We are shooting the breeze up here.

It's 201 and we're going to call into order our rules and open government committee for Wednesday, September 17th.

Let's start with roll call.

Candelas?

Here.

The one.

Fully absent.

Kameh.

Cohen?

Here.

We have a quorum.

Alright, thank you.

We're gonna start by reviewing our council agenda for next Tuesday, September 23rd.

We um it's being noticed for 9 30 closed session, 1 30 regular session, and consent starts on page two, I mean page four, and continues on pages five, six, and seven, we have section three, the status of open audit recommendation, section six, our stormwater management annual report, section eight, gateway tower loan commitment and land purchase, and also the consolidated annual performance and evaluation report.

We have one item on land use consent.

Do we have any public comment on this agenda?

No public comment.

Okay, back to the committee.

Now I've had a request from district three to defer item 8.1 for a week because there will be several council members missing during due to the chamber study session next week.

So if anybody if makes a motion and is willing to accept that change, you can include that in your motion for the agenda, and we don't have an ad sheet.

So I would so move.

Second, all right.

So we're moving the deferral of item 8.1 by one week and um the rest of the agenda.

Let's vote.

Okay, motion carries 4-0, and now we will review the agenda for Tuesday, September 30th, with also with a 9 30 closed session and a 1 30 regular session consent starts on page five and continues on pages six and seven.

Section three, we have the approval in terms of an agreement with POA, and the focus area semi-annual status report.

Section 8.1 is the acquisition of 447 South Almaden, which will be heard concurrently with the SJFA item, which is on page, well listed on the agenda on page 12.

We'll get to that.

We have two items on land use, 10.2, 10.3, and a joint city of San Jose F Council and Financing Authority Housing Authority agenda meeting for a an item on page 12.

No public comment.

All right, back to the committee.

All right, that's about all right.

Motion carries four zero.

Thank you.

And we're on to our consent calendar.

There's four items on rules consent today.

We have any public comment on consent.

No public comment.

Okay.

Motion and a second.

Let's vote on consent.

All right, that motion carries four zero.

We have two items under section C.

The first is a uh policy memo that was submitted by uh Councilmember Ortiz.

We briefly discussed that at a council meeting a couple weeks ago.

Um we referred it to rules to refer to the investment policy review.

Are there any public comment first?

No public comment.

Okay, back to the committee for any questions or discussion.

Anyone want to?

All right, Councilmember Kameh.

Okay.

Thank you so much.

I know that um uh this uh uh type of uh, you know, sort of looking at our investment policy and what is that uh is being uh asked to be looked at more carefully.

Uh so I would only say that as we're looking uh towards the March 2026 timeframe, there may be other types of things.

I know that in the past there's been you know what is socially responsible and and that sort of thing.

Uh so I think that having that conversation at that time uh is something that I think uh would be worthwhile because I I know that this keeps coming up, and with that I would like to uh move the item sorry just respectfully request um that you allow staff the two weeks to do an official workload analysis this is actually a bit um more of an undertaking especially the trade-offs and sensitivity analysis um that would be needed so I know our finance director would actually like to work with the author during those two weeks so that we can through the workload analysis give you some options on what would be a green light versus what would be a yellow and what the scope of that work um could look like moving forward because there definitely will need to be some trade-offs if you wanted to pursue this.

Okay.

Yes.

Alright so we're the motion is amended to ask for a workload analysis on this item and come back to the rules committee at that time.