39:13] lot line moment?

[2:39:24] » So the planning director is advising me

[2:39:26] that when any homes are to be built

[2:39:27] there, they would need to come back in

[2:39:28] and go through a public hearing process

[2:39:30] in regard to those. So we will note this

[2:39:33] um

[2:39:34] so that that can be addressed at the

[2:39:35] time. I do think it's covered here. It

[2:39:37] doesn't say specifically where you're

[2:39:39] going to drive to get there, but it does

[2:39:41] obligate the homeowners association uh

[2:39:45] to to keep that clear and preserve that

[2:39:47] area.

[2:39:48] >> Okay.

[2:39:48] >> But we would can address it again when

[2:39:50] they bring forward their

[2:39:51] um

[2:39:52] applications to build homes.

[2:39:54] >> Okay. I think that's the answer. At

[2:39:56] least that's a

[2:39:57] >> So [snorts] I need to come back at

[2:40:00] when they wanted to do that lot and do

[2:40:03] could do this all over again?

[2:40:04] >> Well, it should be part of the process

[2:40:06] at this point.

[2:40:06] >> This is just it

[2:40:08] >> The current owners are required to

[2:40:10] maintain it. The future owners are

[2:40:11] required to maintain it in the exact

[2:40:13] same fashion. Accessing it from this

[2:40:15] property,

[2:40:17] um the homeowners association will work

[2:40:18] out how they access that. It's their

[2:40:20] responsibility to make sure that it's

[2:40:22] maintained free and clear per the

[2:40:24] original encroachment permit.

[2:40:27] >> Okay, cuz this is

[2:40:29] the equestrian easement that we're going

[2:40:31] to take a truck up on the eucalyptus

[2:40:33] properties. And I don't see how you're

[2:40:35] getting it through those eucalyptus

[2:40:37] trees.

[2:40:38] So using that as our backup doesn't make much sense.

[2:40:44] So.

[2:40:45] >> All right, thank you.

[2:40:45] >> for your time.

[2:40:46] >> Thank you for bringing it to everyone's

[2:40:48] attention.

[2:40:51] Ms. Putnam, this is a public hearing and

[2:40:54] I should be able to you have as much

[2:40:56] time as you want to speak to any of

[2:40:58] these issues.

[2:41:02] » Thank you. I actually don't have all

[2:41:05] that much to say, but um

[2:41:07] I've been at this for 5 and 1/2 years,

[2:41:09] and I just really

[2:41:11] I'm I'm only talking about my project,

[2:41:13] nothing else tonight, but I just want to

[2:41:14] say how grateful I am.

[2:41:17] I've been working with Sarah for and

[2:41:19] she's been wonderful. She's just been

[2:41:21] wonderful, and so has Sage and Cindy and

[2:41:25] Jason

[2:41:26] and Julie. Everybody I've worked with

[2:41:28] has just been

[2:41:30] top-notch.

[2:41:31] I think they're here because they love

[2:41:33] the town, and I think you're here

[2:41:35] because you love the town.

[2:41:36] And I just want to thank my dad was on

[2:41:38] town I've

[2:41:39] lived in Woodside off and on since 1971

[2:41:42] for 55 years, and I know Steve has me

[2:41:44] beat,

[2:41:45] but um

[2:41:48] we have deep roots in this town. We love

[2:41:50] this town, and I know you guys are

[2:41:53] serving

[2:41:54] because of your deep love, and I just I

[2:41:56] just want to recognize that, and I I

[2:41:58] appreciate Ken's comments, and I'd like

[2:42:01] to work with him. I've talked to his

[2:42:02] wife Laura a little bit cuz I have some

[2:42:05] ideas cuz I'm

[2:42:07] very very passionate about soil, and I

[2:42:09] think um

[2:42:11] we could get some ground cover,

[2:42:12] >> [clears throat]

[2:42:12] >> excuse me, and we could do a lot so

[2:42:14] there's not so much um water that's

[2:42:17] being lost cuz that's you want to slow

[2:42:19] it, sink it.

