Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Public Safety Fire topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Council declines to endorse AB 2517 after residents warn local discretion could be misused
Summary
After extensive public comment about parcel-level fire‑hazard designations, the council did not move forward with a resolution supporting AB 2517; residents said the bill preserves local discretion that previously led to whole‑parcel updesignations when only small slices of land were mapped as higher risk.
The Los Altos Hills City Council debated AB 2517 — proposed state reforms to the fire hazard severity zone process — and chose not to adopt a letter of support on March 19 after divided discussion and public concern.
Staff summarized the bill as providing procedural improvements to statewide map updates, more transparency about data and methodology used by the State Fire Marshal, and a clearer opportunity for local engagement before map release. Staff stressed it would affirm that local jurisdictions retain authority to determine parcel‑level designations, and the bill includes provisions for more regular map updates and outreach.
Several residents and council members said the language leaves intact local discretion that, in earlier local action, had resulted in whole‑parcel designations at the highest severity level even when only a tiny portion of a property mapped higher. Speakers described cases where large parcels—95–99% moderate—were treated as very high and warned of consequences for construction, insurance and property values. Some urged the council to take a moral stand and either oppose the bill or seek changes in Sacramento to remove the discretion that allows whole‑parcel updesignations.
Staff and supporters countered that the bill provides important transparency, requires public engagement prior to statewide map rollout and clarifies that local authorities retain the power to treat mixed‑severity parcels consistently; they said the proposed language does not itself force an increase in designation but preserves local control. Several councilmembers expressed concern about optics and potential misuse and asked whether adopting support would influence negotiations in Sacramento.
A motion to place the town’s support on the record did not secure sufficient backing and the item failed to advance. Council directed staff to continue work on a local proposal for mixed‑zone parcel handling already underway with the Planning Commission and to keep the public informed about state and local next steps.
