It's two o'clock, so we're gonna call today's meeting of the rules and open government committee to order.

Uh, we'll start with roll call, please.

Candelas.

Here.

Foley, can we absent Cohen?

Here.

We have a quorum.

Thank you.

All right.

Welcome to the October 22nd meeting of the Rules and Open Government Committee.

As a reminder, we expect all attending to follow the code of conduct located in the agenda.

Failure to comply with this code of conduct and behavior, which will disturb, disrupt, or impede the orderly conduct of the meeting, may result in removal from the meeting.

We are going to start today with the review of the October 28th City Council agenda.

The special starting time for closed session of 9 a.m.

Open session starting at 1 30 and no evening session.

And consent starts on page five and ends on page six.

Section three, we have our homelessness activities audit report.

Actions related to purchase order for fire apparatuses.

An amendment to the vendor agreement with VSP.

An amendment to the agreement with Standard Insurance Company and Life Insurance Company of North America.

And Vision Zero East San Jose safety improvements for Center Road.

Section four, we have an ordinance prohibiting law enforcement officers from concealing identities.

And section eight, a grant agreement with We Hope for the Arena Hotel Operation.

Also in section eight, an immunicode amendment related to building standards.

We also have an ad sheet.

Do we have any public comment?

Yes, Blair, go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Hi, Flair Beekman.

I'm going to be back in the Bay Area for the next few months.

So I return from San Diego.

Nice to be here.

And learning that is been a really valuable lesson for myself.

And I just thought I'd share that at this time.

And then thank you so much for the item that you have about asking an ordinance working towards an ordinance prohibiting law enforcement officers from concealing their identities in San Jose.

That's something to definitely bring back to San Diego and chair.

And good luck in the work.

I hope they can those can be returned to saying something like federal agents or something like that.

Good luck in those type of efforts as well.

My remaining time, I just kind of wanted to say hi and redo reintroduce myself to your cells at this time and uh hope all is going well and uh good luck with the meeting today.

Thank you.

Back to the committee.

All right, thank you.

Do we have any comment?

Move approval of the agenda and the ad sheets, and I'm really happy to see all the appointments to the senior commission.

All right, we have a motion and a second, so let's vote.

Okay, that motion carries 4-0.

And we will now do our first review of the agenda for the November 4th council meeting with a 9.30 closed session and 1 30 regular session.

And consent starts on page five.

Continues on pages six, seven, and eight.

Section three, we have our FPPC interviews for the for appointments to that board.

Or not FPPC, but F Board of Fair Campaign and Political Practices.

We have actions related to ground transportation island project at San Jose Airport.

And skipping ahead to section seven, we have a municode amendment related to nitrous oxide sales.

And a temporary moratorium on tobacco retail licenses.

Section eight, actions related to fairways at San Antonio, and actions related to grant agreement for targeted outreach and engagement programs for unsheltered individuals.

We have one item on land use item 10.2.

And I think that is it.

Any members of the public?

Lair.

Motion.

Mo for approval.

Second.

All right.

Any comments?

None, so let's vote.

All right.

That motion carries four-zero.

Thank you very much.

We are on to our consent agenda for today's meeting.

There's three items on consent.

We'll start with public comment.

Blair?

Hi, where are we going?

Um I have my uh my letter is the only letter in public record this week.

And it's uh I've been doing a series of letters that I'll continuously be doing about the current state of uh Bay Uasi uh here in the Bay Area.

They're the emergency preparedness and planning agency, federal agency that helps uh with with planning needs for our local Bay Area cities and communities.

They were in charge of urban shield all those years ago when we were in the war against terrorism.

Remember that war?

Um we worked together to end that urban shield program.

Baywasi helped a lot in that process.

Bayiwasi has always been an open public process in its decision making.

Um, it's open to the public.

I attend their meetings often.

Uh Ray Reardon of Emergency Uh Planning Services here in San Jose is a part of the approval authority board.

They do really decent work, and they have been, they've gone through some serious changes in the past few years, uh, administrative changes, and so they're a bit uneven and unbalanced right now.

They're heading towards a new future that is going to possibly upend and end what was previously having a federal agency working with our military industrial complex and state, they offered the public process.

They're thinking of ending that public process, and that accountability, that transparency, um, I'm really commenting that we have to keep that process open and clear and public and understandable.

Um, they're they're going through a tumult to figure out best choices, how to move forward in their future.

