I'd like to call this meeting to order.

Could you take the roll, please?

Kamei.

Campos.

Present Tordillos.

Here.

Cohen.

Cohen.

Ortiz.

Okay.

Here.

Juan.

Here.

Candelas.

Here.

Casey.

Foley.

Here.

Mayhem absent.

We have a quorum.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Now, if you're able, please rise and join me in the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America.

And two for which she stands.

One nation of the God.

Indivisible with literature justice.

Thank you.

Welcome everyone.

Today's invocation will be provided by Dan Gross, executive director of the Youth Science Institute.

Councilmember Cohen, please tell us more.

Yes, thank you.

Today our invocation will be presented by Youth Science Institute, located in Allen Rock Park.

They were here a couple years ago bringing some of their friends, and we thought we'd invite them back for an encore presentation.

YSI provides hands-on nature-based education for children and families with school programs, summer camps, and weekend science safaris at their nature centers in Allen Rock Park, Sanborn County Park, and Visona Lake County Park.

Joining us today are Dan Gross, their CEO, Alexander Shord, their lead animal curator, and some of our animal friends.

Thank you, Councilmember Cohen.

Thank you, Council members, and good afternoon.

My name is Dan Gross.

I'm the executive director of the Youth Science Institute, or as we call it, YSI.

We are honored to deliver the invocation for you all this afternoon.

And we serve thousands of families across Santa Clara County, including at our nature centers at Alam Rock, Sanborn, and Visona.

But the real stars of our show and our work with kids and families for our school and group programs and our summer programs are animal ambassadors.

So I'm pleased to bring up Alex Short, who is our lead animal curator, who's gonna introduce you to three of our animal ambassadors that regularly interact with students on a daily basis at YSI.

Take it away, Alex.

Yes, so we focus on get uh, of course, educating children in all sciences, but one of our main goals is also getting them more in touch in with nature.

You'd be surprised at how many visitors we have that um that have never really seen a lot of the animals that are just local to around here.

So whether it's a uh summer camps, our free nature centers, uh, or um just the the events we uh hold at Allen Mark Park, our animals are often a big part of it.

Now, a lot of these animals are ones that aren't super exotic, but are actually ones that still people have never seen.

Like, for example.

One that people often don't see because of nocturnal, although they're all around anywhere there's really water and nature.

This one is actually the one of the favorites of the children, is actually the Western toad.

This actually animal that gets the biggest laughs of all, almost all of them, because of how they act.

Now, raise your hand if you've ever seen a western toad before, in either in the wild or at a zoo.

Um, these guys, they're nocturnal, so they're one of those that a lot of people out that are from the city, they're they're not really around in the parks there, but they're all around.

So it's a way that we show that the um the animals that people just are around that they don't even know are there.

Now she is actually also really old.

She's about 15 years old, which is pr um pretty big old for them.

Um, she's actually puffing up for uh for you guys.

That is actually a defense.

She makes herself look big.

Now, our next animal represent uh is a good representative of the weird and wild that are found from uh uh around the world.

Um is anyone here afraid of snakes?

It's okay.

Uh it's a hardwired into our into our it's hardwired into our species, but I promise this next one is super friendly and actually one of the more bizarre looking snakes in the world.

Um she is a Kenyan Sanboa from the deserts of Africa.

Now she gets that name not just because of where she's from, but because she actually likes to dig.

She digs all through the sand, and because of that, she has a very odd face.

She actually has her.

Her face is actually her eyes are more on the top of her head.

And that's because so that she can little pop them up like an alligator out of the sand.

Now, she might look her name is Cheddar, and while she might look bright and colorful, that is actually because she is camouflaged against the orange sand in the Kenyan deserts.

Now she is also more thick and less long than the average snake.

And she actually loves warmth.

Even though a lot of people are afraid of snakes, it's a good example of how we show kids to get used to um to the uh to them, even despite fear.

We have lots of kids that start out afraid of our tarantulas or our snakes.

And yet, as soon as we say that this one's name is cheddar, you get a lot of the same kids that were backing up and trying to avoid them to go awe and wanting to be the first to pet them.

