Historic Resources Board debates creating "Preserving Palo Alto" awards; no consensus to proceed in May 2025

The Palo Alto Historic Resources Board discussed a proposal to create a city-level preservation awards program (working name: "Preserving Palo Alto Awards") and whether to hold an inaugural ceremony in May 2025. The HRB subcommittee proposed honoring long-term preservation leaders and recommended beginning with people (individual honorees) in the first iteration, then broadening to people, projects and properties in later cycles.

Subcommittee members proposed three initial honorees for the first iteration: Carolyn George, Gail Wooley and Steve Steiger. A subcommittee member said the proposed initial honorees were chosen to honor "long-term preservation leaders in Palo Alto" and noted the awards would help build awareness of local preservation work.

Board members debated several core issues: whether awards should honor people or projects/properties; whether the awards should be decoupled from the Architectural Review Board design awards; the appropriate cadence (two-year versus five-year cycles); how far back to consider completed projects for retroactive recognition (a 10-year lookback was discussed); venue, budget and insurance logistics; and the degree of community input required before naming award recipients. A staff member advised that logistical items such as certificate-of-insurance requirements and available budget would constrain any May 2025 timeline.

Some board members supported launching a first ceremony in May 2025 during National Preservation Month, citing momentum and the ability to learn from an early attempt. Others urged delaying to 2026 to allow time for broader community outreach, clearer categories, coordination with other preservation organizations (PAST, PAH, Stanford Historical Society) and confirmation of city procedural and budgetary requirements.

There was no formal vote to establish the awards or to hold a May 2025 ceremony. One board member summarized the outcome: "What I am hearing is there is not a consensus from this board on who or what we should be awarding and that it should be done this May." Staff was directed to return with amended bylaw language and options for timing, categories and logistics at a future meeting. The active ad hoc subcommittee will continue work on categories, candidate lists and outreach.

Discussion also touched on possible award categories suggested for future cycles: residential, commercial, Stanford-affiliated properties, multifamily, adaptive reuse, small-project recognition, and a community "people's choice" or reader-vote category for outreach. The subcommittee recommended consideration of a 10-year retrospective list (subject to board approval) as a starting point for future project-based awards and proposed coordinating with local preservation organizations for nominations and event support.

Board members thanked the subcommittee for its work and requested additional staff analysis of budget, insurance, and procedural constraints before scheduling a ceremony.