Um, writing letters at this time to really ask yourselves to look into it and and ask how to be a part of whatever that future is to that we contribute something positive to it, and it can be a shared growing process for all of us of the Bay Area, and not just for a select view to figure out this future.

Back to the committee, okay.

Do we have a motion on the consent calendar?

Second.

All right, we have motion and second and the vote.

That motion carries four-zero.

Now we're on to our action item for today's agenda.

I'll have Council Member Ortiz come down and give us a brief introduction before we go to public comment and committee discussion.

Thank you, Chair.

Uh, members of the rules committee.

I'll try to be quick.

Uh today I'm asking for your support uh to move this memo forward to direct staff to prioritize identifying city-owned properties such as parking lots, garages, and open spaces that could be commandeered or misused for civil immigration enforcement activities like staging, processing, or establishing an operational base.

This policy comes from the city of Chicago, where all of these things unfortunately happened when the National Guard and increased ICE activity occurred in that region.

This recommendation aligns with the intent of our memo to ensure that city property is used only for city purposes.

San Jose's facilities, lots, and garages exist to serve our residents.

Not facilitate federal civil immigration enforcement.

Just last week, news broke that former president, oh well, current president, Donald Trump is considering sending the National Guard into San Francisco to carry out federal actions.

This kind of rhetoric and that kind of federal overreach is exactly why we need to act now.

They start in SF, but this could move to our city in the future, especially with the Super Bowl being around the corner.

So by supporting this memo, we take a clear and principled step to safeguard our city's property, our resources, and most importantly, our communities trust.

I respectfully ask to support uh the staff recommendation.

Okay, thank you.

We'll start with public comment.

I'll be calling three names at a time, and let's go ahead and have Brenda, Blair, and Floor.

Please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Hi, my name is Brenda Sandejas.

I am a proud immigrant and an immigrant advocate for our community.

Today I'm here to support the limiting use of city property for civil immigration enforcement.

This not only sends a message to everyone in San Jose that this is a safe city for our immigrant community, but also sends the message that we are all an immigrant community here and we thrive off our small businesses, our immigrant community always.

I want to make sure that they know that we are committed here to making sure that they feel safe and protected in all spaces, especially owned by city.

So I thank you all for your time, and um again, I'm just here to support this memo.

Um and anybody that wants to create any fear-mongering in our community is not welcome here in San Jose.

Thank you.

Hello, good uh afternoon.

My name is Flor Martinez.

I am here representing the farm work with the families and workers who have built and sustained the city with their labor culture and heart.

I'm here in support of this memo presented by Peter Ortiz.

I want to make it clear that I mean our public spaces should serve the public good, not private interest, not outside agencies that harm or intimidate our residents.

When we talk about city properties, we're talking about spaces that should uplift, protect, and serve people who make this city thrive.

As someone who works very closely with these communities, I've seen the fear and confusion that arises when city spaces are used in ways that don't align with values of safety, inclusion, and dignity.

So a clear policy will help rebuild trust and ensure that city facilities remain having for community, not a tool of harm or exclusion.

This is about transparency, accountability, and community trust, and I urge to move this forward.

Thank you.

Calling the next three set of names, Lucilla Ortiz, Akemi, and Jeremy.

All right, thank you.

We're doing the same important work in San Diego.

So thank you for your efforts and what you're doing here for this item.

For as much as Trump wants to put fear in into ourselves, um, I think he's practicing some practicing something that's really dangerous and harmful.

Um that's not fear.

That's not he's really going about it the wrong way.

And I think we we are trying to offer um that the ideas of justice can work towards uh a real understanding of best practices.

I think we're trying to really present ideas of best practices to him, and I think over time, this will have an important effect, and he is going to eventually tone down.

I mean, he has to listen to what we're doing and offering and what is reasonable.

Um I'm just I'm I'm hopeful in what you're doing with this item.

The work we do in San Diego has been also really important.

We're trying to talk about uh really uh lessening over militarization issues, and that he cannot just uh what he's doing in Chicago and Portland, possibly in San Francisco.

I hope it's with the with the reasoning that he wants to wind this down, and he's trying to find that conversation.

How to wind this down and just deal with dialogue and best practices we've already been delivering and doing with our issues of crime uh with our issues of housing.

Um, those are two talking points that I think we can work together on with dialogue and not with this what he's doing is just absurd, and I'm hoping he is going to find the ways to practice dialogue instead of over militarization.

So it's these sort of efforts that we continuously share and offer and show what our best selves are and and that's our future.

