Demand Letter Alleges Secret Meetings, CEQA Evasion, Site Selection Failure, and Misuse of Public Resources

LOS ALTOS HILLS, CA — December 16, 2025
A coalition of Los Altos Hills residents and environmental advocates has formally accused the Los Altos Hills City Council of unlawful actions aimed at redesignating the O’Keefe Open Space Preserve to development without legally required environmental review or public transparency.

In a detailed legal demand letter delivered this week to the Town Clerk, the SHIELD Coalition (Sustainable Housing Initiative for Environmental & Land Defense Coalition) alleges that the City Council quietly selected O’Keefe Preserve as a housing site, conducted closed-door deliberations, and then engineered a so-called “citizen initiative” specifically designed to bypass the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA).

“This was a site selection failure from the start,” said a spokesperson for the SHIELD Coalition. “The Town quietly chose an ecologically irreplaceable open space, engineered a process to avoid CEQA, and then attempted to pass it off as a citizen-led effort. That is unlawful, and it puts every protected open space at risk.”

A Preserve Chosen Behind Closed Doors
According to public meeting transcripts and official staff reports cited in the demand letter, Town officials identified O’Keefe Preserve — an ecologically irreplaceable open space — as a housing site months before any public discussion or environmental analysis. A Council-appointed committee met outside public view, walked the property, and coordinated with the City Attorney regarding removal of voter-adopted open-space protections.

On October 29, 2025, the City Council openly discussed two options:

• Place a Council-sponsored initiative on the ballot — which would require CEQA review; or

• Advance the same Council-drafted plan through a so-called “citizen initiative,” which City officials asserted could avoid CEQA.

The Council chose the second path.

A Fully Drafted Initiative — Written by the City, Not Citizens
On November 17, 2025, the Town unveiled a fully drafted ballot initiative written by the City Attorney, complete with maps, development footprints, legal amendments, and a detailed election timeline for June or November 2026. The initiative would redesignate the Preserve from protected open space to multifamily residential zoning and transfer voter approval requirements for land conveyance into the Council’s hands.

Town officials then encouraged residents to gather signatures, supplied a “template,” and discussed signature targets — all using Town staff, Town resources, and official meetings.

Why Environmental Groups Are Alarmed
Environmental advocates warn that this conduct represents more than a procedural dispute — it reflects a site selection failure with lasting environmental consequences:

• CEQA exists to ensure environmental impacts are studied before decisions are made — not after.

• O’Keefe Preserve contains wildlife habitat, creek corridors, mature trees, and publicly protected land that cannot be replaced once lost.

• If voter-approved protections can be removed through unlawful shortcuts, any protected open space could be next.

A Dangerous Precedent
The demand letter warns that allowing this approach would normalize a site selection failure in which cities decide first, hide the process, label it “citizen-led,” and defer environmental review until after irreversible harm is already set in motion.

“Today it’s O’Keefe,” the Coalition warned. “Tomorrow it’s any open space the public thought was protected.”

What Residents Are Demanding

The SHIELD Coalition is calling on the Town of Los Altos Hills to:

• Immediately suspend all work on the sham citizen initiative

• Conduct full CEQA review before advancing any redesignating

• Cease all unlawful coordination with purported citizen proponents

• Rescind prior unlawful actions taken in closed meetings

Absent corrective action, the coalition has stated it is prepared to pursue legal remedies to enforce open-government laws, environmental protections, and voter mandates.

This Affects Everyone
Residents emphasize that this is not a narrow land-use dispute. It raises broader questions about whether voter-approved protections mean what they say, whether environmental laws apply when politically inconvenient, and whether major decisions will be made in public — or in private.

“We support affordable housing,” the Coalition emphasized. “However, our demands are about protecting ecologically irreplaceable open space, respecting voters, and following the law.”

More information, documents, and video evidence are available at saveopenspaces.org

Media contact:
Yatin Mundkur
saveopnspaces@gmail.com
(408) 313 - 3928