Now, she has little tiny eyes, that is also a good sign of how she digs.

Now, we actually have a local species that's kind of like that too, called the um the rubber boa that also looks kind of pudgy and lives in the soil around here.

Now, our last animal friend uh is actually our state reptile.

Raise your hand if you uh knew uh know what our state reptile is.

Raise your hand if you even know we have a state reptile.

Our state reptile is actually from the deserts of Southern California, and she is our oldest animal.

Well, her and her cousin, the Florida Gopher Tortoise.

She is a California desert tortoise, and she is over a century years, uh over a century old.

Her name is Daisy, and she actually just woke up.

They brew mate for half the year.

She's been awake, uh, she's been asleep since October, without eating or drinking.

Now, without drinking is not much because she actually gets all her water from her food, even when she's awake, but she actually just woke up literally two days ago.

And she'll so she um one of the reasons tortoises live long is because of that, um, is because they go in brumation and save themselves when it's too cold.

Okay, now she's a good example of how some uh some cultural views come from science.

The idea in a lot of cultures, um tortoises and turtles are signs of longevity.

That is because a lot of them are long-living.

But that's not always uh always true.

Um while this one's true, other ones are false, such as how owls are symbols of wisdom, although they actually do not have that much high of intelligence.

Okay, so I thank you here.

Um, this is a good example of how of the type of education that we give a lot of the kids, whether they come from our for our field trips, our science safaris, or even just the visit.

They often get to pet these animals and see these animals that they would never get to see in the wild.

So I want to thank you guys for your support and your time.

Thank you so much.

And I'll remind people who are not aware that the YSI um museum, which has a lot of these animals in it, is open to the public.

So if you come up to Alan Rock Park, uh you can find the YSI Museum about halfway up the canyon, and you ought to stop in and take a look and see some of these animals for yourself.

Yep, it's free.

Thank you for that.

And and I'll just add a personal note.

My mother-in-law Shirley Foley was uh one of the founding members of YSI when it came to when it was brought to San Jose.

So I when I see this, I always think about her a little bit.

Um thank you.

Moving on to the ceremonials.

Will Council Member Duan please join me at the podium as we recognize and proclaim April 30th as Black April.

Thank you, everyone, for being here.

Today we come together to recognize a date of profound historical and emotional significant.

April 30th, known as Black April, marked the fall of Saigon in 1975.

A moment that signaled not just the end of the war, but a loss of homeland for many.

Over two millions of Vietnamese people.

It was not simply the end of a conflict, but the beginning of unimaginable lost, displacement, and uncertainty.

Hundreds of thousands of people died crossing the ocean for freedom.

Family were separated, lives were uprooted, a homeland was left behind, often under the most dangerous circumstances.

And yet, from this tragic emerge extraordinary resilience.

Those who sought refuge in the United States, including many who made their homes right here in the city of San Jose, arrive with little, but carry with them something for greater, like courage, determination, and unbreakable spirit.

They built their lives from the ground up.

They established families, businesses, and communities.

They contribute to the cultural richness, economic vitality, a civic life of our city in a way that continued to shape San Jose into the vibrant and diverse place it is today.

The Vietnamese American community has never forgotten its history.

Each year, through solemn remembrance and collective reflection, we honor those who lost their lives and acknowledge the sacrifice that made new beginning possible.

Community organization, including groups like Vietnamese American Roundtable, play a vital role in ensuring that this history is preserved and shared through advocacy, education, and community engagement.

So that future generation understand not only the past, but the value of resilience, unity, and cultural pride that define this community.

Black April is not only a day of mourning, it is a testament to endurance.

It is a reminder that even in the face of profound hardship, hope can take root and flourish.

And so it is with great respect and solemn recognition that I joined Vice Mayor and my colleagues, and I invite my colleagues to come on down to commemorate this proclamation, April 30th, 2026, as Black April in the city of San Jose.

May we continue not only to remember, but to carry forward this legacy, honoring the sacrifice of the past, uplifting the voice of the present, and inspire generation to come.

Thank you for all of you being here.

Thank you, my colleague, for standing with the Vietnamese community, and now the vice mayor will present the proclamation to our community.