Thank you for these efforts.

Good afternoon, Chair Cohen, and rest of the members of the rules committee, Jeremy Barus with Amigos de Guadalupe, as well as the IPEN network, and I urge the rules committee to move forward this policy authored by Councilmember Ortiz.

The real threat of seeing ICE agents, mass raids in our communities becoming real by the minute, literally, especially with the news that we're getting today.

So this makes this policy all the more relevant as we need all the tools in our toolbox to be able to push back against this administration.

Uh we urge you to pass this policy that excludes federal immigration enforcement from using city property to execute their harmful family separation agenda.

This is our community, and we must not let malicious federal agents use local government property to violate the constitutional rights and safety of our people.

Our city is a beautiful place that thrives due to the vibrant contributions of our immigrant communities, and we must protect this diversity in our communities with the powerful unifying partnership across the city that boldly asserts hands off our communities.

San Jose will not tolerate ICE agents violating our residents' constitutional rights, and we cannot allow the federal government to disregard our local authority.

Thank you, and we urge you to please move this policy forward.

Good afternoon, Council members.

Lucilla, and I'm here representing Silicon Valley Rising Action.

Um, and let's make something clear.

ICE is being used as agents of terror by the president to disseminate and actually quit any kind of dissentment that is happening to his government.

This is not about immigrants, this is about saving and protecting the pillars, the core pillars of our democracy.

If we allow the constitutional rights of human beings to be violated, that is just the beginning.

We might be at the front line, but we're not gonna be the last ones in there.

And he's going for destroying our democracy all together and making sure that he stays in power as long as possible and that we fall down into authoritarian regime.

And so as I believe that it is our duty as elected officials to stand up and save the democracy that we have right now, as the oath that you have taken is to the Constitution of the United States.

Um, and so I want to remind you of that.

I want to thank the leadership of Councilmember Ortiz, Councilmember Candelas, and Council Member Kamei for bringing this forward.

It's really important that the private property that we have right now is being respected and is being uh it's abiding by the constitution as well.

And so I want to like invite you to please uh move this forward, not back down, and making sure that we're standing up for democracy.

Thank you.

Calling the next set, Kimberly and another speaker with the name Lucilla.

Good afternoon, council members.

Thank you for the opportunity to be here and speak with you about this important memo.

Thank you to Councilmember Ortiz, to Councilmember Candeles, and to Councilmember Kamei for bringing it forward.

As um, as we have shared before, IPen, sorry, Akemi with IPEN Immigrant Protection and empowerment network.

And our network is cross-sector and includes the city as well.

So we are working in close partnership, including the city manager's office and the Office of Racial and Social Equity.

Um so I'm I appreciate the work that happens behind the scenes in between all of these public um moments.

I just want to lift up, as was shared earlier, that this is an opportunity.

This memo, as some of the other policies have been, are opportunities for you to provide strong leadership of protection and well-being for our community in stark contrast to the terrorization that we are seeing.

This is very reasonable within legal uh within legal standards, and it is also really important for I know that our police department is concerned about trust, community trust with local law enforcement.

It will help to further the distinction between local law enforcement and federal terror, federal, uh, federal action.

So one last thing.

Just want to thank you as city council members for and with this memo coming forward together with the county.

It's really important for our community that we see that kind of consistent leadership across our county and across our region.

So thank you.

We urge you to support this.

I'm Kimbuli Wu, and I represent Simon, which is part of IPen.

So good afternoon.

We stand in strong support to exclude civil immigration enforcement activities on city on city property.

Today, the su the SF Chronicle announced that a hundred federal agents, including ICE and Border Patrol will be deployed in Alameda tomorrow.

For context, I live in SF and I make this one-hour drive to here in San Jose multiple times a week.

I know how far it is.

So please make no mistake.

Federal immigration agents like ICE is coming, and they're coming to terrorize and debilitate our communities on a mass unprecedented scale.

I'm terrified and anxious for myself, for my family who immigrated here from the Philippines and Hong Kong, for my loved ones and for my communities.

We must act now, and the strongest way to protect ourselves is to stand united across our Bay Area communities and be organized.

Do not let them separate our communities and tear our families apart.

Do not let them militarize the same properties that we and our immigrant communities pay our hard-earned tax dollars money for.

Do not let them bully you into betraying the same communities who have elected and entrusted you to serve us.

The city of San Jose is stronger and better than this.

I know this because we love and have been built by a vibrant immigrant and refugee communities.

