Item 12, a package of airport upgrades that includes a 24‑hour automated weather observation system (AWOS), runway lighting and threshold systems, generated extended public comment. Opponents urged removing the item from the consent calendar, citing concerns about potential increases in night operations, new or brighter lighting near baylands that could harm migratory birds, accuracy of environmental paperwork, lack of detailed cost‑benefit or maintenance analysis, and new FAA grant assurances the city would accept if it takes FAA funds.

Speakers citing wildlife and environmental concerns included representatives from the Santa Clara Valley Bird Alliance and East Palo Alto residents arguing for more public analysis of lighting and potential effects on the Baylands. Several speakers also raised the subject of FAA grant assurances and whether accepting federal funding would require changes to local nondiscrimination, climate or equity programs; one commenter cited the King v. Turner litigation as related context.

Airport users and pilots disputed those concerns in public comment, calling the AWOS a routine maintenance upgrade that provides pilots with up‑to‑the‑minute weather and reduces risk by improving situational awareness (several speakers said the equipment will not increase operations). City staff and airport supporters said FAA standard equipment and grants are common at many airports and argued the proposed work replaces aging, out‑of‑date systems.

Council considered public input and a council member attempted to pull Item 12 from the consent calendar; the pull failed and the consent calendar then passed with one member abstaining on Item 12. Council did not take additional action on the AWOS at this meeting; staff said contracts can be extended and further review and public engagement will continue as appropriate.