[2:42:20] You know, you you you you don't want

[2:42:22] water going away. You actually want

[2:42:23] water percolating down into the ground,

[2:42:25] and I think um if Ken was open to it,

[2:42:27] I'd be more than happy to work with him

[2:42:29] on that and maybe get in some

[2:42:31] California natives planted um

[2:42:33] so we can get that water where it

[2:42:35] belongs, which is in the ground. So,

[2:42:37] that's really all I have to say. I I

[2:42:39] just really want to thank the town and

[2:42:41] thank the staff for um all the help that

[2:42:43] they've shown me for the last 5 and 1/2

[2:42:45] years. Thank you very much.

[2:42:47] >> Thank you, Lisa.

[2:42:51] Any other uh public comments on this

[2:42:52] matter?

[2:42:55] Hearing none, we will close public

[2:42:57] comment and go to any further

[2:42:59] deliberation from any council member.

[2:43:06] » Um so I'm very supportive of the of the

[2:43:09] item. I want I just want to make sure it

[2:43:10] sounds like from what I hear, Lisa and Ken, you guys are aligned, but it

[2:43:15] sounds like Ken, maybe you want some

[2:43:17] just additional language or

[2:43:19] clarification to feel confident that the

[2:43:23] encroachment easement will be maintained

[2:43:25] in the same way or sorry, the

[2:43:26] encroachment permit would be maintained

[2:43:27] in the same way.

[2:43:28] >> better than it has,

[2:43:30] um

[2:43:30] but that they have access.

[2:43:32] >> Mhm.

[2:43:33] >> And I just don't see where the access is

[2:43:34] coming from.

[2:43:36] >> Mhm.

[2:43:37] >> And the indemnification, um

[2:43:39] again, I don't see that I mean maybe

[2:43:41] it's just where you have it written and

[2:43:43] like I'm not an attorney as everyone

[2:43:44] else here is. Um

[2:43:47] uh but uh it just

[2:43:49] the indemnification and the access.

[2:43:51] >> So access, okay.

[2:43:53] >> Yeah, and I just don't see with this map

[2:43:55] and I brought it up when they did the

[2:43:56] preliminary map.

[2:43:58] Uh was kind of told to go sit down at

[2:44:00] that point. Um that I don't see where

[2:44:04] the access is.

[2:44:05] >> Okay, maybe we can take both both

[2:44:06] questions.

[2:44:07] Yeah, so let's talk about the access. So

[2:44:09] what I heard is

[2:44:11] um that the HOA would determine access.

[2:44:14] Is that right?

[2:44:17] » That's correct. It's their

[2:44:18] responsibility to maintain it for this

[2:44:20] encroachment permit. And the reason it's

[2:44:22] an encroachment permit is because it is

[2:44:24] encroaching on the town's um

[2:44:27] trail easement.

[2:44:29] Uh and so that's why it has to be an

[2:44:31] encroachment permit. So that that access

[2:44:35] whether you you jump off

[2:44:37] >> Wait, okay, so a couple questions. So um

[2:44:40] would the So I'm envisioning like this

[2:44:42] is what is it? Seven lots? There's

[2:44:44] seven future homes. Those home property

[2:44:46] owners would make up the HOA. Those

[2:44:49] property owners get to come together and

[2:44:51] say we're going to access this

[2:44:53] in this way. So is that are you saying

[2:44:55] that access is fully up to the

[2:44:57] individual property owners of the HOA?

[2:45:00] >> Yeah, it's it's just as it is today. You

[2:45:01] know, there's a group of property owners

[2:45:03] and they have to get together and make

[2:45:05] sure they access that area for the

[2:45:07] encroachment permit.

[2:45:08] >> What is the access today? How do they

[2:45:10] access it today?

[2:45:11] >> I'll speak to that.

[2:45:15] » Yeah, right now since it is under

[2:45:18] well, it's not technically under one

[2:45:20] ownership, but we've always accessed it

[2:45:22] what would be lot five right now. Um and

[2:45:25] I will say I mean I think

[2:45:28] I didn't know that we were supposed to

[2:45:29] be maintaining this till recently and

[2:45:31] then after I found out we're supposed to

[2:45:32] be my my parents agreed to this maybe 30

[2:45:35] years ago or something.

