May, 2005

A New Superintendent for LASD

School Board Trustees are empowered with three crucial responsibilities: to hire – and when necessary, terminate - the Superintendent, balance the budget and set district policy. Every year we deal with budget and policy; this year, for the first time in 18 years, we are dealing with all three responsibilities. Without a doubt, selecting a Superintendent is the single most important responsibility of any Board.

The process that we as a Board decided on in September is commonly used by many school boards. The Board priority was to conduct a search that would net the very best candidates to choose from and to minimize disruption for the district office staff such as phone inquiries, processing of documents, reference checks, interview logistics and so forth. The Board unanimously decided to retain an executive search firm that specializes in Superintendent searches. The district has engaged search firms in the past – most recently to find Dick Leiwer's replacement, Dr Boettcher, three years ago.

The Board also decided to conduct the application and interview process "with complete confidentiality", meaning that just Board members would be present for interviews and only the Board and the search firm would know who the applicants were. Dr Gratiot herself asked to NOT be part of the interview and selection process other than to provide information about the job, her contract and so forth.

In September, Dr. Gratiot distributed a Request for Proposal to several well-known and widely respected search firms. After reviewing the documents from the several firms that responded, the Board decided to interview representatives from three firms. We selected the firm of Hazzard, Young and Attea (HYA), based in Chicago. All three principals of HYA are former Superintendents and have conducted many successful local and nation-wide searches.

The search firm held open, public meetings in October and November with Dr. Gratiot, current and former district administrators, principals, employee union representatives, parent groups and community leaders - including police chief, city council representatives, neighboring education leaders and former Board members. In addition, a questionnaire asking for specific information went to all parents via the weekly school newsletters and was also written about in our local paper for any non-parent input.

At the same time, HYA placed an ad in a widely distributed administrative publication and website. HYA also relied heavily on their network of professional contacts to recruit qualified candidates. The consultants received nearly forty requests for application packets; more than twenty application packets with credentials, references, etc. were returned. Two principals of HYA personally interviewed eleven highly qualified candidates (based on their applications and references); the firm then selected five candidates that they believed had the experience, credentials, and "personality fit" for Los Altos. After reviewing and editing HYA’s choices, the Board moved forward with scheduling interviews.

In 2-hour interviews over two days, the Board interviewed five candidates using the same format and questions for each candidate. The questions were a compilation

based on contributions from principals, teachers, parents, administrators and Board members. The Board met in closed session with HYA after the final interview and decided on three final candidates. Next, two Board members "doubled up" to spend an afternoon with each of the final three candidates (one member could not participate in the afternoons), followed by a dinner meeting with all the Board and another formal interview. At the after dinner meeting, the questions were more targeted, formulated by each Board member and the format less structured. The following morning each candidate met with two Board members to discuss particulars of a hypothetical "contract".

The Board once again met in closed session and decided on a final candidate. The Board visited the district where the candidate works and met with several community, district and administrative representatives. This final due diligence interview session was followed by the initiation of a thorough background check and contract negotiations over several days.

I would like to address the "confidentiality" of the search, as this particular piece of the process did generate a lot of interest and concern. Having the candidates interview in confidentiality allowed us several benefits: 1) the candidates who were NOT selected did not have any stigma attached to them at their home district, 2) if there were any internal candidates, they did not have any concerns that peers would find out, and thus subject them to discussion - good or bad, and 3) the Board was allowed very frank and open discussions with all of the candidates and those discussions went no further than the four walls.

LASD is the largest employer in Los Altos with nearly 4000 "clients" and 230+ employees and the Superintendent is the CEO of that "company". Most CEO-level searches ARE confidential; CEO candidates themselves demand it. Imagine the unrest and distraction if it was known that Dr. Gratiot was a candidate for superintendent at another district. It would bring out all sorts of speculation and internal preoccupation.