So we don't get the so we get the podium out of the way.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Philip.

Next, I'd like to invite Councilmember Duan to stay here and Councilmember Campos to join me at the podium as we recognize and proclaim May 1st as May Day.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I'd also like to invite any colleagues who want to join me in this commendation for May Day to please make their way down.

Today we proclaim May Day, also known as International Workers' Day.

And I want to thank the community members, the organizers present, and who represent thousands of working families in San Jose and across Santa Clara County.

It's because of trailblazers in the labor movement that secured better working conditions back when our children were seen as viable laborers.

It wasn't too long ago that children were working in coal mines in the United States.

And because of the labor movement, we were able to secure protections for children, people with disabilities, women, and those who are most impacted by working conditions, by organizing their voices and their struggles.

Working families in San Jose and across the Silicon Valley are facing high cost of living, specifically the rising cost of housing and child care.

And it is important that we as a council prioritize affordability and address the financial stress that working families are experiencing.

And I am thrilled to be joined by Jean Cohen, executive officer of the South Bay Labor Council, and David Beaney, Executive Director of the Santa Clara and San Benito Counties Building and Construction Trades, who will jointly receive today's proclamation.

I will now invite David Beaney to speak before we invite Jean to speak and then the Vice Mayor who will present the commendation.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Good afternoon.

I represent thousands of skilled craft workers of our local building trades unions.

And as we mark International Workers' Day, I call on you to remember that every skyline we admire and every road that we drive on is built by the hands of these men and women.

And I emphasize that our strength lies in our people.

We appreciate this recognition, and we ask for a continued investment in registered apprenticeships and rising labor standards.

Let's ensure that as our city grows, the workers who build it can afford to live in it.

I'd like to introduce my partner in this work, executive officer of the South Bay Labor Council, Jean Cohen.

Thank you to the Vice Mayor and the City Council for this proclamation.

May Day International Workers' Day is a global day of action rooted in the struggle of working people and the ongoing fight for workers' rights, dignity, and collective power.

That history is not behind us.

It is San Jose today.

This city runs because of workers and immigrants.

They build our homes, they care for our families, they keep our hospitals running, and power our economy.

And often they are the first to be exploited and the last to be protected.

May Day calls on us to lead, to stand with immigrants and working families, to support the amazing city of San Jose workforce, to set a clear standard that every job in this city comes with dignity and respect and a living wage.

At the South Bay Labor Council, we are proud to lead with these values, organizing and advocating and building power so that working people are never left behind.

Because a strong city is not measured only by what we build, but by who shares in the opportunity and prosperity, we accept this proclamation with pride and urgency, and for the hard work of the San Jose Mayday Coalition, who invite you at 2 p.m.

to join us at King and Story to march to City Hall.

Because the labor movement here is organized, united, and ready, ready to fight for dignity and fairness for every worker.

This is International Workers' Day, and it is San Jose at its best.

Thank you so much for this recognition.

And I want to acknowledge and thank the May Day Coalition as well, and we'll scoot over for a picture.

Everybody wants to scoop.

Thank you.

And finally, I'd like to call forward Councilmember Mulcahy as a recognize the Autism Society, San Francisco Bay Area.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Today marks the end of our city's recognition of Autism Awareness Month, and each week we've recognized organizations doing this important work in our community.

And it's an honor to recognize the Autism Society San Francisco Bay Area for its decades of leadership and service to our community.

Since 1967, SFAASA has been a driving force in bringing together families, advocates, and professionals to build a stronger, more connected autism community across our region.

What makes this organization especially impactful is its role as a hub, connecting over 20,000 autism families to critical information, resources, and each other.

Their work ensures that no one has to navigate autism alone.

SFAASA also plays a vital role in education and awareness, hosting events, conferences, and conversations that deepen understanding and strengthen community ties.

And just as important is their advocacy.

Thank you so much, Councilmember Mulcahy.

Thanks to all of my friends from Autism Society.

And here we have Sadie Randall, my fellow D6 resident, who is the incoming president of what we call SFASA.

But our home, I would say our home base is very much here in San Jose.

Our mailing address is in San Jose.