[2:45:38] Yeah, I don't know how old the

[2:45:39] encroachment permit. I think it's about

[2:45:41] 30 years ago is when they came to an

[2:45:43] agreement on the drainage. And at the

[2:45:46] time my parents agreed and Ken agreed

[2:45:48] and and now that's part of the

[2:45:52] That's now part of our restrictive

[2:45:55] covenant.

[2:45:56] >> sense.

[2:45:56] >> Um so it it was he's right. It was

[2:45:59] easier when it's all under basically one

[2:46:01] ownership, but you guys are also right that then

[2:46:05] the new homeowners will at some point

[2:46:06] then have to get together and say okay,

[2:46:08] lot five we're going to have to go

[2:46:09] through, you know, we're going to have

[2:46:10] to go through your lot to get to the

[2:46:12] It's a

[2:46:14] 20-ft easement right behind it. Um

[2:46:18] I mean you could you would have to take

[2:46:20] down those um eucalyptus trees if you're

[2:46:23] going to try to get a truck going up the

[2:46:24] easement. So it would be easier to get

[2:46:27] it to it through lot five.

[2:46:29] >> So we kind of know how access needs to

[2:46:31] happen. Sounds like we're going to

[2:46:33] there's going to be a home built on lot

[2:46:34] five and that

[2:46:38] Jump in if I'm saying anything wrong.

[2:46:39] That building permit will need to

[2:46:41] account for the fact that the the home built on that lot will need to

[2:46:45] provide for access to this encroachment

[2:46:48] easement.

[2:46:50] >> Yes,

[2:46:52] there there's setbacks required for the

[2:46:55] buildings as well that will provide

[2:46:56] other open areas.

[2:46:58] >> Is there a way would there be a way to

[2:47:00] make a more affirmative statement in

[2:47:02] these documents that the HOA will

[2:47:05] determine access through lot five um

[2:47:12] and even maybe in a way that's

[2:47:13] acceptable to the westernmost property. I'm just

[2:47:16] trying to figure I'm just trying to

[2:47:17] bridge the gap here.

[2:47:20] So

[2:47:22] >> I think you can um make some suggestions

[2:47:24] for changes in CC&Rs but I think the

[2:47:26] more practical way to do it is just for

[2:47:28] us to note that whenever development for

[2:47:30] lot five comes in that this is an issue

[2:47:32] that must be addressed and they're going

[2:47:34] to have to provide access unless they

[2:47:36] can show that there's there's um

[2:47:38] alternate access.

[2:47:41] >> That that does seem really practical.

[2:47:42] Would you say that we would

[2:47:44] address that here? Like put language in

[2:47:46] into um

[2:47:48] what we're looking at tonight or would

[2:47:50] we put that into like the HOA like the

[2:47:52] CC&Rs a good but

[2:47:54] how would you suggest we

[2:47:55] >> I think what you could do is you could approve the map tonight which

[2:47:58] is really a ministerial act and then you

[2:48:00] could give direction to staff that that

[2:48:02] is to be addressed when um lot five

[2:48:05] comes in.

[2:48:07] >> But also just to be clear that the CC&Rs

[2:48:09] are also what need to be adopted tonight

[2:48:11] as well.

[2:48:12] >> And so the what you have before you is

[2:48:13] the language for the CC&Rs so that's

[2:48:15] item number three and then exhibit D

[2:48:17] includes the entire encroachment permit

[2:48:20] along with

[2:48:22] So you have this entire encroachment

[2:48:24] permit that's in place today and that is

[2:48:26] tied to this CC&Rs

[2:48:29] um specifically referenced from that

[2:48:31] item number three. To make any

[2:48:32] modifications you want to make that in

[2:48:34] item three.

[2:48:37] » Can if I may would would direction to

[2:48:38] staff to address access

[2:48:43] um

[2:48:43] when development for lot five occurs,

[2:48:46] would that ease your mind on this topic?