On a personal note, at the outset I was apprehensive about selecting a successor to Dr. Gratiot: it appeared too enormous and burdensome an undertaking. However, HYA provided incredible confidence and support, and the candidates themselves were all well qualified and interesting to talk to, which made the process rather enjoyable. Spending more than 60 hours with my fellow Board members under unusual circumstances provided an opportunity to get to know each other in a variety of venues. The discussions before and after the interviews and the meetings with HYA also provided an insight into each of the Board members’ values and vision for the District. I am very proud of the manner in which we all worked together thoughtfully, collegially, respectfully and with a common goal: to find the best person for our district.

I sincerely hope that the community gives our new Superintendent a warm welcome and the same enthusiastic support and respect that Dr Gratiot has enjoyed.

In 1990 the Los Altos City Council approved the completion of an historic property inventory of structures, built before 1940, with the goal of preserving what is unique to Los Altos. The survey was conducted in accordance with the recommendations of the State Office of Historic Preservation. All

Currently over 120 commercial, residential and agricultural properties are listed on the HRI – a little over 1% of all Los Altos residential addresses. Eighteen have been designated by the City Council as local landmarks. Neighborhood meetings to explain the HRI and its benefits to historic property owners were held several years ago, after which all owners received certificates of appreciation for their efforts in historic preservation.

When the owner of a property listed on the HRI and rated at least 50 on the Kalman scale wishes to make alterations, one of their first steps is to meet with the Historical Commission. The Historical Commission, which is required to include at least one architect to maintain the city’s Certified Local Government status, can provide guidance in many areas, including appropriate materials, variances to preserve historic structures, state historic building codes, property tax reductions, Federal tax credits, etc. The commission makes recommendations on the properties it reviews to the Planning Commission.

Now in its 21^st year, the Annual Margaret Thompson Historical Essay Contest is administered by the Historical Commission in conjunction with local public and private elementary schools. Hundreds of 3^rd through 6^th grade students participate by writing an essay on an historical theme chosen by the Association of the Los Altos Historical Museum’s education committee. Every participating student receives a certificate and three winners from each grade level are awarded cash prizes at an ice cream social held at the Los Altos History Museum and attended by the City Council, Historical Commission and other community volunteers.

The Commission welcomes any information regarding early property owners and their families, photographs (originals can be electronically scanned and returned), building plans, etc. that could contribute to the preservation of our city’s unique heritage. The Commission can be contacted via city hall. I enjoyed being on the Los Altos Historical Commission for the past four years, serving as both Chair and Vice Chair, and look forward to continuing to serve our community on the Los Altos Planning Commission, to which I was appointed in March 2005.

With all the hoop-la surrounding the Pinewood development, questions have been raised. Was the seller’s intended use of the property in keeping with Pinewood School’s expansion plans? The property, which slid through the hands of a residential developer and landed in the laps of Pinewood School is the focus of much neighborhood debate. If the original owner did not want her land to be used as part of Pinewood school, what could she have done to secure her wishes for her property?

Harry Price, a real estate attorney in Los Altos has some answers. "Homeowners can put conditions on the future use of their land or buildings" says Price. But he cautions that "more restrictions on a property, depending on the restriction, could affect the value."

Deed restrictions are only limited by the desire and imagination of a property owner. In Sacramento, a seller used a deed restriction so that he could refuse to sell his buildings to attorneys. On the face, this restriction seems discriminatory….depending on how you feel about attorneys. The seller maintained that he had enough experience in being sued by attorney-buyers that his self-imposed restriction was necessary as a protection to his business. Two courts agreed with him.

The Parc Regent in Los Altos is a high end townhouse community requiring that one owner/occupant per home be at least 55 years old.

A community in Southern California prohibits the parking of cars on the street.

Everything from height restrictions to landscaping to paint colors can be enforced indefinitely using deed restrictions. Small groups of neighbors can band together to create Covenants, Conditions and Restrictions (CC&Rs) to ensure future conditions. Privacy, for example, may be protected by either agreeing to place single story conditions on a small number of adjacent homes or by mandating particular landscape barriers. The neighbors must be in 100% agreement, and even with the CC&R’s in place there is no guarantee that they will not go unchallenged in the future. When CC&R’s result in a benefit to adjoining neighbors, they are more likely to be enforced when challenged.