I know this due to the courageous leadership by Super Supervisor Renis and Santa Clara supervisors yesterday for passing a similar county initiative.

And I know this due to the leadership by Councilmember's OTs, Candales, and Kameh today, for unifying this collaborative partnership across city and county lines to truly protect all our communities.

This policy is urgent, given the impending federal enforcement operations and SF.

We need courageous leaderships leaders now to say no to ICE.

No to cooperation between local agencies and ICE, and most importantly, hands off San Jose.

Hands off Santa Clara County and hands off our communities.

Thank you.

Lawrence.

Good afternoon, good council.

Um my name's Lauren's and I want to let you know that we live in we live in the same city, big city of San Jose.

We live in a beautiful diverse city and a beautiful diverse democracy.

What's very important is that we must we must pass policies that um prevent the excludes federal immigration enforcement from using using any of our property to execute harmful family separation agendas.

Very importantly, let me mention that ICE these days are now are now using are violating human rights.

Very importantly, we need we do better when we work together staying united.

And we must use every tool to ensure that we that we do our part, no matter the district, to ensure that everyone can be able to learn grow and adapt in a safe community.

This is our job here now, and we must do everything we can to lead this way.

And we must do everything we can, even when times are difficult, and we must do everything where we can to ensure that everyone can feel safe, that they feel safe, and they are that they are being welcomed here in a time of crisis.

Thank you.

Very Diana.

Hi, good afternoon.

My name is Vidi Diana Borroid Duran.

And I would like to consider this policy and move forward with it.

Our people must be and feel protected by our city and our people.

We cannot let Trump and his administration keep causing fear in our people.

I just want to remind you that most people that live here are immigrants, not only Mexicans like myself, but Asian, Indian, European, etc.

San Jose is a beautiful melting pot.

And I wouldn't like to people be living in fear because of this Trump administration, which we already are.

We need this policy to go through.

Thank you.

I've already called all the speaker cards.

If you did not hear your name, please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Back to the committee.

Okay, thank you.

We're back to our committee of commerce discussion.

We'll turn to council member Candellas first.

Thank you, Chair.

Um, you know, I again uh council member Tees, we're gonna get you uh uh an unofficial seat uh uh on the box given uh how how often we're here every every rules committee.

Uh but you know it's it just shows your the the the work and and um your your advocacy for for our immigrant community in the times of crisis.

So um I appreciate uh being able to join the Brown Act and and this memorandum uh for uh for to support to support this memo and sure that our city property is only used for city purposes.

Um, you know, the city of San Jose was recently named the safest big city in the entire country in the entire United States, and this is undoubtedly because we are a welcoming city for all, and we will not play a role in targeted attacks against any resident in our city, and and and I appreciate uh the work of this memorandum.

And um I I do have a question for the administration.

Uh usually we do we have a workload analysis um uh and and we we uh you know we do this to be able to ensure how much balance you know our staff has.

So uh Lee, would you mind um, you know, talking a little bit about any workload analysis if that is necessary, or can we just move forward uh with the memorandum uh direction?

So typically we may do a workload analysis in these cases.

I think given the urgency, just why we kind of went to the side and chatted about it.

I think one, three, and four are relatively straightforward and may take a few days to complete.

So we would obviously be greenlighting that work.

Okay in the interest of time, I think we're okay without the workload analysis.

I think on the city attorney and the coordination with us on the policy, that may take a few weeks to get to council once we iron everything out, but given the sense of urgency, the administration's fine with you guys moving this forward, especially with the clarification from Councilmember Ortiz.

Wonderful.

Uh that being said, I will move um uh the memorandum for adoption.

Thank you.

Okay, thank you.

We'll go to uh Vice Mayor Foley.

Thank you.

First, I want to thank all the members of the public who spoke on this important issue.

I think we're all concerned about the activities of ICE and they may be coming to San Jose sooner than we think, uh, or sooner than we'd hoped.

I I guess that's the way of put it.

But I am concerned about the overly broad nature of this approach.

There are a lot of nonprofits who use our facilities, there are a lot of uh organizations who use our facilities already who pay for the use of their facilities, and and this doesn't limit any of that.

Additionally, we have the U.S.

Patent Office that has a lease, and that's a federal government.

So I I was hoping that I was gonna hear a little bit of clarification, and and I I wondered if uh, council member, if your real intent was to prohibit the use of facilities for immigration enforcement activities.