[2:48:49] >> Not a great deal.

[2:48:50] >> There you go.

[2:48:51] >> To be honest with you.

[2:48:53] Because again, I've I I was not in

[2:48:55] agreement with your dad on putting it on

[2:48:57] my land. In fact, they went to put it on

[2:48:59] and they didn't even realize realize

[2:49:02] they needed cuz it's a scenic corridor

[2:49:04] that they needed

[2:49:05] a ruling from you guys to do it. I had

[2:49:07] to bring that up to try to stop it.

[2:49:09] But I couldn't stop it

[2:49:11] because for whatever reasons it ended up

[2:49:14] there.

[2:49:15] Um so again, I don't want to have to

[2:49:18] keep an eye on what comes in my mail a

[2:49:21] week before someone votes on something

[2:49:24] to make sure that this is in there when

[2:49:27] they do the lot. Otherwise, it it's

[2:49:30] I mean

[2:49:31] it's a huge drain pipe, but who knows

[2:49:33] what goes in there and what clogs it. So

[2:49:35] I mean, Benji may even have to bring a

[2:49:36] pumper truck in it to clear out that

[2:49:38] whole thing. And that if that backs up

[2:49:40] then all the drain system that's been

[2:49:42] put on Cañada Road is is worthless.

[2:49:46] Because that's the that's the freeway

[2:49:47] drainage is coming off of that. It's not my water. It's the freeway

[2:49:51] drainage.

[2:49:52] So.

[2:49:54] Thank you.

[2:49:56] >> So I think we were going to address the

[2:49:57] indemnification as well.

[2:50:00] Um

[2:50:01] So what I'm hearing from um from Ken is

[2:50:03] that uh

[2:50:04] Is it Is it Is it correct that you're

[2:50:06] just you you feel as though the

[2:50:07] indemnifi- indemnification language is

[2:50:09] not strong enough or not clear?

[2:50:12] >> I'm not I don't I don't Again, I'm not

[2:50:13] an attorney to know that. I mean

[2:50:15] you're being identi- indemnified also as

[2:50:18] the town

[2:50:19] in the original permit. But I just

[2:50:22] I mean, if

[2:50:23] it it's kind of like is the CCRs really

[2:50:27] going to read that deep to know that

[2:50:28] that's what they're buying into

[2:50:31] um when they're buying one of these

[2:50:32] seven lots and that the lot, whatever

[2:50:34] number it was, is going to have a pumper

[2:50:36] truck drive across the middle of their

[2:50:38] backyard and the swimming pool

[2:50:41] to get to this drainage

[2:50:43] ditch

[2:50:45] and the catch basin.

[2:50:47] I mean I would encourage you to come out

[2:50:48] and walk it and see how how it's going

[2:50:51] to happen.

[2:50:53] I'm happy to give anybody a tour.

[2:50:56] Just a lot of thorns.

[2:51:06] » Yeah, it's it's hard this is a pretty

[2:51:08] dense agenda item. So it's hard for me

[2:51:10] to make a recommendation on the fly like

[2:51:12] how to properly address the access

[2:51:14] issue. Sounds like it, you know,

[2:51:17] valid issue.

[2:51:18] Um and to the extent, you know, we need

[2:51:21] to highlight indemnification in a

[2:51:22] different way.

[2:51:24] Um

[2:51:25] I don't know if if uh

[2:51:27] staff has any thoughts on how we can

[2:51:29] accomplish that. And I heard the

[2:51:31] >> She wanted to look at the language in

[2:51:33] number three and

[2:51:35] require some type of access through lots

[2:51:37] four and or five

[2:51:40] to provide

[2:51:41] you know.

[2:51:43] >> Can you make you Would you be able to

[2:51:45] make a suggestion on the fly of what

[2:51:46] that adjusted language would how it

[2:51:48] would read?

[2:51:50] >> The clearing and its successors and

[2:51:51] assigns are required to operate clear

[2:51:54] and preserve structural and hydrologic

[2:51:56] hydrological integrity etc. etc.

