Get Full Government Meeting Transcripts, Videos, & Alerts Forever!
Get email alerts on the Mills Act topic
No spam. Unsubscribe anytime.
Los Altos staff reports Mills Act compliance after five‑year audit; owners urge tighter privacy controls
Summary
Staff reported that owners complied with a city five‑year Mills Act audit, but public commenters and property owners criticized prior public disclosure of confidential Mills Act documentation and urged redaction of monetary details.
City planning staff presented the results of a five‑year Mills Act compliance audit and said most Mills Act property owners cooperated with the inspection process, but multiple Mills Act owners urged the city to protect private documentation and financial details from public publication.
Senior planner Sean Gos told the commission that the Mills Act is the state incentive that reduces property taxes in exchange for historic preservation obligations and that the city currently has 17 active Mills Act contracts. Gos described the audit as a largely self‑reported review: staff requested documentation and receipts from owners and compiled materials to verify that properties are being maintained consistent with preservation standards. He said that of 14 properties asked for documentation, all responded and staff found broad compliance with preservation requirements.
Gos told the commission that some attachments originally included in the staff packet were removed because they contained confidential information, and he said staff would consider leaving monetary figures out of public summaries at the owners’ request. “I do have tables that show basic information without conveying confidential information,” he said.
Several Mills Act property owners praised the audit’s findings while expressing alarm that personal receipts and financial information had briefly been available online. One owner called the prior publication “a slap in the face” and said disclosure risked misuse of private financial data; another owner who identified himself as a Mills Act participant confirmed that his restoration work was extensive and that owners are maintaining their properties. Public commenters urged staff not to increase mandatory reporting requirements unless there is evidence of noncompliance.
Staff said the city will continue five‑year inspections and discuss redaction options for public materials; the presentation was informational and required no commission action.
