By Scott Wong

In the face of resident protests, torrential rains and a bomb threat, the Los Altos Hills City Council unanimously voted Thursday to adopt a revised pathways plan that, according to one county official, “scaled back the scope of the ultimate trail network.”

The 2002 Master Path Plan, last revised more than 20 years ago, eliminates some off-road pathways and potential pathways, while securing other roadside paths added in 1996, said Patty Ciesla, Santa Clara County Parks and Recreation commissioner.

Residents packed the council chambers and beseeched council to delay the vote, contending that Breene Kerr and Dean Warshawsky’s landslide victory over council-backed candidates last week was a clear repudiation of council’s motion to approve the plan - one they said was plagued with errors and inconsistencies.

Responded Councilman Mike O’Malley: “(The map) is a lot more accurate than anything we’ve had up to now.”

Mayor Bob Fenwick said the map plan was merely a “working drawing.”

“Many ask why should we deal with this tonight?” Fenwick said. “Because it has been addressed in the past and never nears completion. Nothing done here tonight cannot be changed by the next council.”

A 20-minute recess was called and the building evacuated at 6:25 p.m., when a 911 bomb threat was called in from a pay phone just outside council chambers. The caller said a bomb would be detonated in the room sometime between 6:30 p.m. and 11 p.m., according to Santa Clara County Sheriff Deputy Jeff Novik, who was on the scene.

The timely threat, just as discussions on the hotly contested pathways revision got under way, led some on council to suspect opponents of the revision approval would go to any length to stop it.

“The intention was to delay and get the meeting canceled,” said Fenwick.

But residents speculated that council was behind the threat.

“I think it’s a diversion, because (council) wasn’t expecting such a large turnout,” said resident Carol Pearson.

A bomb-sniffing dog didn’t arrive until more than an hour later, just after 8 o’clock, when the building was evacuated a second time and the meeting delayed about 10 minutes. No bombs were discovered.

When council reconvened, residents argued that sufficient resident input had not been considered before the vote.

“There’s been a lot of talk about public input,” resident Steve Bristow said. “But there hasn’t been a lot of public input, just a lot of public frustration.”

City Attorney Steve Mattas said the council had in previous weeks fulfilled public hearings requirements mandated by law.

O’Malley said he was disturbed that out of 87 easements, council was vacating 54 of them, but noted that many were redundant or not necessary.

“We’re wiping out about 60 percent of them,” O’Malley said.

Despite council members repeated references to “vacating easements” throughout the discussion, Fenwick clarified that no easements would be eliminated by the map update.

“We aren’t removing any easements here, so we shouldn’t be using that terminology,” Fenwick said.

Ciesla reasoned with council to defer their decision until easements could be analyzed in addition to the pathways.

“The effort to create an accurate map needs to be taken out into the community in small group meetings, so the people who know their neighborhood best can verify on the ground what’s on the map,” Ciesla said. “The easements that aren’t shown need to be dug up (from residents’ housing deeds) and put on the map.”

Portola Valley Councilman Kirke Comstock came before council as a friend of the valley and not a member of council, he said.

“I’m here to save the value of the trails,” he said. “Trail maps must be comprehensive to be effective. Trails are good, easements are good and an extensive network is necessary.”