[2:52:00] Uh but as in accessing uh this area

[2:52:02] through lots four or five.

[2:52:08] » Ms. Putnam, would that work for you?

[2:52:15] » Yeah, I guess so. I I feel it's a little

[2:52:17] bit of a joint problem with Ken and I just asked Ken we can easily

[2:52:22] access through it his lot and he said

[2:52:23] no. So I don't know. I guess I just feel

[2:52:26] like maybe there could be a little more

[2:52:28] give and take here.

[2:52:31] » If I could just revisit and try what try

[2:52:34] it one more time, that I really think

[2:52:35] this should be looked at when they come

[2:52:37] in to develop the houses because then

[2:52:38] you're going to see where the houses are to be located. Um we can make a note that this this is

[2:52:45] something that has to be addressed at

[2:52:46] that point and they have to demonstrate

[2:52:48] how how uh

[2:52:50] and what responsibility each one of

[2:52:51] those lots would have

[2:52:53] um

[2:52:53] for addressing number three.

[2:52:59] » That feels like the way we have

[2:53:00] historically handled these

[2:53:02] matters, right? I mean, this is not a

[2:53:04] we're not looking at building right now.

[2:53:06] We're looking at

[2:53:08] sub a final subdivision, basically.

[2:53:10] >> Correct.

[2:53:12] >> So, I think that makes sense as uh

[2:53:15] recommendation with note uh issue

[2:53:18] um

[2:53:20] So,

[2:53:21] that's something I could certainly

[2:53:22] support.

[2:53:23] I think I I think it's the right thing

[2:53:24] to do.

[2:53:27] Anyone [clears throat] else have any

[2:53:28] thoughts on this?

[2:53:31] >> I I I would support the the language

[2:53:33] adjustment that Gene just suggested. Um

[2:53:36] I may think

[2:53:38] I mean, what I heard is that regardless,

[2:53:40] like with there's building on lots four

[2:53:42] and five, they're going to have to

[2:53:43] address this, but I don't see any harm

[2:53:44] in in stating that up front here.

[2:53:47] Um so, I I would support that additional language.

[2:53:53] >> Just for clarity, the note that this

[2:53:55] will be dealt with at the time of uh

[2:53:58] plat five building the permit.

[2:54:00] >> Exactly, like the language adjustments

[2:54:02] that that Gene articulated.

[2:54:04] >> Yeah.

[2:54:04] >> She's indicating that we would add that

[2:54:06] they would be accessed through lots four

[2:54:07] or five.

[2:54:09] To condition number three.

[2:54:14] » Four or five.

[2:54:16] >> I think that's what we've

[2:54:18] >> Those are the closest lot.

[2:54:20] Four is not very close.

[2:54:23] » [clears throat]

[2:54:23] >> So, it's really five.

[2:54:35] » Any other

[2:54:36] Anyone want to weigh in on this at all

[2:54:38] or

[2:54:39] No?

[2:54:39] >> Nope.

[2:54:40] >> No.

[2:54:41] >> I personally feel like I agree with uh

[2:54:45] Dean's comments. Um I I feel like it

[2:54:47] makes more sense to address this more

[2:54:49] specifically and more in detail when

[2:54:52] we're actually looking at building plan

[2:54:53] a building plan.

[2:54:54] >> Yeah.

[2:54:55] >> And so I would propose

[2:54:57] unfortunately just accepting

[2:54:59] the language as as recommended

[2:55:01] currently.

[2:55:04] » Okay.

[2:55:05] I'm there as well with with the caveat

[2:55:08] of a note. Uh you know, this is a big

[2:55:10] highlight and I I again I I sympathize

[2:55:13] with Ken's comment a minute ago finding

[2:55:14] out a week ahead of time or something.

[2:55:16] So again, engagement with the neighbors

[2:55:18] is really important, of course.

[2:55:20] I think we all know that, but um

[2:55:24] just to drive it home.

[2:55:27] » Yeah, I'll second.