Is that yeah, yeah, exactly, and uh I'm happy to add our city approved functions that way that would uh include nonprofits who we uh allow to use the sites.

Oh before before that my I'm sorry I want a point of clarification point of information um uh Leland it looked like you were the administration had comments or feedback on that on that point uh I just want to make sure we're not you know overly prescriptive or hindering our ability to actually that's why in my um opening comments I I directly said um specifically the Comradean or misuse uh of city property for civil immigration enforcement activities yeah I I took his comments um as making that change in the record but deputy city manager angelrios can clarify that as well yeah yeah thank you uh uh vice mayor so uh we actually had that conversation with the city attorney's office because when we first read this we were kind of interpreting you know the use of city properties in I think the same way that you are and and the way uh the city attorney's offices advised us is that uh what we mean by uh uh city purposes is tip like current and typical uses for city property right so that that would not exempt like our partnerships with nonprofits activations with other uh sponsors uh basically the provision of core services that a city provides uh I ICE response for example isn't a typical core service so that would fall outside of a city service so uh so based on the advice of the city attorney's office they were fine with this language here but but but initially we actually had the same reaction as you okay but but if uh you'd like we could actually make it more specific and call that out to say I'm actually going to propose a friendly amendment and hope the maker of the motion will accept it and in the background you uh is stated some language that I'd like to move up to into the recommendation which is prohibiting the use of municipal facilities including parking lots garages and vacant land for federal civil immigration enforcement activities will you accept that as a friendly amendment.

I believe that's what uh the council member Ortiz stated in in his um in his uh introductory remarks and I'm fine with it.

Okay.

And the second thank you.

Just to provide some clarity I think I went back and forth with the city attorney a lot on this language and so I understand it's confusing.

So yeah, yeah no and I I appreciate it and I and I appreciate your intent too I just wanted to clarify the intent and make sure that we're all moving in the same direction I support that completely but I also know some organizations who want to use the Rotunda for instance instance who aren't city related and uh and then I think about all of our facilities that may be rented already to federal agencies and other non-city organizations so I look forward to this coming back and we'll be happy to uh prove the motion with the amendment.

Thank you for accepting that.

Okay thank you and thank you for the clarification on the motion uh councilmember doan.

Thank you chair uh thank you um to all the speakers and um I appreciate that we had this clarification because I had the same concern as vice mayor but um I think it's important that we we as council continue to commit to support our immigrant community and do everything that we can to protect them and um thank you Councilmember Ortiz for bringing this uh memorandum uh forward thank you all right well thank you and I want to thank the authors of the memo for bringing this forward it is important that we are uh as supportive as possible for um I would say our immigrant community but for our entire community and I want to um I think it's really important that we clarify that we are not partner in this uh this demonization that's occurring.

Um, I think we're ready to vote.

All right, thank you.

That motion carries four zero.

We're on to open forum.

I have to get to a ribbon cutting.

I'm gonna have vice Mayor foley take over the rest of this meeting.

Blair?

Hi, uh Blair Beekman.

Uh I'm still plugging away with tech accountability efforts, what that can be about.

Uh, good luck that you're you're doing well here in San Jose with those sort of things.

Um I think we said uh there's been so much uh surveillance tech recently placed in our Bay Area cities that I don't think it should be a much debate um uh about uh you know crime and things.

Uh in fact uh Trump made a big deal about crime things when he first became president, and we were already set and prepared because uh of our previous practices.

Um so it's a lot of what I hope the current Trump administration can take in, and they don't have to be uh uh egotistical and and overbearing about it.

I just hope they just fall in line and and work with what we're doing already.

Man, I hope they learned that lesson.

And uh it's an important lesson, and that and they won't be held any less uh uh regard if they if they back down a bit.

So good luck in those efforts to just talk to them rationally about what we're doing well already and what we're trying to do.

Um with that said, in San Diego, uh, believe it or not, they were one of the early instigators to really question the use of Flock for the future of their uh ALPR use.

And um I I'm following uh working within that framework that we don't have to necessarily need Flock for our future ALPR concerns.

I'm not sure if San Jose uses Block or not, but um they're an agency that controls a lot of the ALPRs uh within a city, and um it's being questioned around the country at this time that their current work with uh federal agencies, it's a bit insensitive, and their overall business philosophy uh for as much as they do regular standard work is being considered is being questioned.

Good we can do that.

Uh, the status quo can be questioned.

Thank you, we can do that.

Back to the committee.

Thank you.

We stand adjourned.