Deed restrictions can be implemented at the time of a property’s sale according to Denise Welsh at Intero Realty Services. "A seller would incorporate any restrictions during the escrow process by making the demand a condition of title," counsels Welsh. Harry Price agrees with this and adds that these types of last minute restrictions work best if a time limit, like 50 years, is put on them.

So the seller of the (now) Pinewood property could have put some safeguards in place to ensure that her property would not become a school if in, fact, that was what she had wanted. However, it is hard to predict how neighborhoods and properties might evolve and therefore difficult to know what might be a seller’s regret down the road.

This month is huge!

2.  05-SC-16 -- Stewart Associates / T. Witter and J. Mayer --  765 Vista Grande Avenue.  Consideration of design review for a new two-story home.  Project Planner: Kornfield

3.  05-SC-17 -- J. Quan / J. Osias -- 151 Giffen Road. Consideration of design review for a new two story home.  Project Planner: Beaudi

32 years ago, in September 1973, the Los Altos Town Crier cover showed a photo taken at the corner of Campbell Avenue and Covington Road. The impressive pepper trees that line the mostly one acre lots of Covington, (between Campbell and El Monte) were Los Altos landmarks, but also served as a gateway into what is known as Costello Acres. A photo taken today would show a nearly identical scene: the quadrangle of Campbell, Fremont, El Monte and both sides of Covington contains some of the most unique and desirable residential lots in all of Los Altos.

In 1916, Francis Costello initiated the original subdivision and had lots deed-restricted to 40k square feet. In 1973, the restrictions expired and Los Altos developers eagerly wanted to subdivide it into R1-10 (quarter-acre) lots. Land owners fought to preserve these lots and the neighborhood’s special rural character. Through Town Crier reporting, letter publishing, and the enthusiastic support of large numbers of townspeople, the City Council was petitioned to change the zoning in the area to R1-20 (half-acre), and to set the lot widths greater than Los Altos standards, ensuring that the lots would never be split. The City Council agreed; the result was the preservation of a rare city asset, an entire residential subdivision of near-acre lots.

Today, Costello Acres is saturated, serving Covington School, a childcare center, St. Williams, the two existing Pinewood School campuses with 320+ students and staff, and soon the proposed Rosita Pool complex. Pinewood is by all accounts a good school providing quality education -- owned by locals. It's also a private, non-profit commercial enterprise, with facilities unavailable for community use. By Pinewood's own choice, they have located in the middle of a residential neighborhood with limited access to arterial streets: nearly every student must be driven to school, generating four neighborhood trips per day each. With over 60% of the campus population from outside Los Altos, any growth means more non-neighborhood traffic and burden on already overloaded streets.

Costello Acres is again in serious danger with Pinewood's latest proposal to expand its lower campus onto residential property at 450 Covington Road, and beyond that, further residential land acquisition for potential school growth between the lower and middle campuses on Fremont. Pinewood has proposed a new use permit with a 65% increase in enrollment over the currently approved 108, a growing administrative staff, and an increase in the already horrendous traffic situation. Even at current use permit levels, the traffic generated by the two Fremont campuses exceeds the traffic density which would have been generated by all the possible subdivisions of Costello Acres which residents voted to eliminate 32 years ago.

Immediate neighbors and a growing number of Los Altos residents now see this issue as a battle between overly-permissive zoning guidelines that allow a Public Community Facility (PCF) on any one-acre lot in the City and a neighborhood that has continuously fought to save itself from subdivision

and development. How should Costello Acres residents protect themselves from developers who acquire a next-door neighbor's one-acre lot and then ask the City for the same treatment?

To date, the Planning Commission and City Development Staff have wavered. Other neighborhoods have controlled their future by voting for 'No-two-story-overlays.' Pinewood's existing lower-campus property could easily support the world-class school they desire for a campus of 108 students, and create a smoother traffic flow as well. Only because they want to grow further, do they want this expansion. Will the City Council deny this project and grant Costello Acres the same self-destiny with a 'No-PCF-overlay?' Or will entire blocks of this rare Los Altos asset succumb to non-residential development? We believe that City approval of this project will set a significant negative precedent moving forward for all Los Altos neighborhoods, and encourage concerned residents to express their opinions to the City Council on May 10th.

David Casas