[2:55:30] If you If your first was was your first

[2:55:32] acceptance of the of the language

[2:55:35] with a uh with with a note to

[2:55:38] really

[2:55:41] emphasize the this in the building

[2:55:43] >> Or just would be directed that to to

[2:55:45] make sure that when they come in on four

[2:55:47] and or five that we're looking at and

[2:55:50] making sure that there is access uh to

[2:55:52] that area for maintenance of drainage

[2:55:54] improvements.

[2:56:00] » I'll move.

[2:56:01] >> Second.

[2:56:03] >> Council member Obritsch?

[2:56:04] >> Yes.

[2:56:05] >> Council member Brown?

[2:56:05] >> Yes.

[2:56:06] >> Council member Golden? Council member

[2:56:08] Wall?

[2:56:09] Mayor Domgowski?

[2:56:14] » Okay.

[2:56:14] Thank you. And then I'll just note that

[2:56:16] we're going to put it in our permit

[2:56:17] tracking system and in our address files

[2:56:20] and we'll make sure there's some

[2:56:21] redundant notes in different places.

[2:56:23] >> Thank you.

[2:56:25] Ken. Thank you, Lisa.

[2:56:29] Uh we got one sort of last formal issue,

[2:56:32] uh new business item D, a resolution on

[2:56:35] road maintenance and safety improvement

[2:56:36] work. And Luis, I'm handing this off to

[2:56:38] you.

[2:56:39] >> Honorable mayor and town council

[2:56:41] members, um with the interest in time,

[2:56:43] I'll make a super short summary. This

[2:56:45] item is uh basically a continuation of

[2:56:47] what we discussed during budget for the

[2:56:49] upper Olahhanja Road safety project. Um

[2:56:52] there are multiple items here for you to

[2:56:53] consider.

[2:56:54] Um these are all the items we discussed

[2:56:56] during the budget season. Um the first item is the amendment to um

[2:57:01] Fairlawn Company and it's for them to

[2:57:04] clean up the uh the upper section,

[2:57:06] remove vegetation, put in guardrails,

[2:57:09] and just improve safety in general, and

[2:57:10] get us ready for the winter season. The

[2:57:12] second item is a annual um cleaning

[2:57:15] agreement that is for 3 years uh with

[2:57:18] Fairlawn and having them come back and

[2:57:20] doing annual maintenance on the upper

[2:57:22] section. And the last item is the last

[2:57:25] action is with uh BKF Engineers, and

[2:57:28] this is for them to uh study uh a

[2:57:31] permanent solution, um

[2:57:33] and looking at um the possibility of uh

[2:57:35] widening the road, and also looking for

[2:57:37] grant opportunity. Now, there's only one

[2:57:40] item is not mentioned in this is the

[2:57:42] purchase of the temporary traffic

[2:57:44] signal. I'm in the process of doing a

[2:57:46] selection right now, and I will bring

[2:57:47] that item to you in September. But, we

[2:57:50] do have a updated rate from Fairlawn,

[2:57:52] which is uh substantially reduced, and

[2:57:54] that will allow us to continue using the

[2:57:57] their uh renting their temporary signal

[2:57:59] until the time comes for us to um

[2:58:02] purchase new one and make that um

[2:58:04] transition.

[2:58:05] So, um with that, I'm open to any um

[2:58:07] questions.

[2:58:09] >> Thank you, sir. Any questions for Luis?

[2:58:12] >> I have a question, and basically

[2:58:13] comment, um

[2:58:15] Luis, and it's basically more for you,

[2:58:17] Pam.

[2:58:18] This is an expensive project.

[2:58:20] Uh it's a project that for what 2 years

[2:58:23] ago

[2:58:24] the whole road was shut down for a lot of reasons, but uh it's been a

[2:58:29] huge problem for the county, not just

[2:58:32] Woodside.

[2:58:33] And this is where we need to go to the

[2:58:35] county and say we need a lot of money

[2:58:38] to make this work way it needs to work

[2:58:40] cuz we've been sort of paying for it

[2:58:42] ourselves the cheap way we can.

[2:58:45] It's It's beyond us. And so we need to

[2:58:48] get really creative on how we can get

[2:58:50] other people's money

[2:58:52] to do this.

[2:58:56] » Any Any other comments or questions?

[2:59:01] Any member of the public

[2:59:03] that's interested in commenting on item

[2:59:04] D?

[2:59:07] Seeing none, we'll close public comment.

[2:59:09] Uh any further deliberation from

[2:59:10] council? If not, happy to accept a

[2:59:13] motion.

[2:59:14] >> I'll move to accept item D.

[2:59:16] >> Second.

[2:59:17] >> Councilmember Abernethy?

[2:59:19] >> Yes.

[2:59:19] >> Councilmember Brown?

[2:59:20] >> Yes.

[2:59:20] >> Councilmember Gold?

[2:59:21] >> Yes.

[2:59:21] >> Councilmember Wong?

[2:59:22] >> Yes.

[2:59:23] >> Mayor Domkowski?

[2:59:24] >> Yes, thank you.

[2:59:27] Any updates on volunteer committees?

[2:59:30] None? Okay. Any council communications?

[2:59:33] >> Yeah, I have a couple quick ones. I know

[2:59:35] it's late. Um I first wanted to thank

[2:59:37] Lewis and his team. The other day we had

[2:59:40] a report of dumping in the Woodside

[2:59:44] [clears throat] Heights. This is a dump

[2:59:45] truck literally dumped a load on the

[2:59:47] street

[2:59:48] over overnight.

[2:59:50] And the residents called them in about

[2:59:52] 8:00 in the morning.

[2:59:54] And And as soon as I heard about it,

[2:59:56] they they were already alerting Lewis

[2:59:58] and his team and that cleaned up by

[3:00:00] 10:00 in the morning. It was amazing how

[3:00:02] fast they reacted to that.

[3:00:04] Um the other thing I want to point out

[3:00:06] is that we are using They will be using

[3:00:09] and have already contacted Sheriff Flock

[3:00:12] camera has caught the the license plate

[3:00:16] of the truck

[3:00:17] doing the dumping.

[3:00:18] And we're going to be use We're talk to

[3:00:19] the Sheriff. We're going to track that

[3:00:21] truck down through the license through

[3:00:23] the Flock Camera. We already have a name

[3:00:25] from having gone through the materials who who the company is.

[3:00:29] So,

[3:00:30] Flock has been very useful there. And I

[3:00:32] have one more personal comment, too, on

[3:00:34] Flock.

[3:00:35] Uh a week ago,

[3:00:37] uh

[3:00:38] we would learn from the Sheriff that

[3:00:40] there was a

[3:00:41] uh a a robbery that had occurred on um

[3:00:46] fairly down on Alameda and Woodside

[3:00:49] Road.

[3:00:50] And they caught them

[3:00:52] right next door to me on Northgate

[3:00:55] because we have a Flock Camera literally

[3:00:58] right outside my my house.

[3:01:00] Um so, two in a row for wins for Flock.

[3:01:06] » Thank you, sir.

[3:01:07] Um any other communications?

[3:01:12] We're a little bit remiss in not

[3:01:13] properly welcoming you, Pam.

[3:01:16] This was not the right meeting for a lot

[3:01:18] of glorious accolades and thanks, but um

[3:01:22] I know I speak for everybody when we're

[3:01:23] really impressed and we're very thankful

[3:01:25] for everything you're bringing to the

[3:01:26] role and

[3:01:28] I'm sorry this was your first meeting.

[3:01:32] Yeah, it's great to have you.

[3:01:33] Uh we actually still will reopen

[3:01:36] communications one last time before

[3:01:38] calling it a night. Are there any

[3:01:39] members in the Zoom room that would like

[3:01:41] to make any additional comments?

[3:01:46] Okay, seeing none, we will close the

[3:01:48] meeting at 10:20 on July 28th. Thank you

[3:01:51] all.

Town Council Meeting - July 28, 2026

Transcript