When I took over as president, some ladies from the Northern Peninsula said, Jill, please, please, please come rescue our organization.

And our office, you know, was rooted right here in D6 of San Jose.

And since that time, we have found the City of San Jose to indeed be a very inclusive city.

And we have forged many enduring partnerships.

I'll tell you about some of them.

For example, uh, the pool at Beer Brack Park.

Some of you might know it in D6.

It's at Virginia and Delmas, a wonderful pool.

We have run more than 60 disability inclusive events at that pool over the past several years, and people love it.

We are so grateful that we have that resource.

San Jose Arena Authority has partnered with us for many, many years, not only at the Sharks, but also at the Barracuda and other events at the arena and at TCU.

San Jose Giants, we run several events with them every year, and they are incredibly accommodating and happy to work with us on special requests.

The new ballet of San Jose, they have done outreach events with us for years at the nutcracker at their other events, and we are so fortunate to be able to work with them every year.

They would invite us to their rehearsals where special needs families could enjoy music together for the first time.

Often now we're working with Symphony San Jose and the San Jose Earthquakes as well.

So there are many, many ways that San Jose has been very, very good to our community, and we're very grateful because as the autism community continues to grow, we need these resources for these families that really depend on groups like us to really enrich their lives and create opportunities that otherwise wouldn't be there.

So thank you so so much for recognizing SFAASA.

Okay, moving on to the uh regular agenda.

I don't believe we have any changes under orders of the day.

And do we have a closed session report?

Councilman closed session to discuss items listed on the uh closed session agenda, but there's nothing to report at this time.

Thank you.

Next is is the consent calendar.

I'm I'm aware that councilmember Mulcahy would like to pull 2.5 and that councilmember Candelas would like to pull 2.10.

Is there anyone else who wishes to pull an item from consent?

If not, then let's move to Councilmember Mulcahy's presentation.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, 2.5 I'm reporting on a recent uh travel on behalf of the city.

And I first want to thank my colleagues for approving the trip, although the city didn't pay for it, but you did cover me at the council meeting that I missed, so I appreciate uh that.

And what a week in Paris taught me about cities, culture, and follow-through is where I'm gonna go here.

So I was invited to Paris for the 10th anniversary Civic Commons learning journey alongside civic leaders and key foundations from across the United States.

Michael Lomeo, our downtown manager from the Office of Economic Development joined me as well.

We went to see how Paris is reshaping itself through the Olympics, a bold greening agenda, and big moves on mobility and public spaces.

I think what struck me the most is how simple and intentional many of the interventions are.

In the greening of the city, you see trees, plantings, and shade along former traffic corridors and modest materials like crushed granite, sand, grass, in front of some of the most iconic places in the world.

None of this is exotic.

The difference is consistency and pride.

Public servants, how city employees actually refer to themselves, talk about maintaining these spaces as a share as a as part of a shared project, not just another task.

One example stood out, their city hall, the famous Hotel de Ville.

They repurposed a concrete plaza over a parking structure.

Sound familiar?

And forested about a third of it.

It softens, cools, and beautifies the space, something worth considering here at our city hall as we work to improve our water issues in our in our building.

The same approach shows up in mobility.

Paris has gone all in on bikes, reworking streets, removing car lanes, and building out a robust bike share system around schools.

They've gone further, closing streets to cars and turning them into safe, active spaces for kids and families.

Again, the tools weren't complicated, but the commitment is significant.

We tested the system ourselves, spending hours biking across the city.

It's imperfect, often chaotic, and a few times terrifying.

But you can see the logic and permanence of it.

The initiative started as a mayoral campaign promise from the left, but is now the de facto vision across party lines and several elections.

Underneath all of this is a governance culture that feels very different from San Jose.

In Paris, the mayor sets a very clear agenda, and the political and administrative systems align to deliver it.

Public servants describe their role simply, implement what voters chose and serve with pride.

Once decisions are made, the focus shifts quickly to execution.

In San Jose, our council manager system has real strengths, but also disperses power and responsibility.

Even when there's agreement on what, on the what and the how we can become long negotiated process with many veto points.

A lot of our effort goes into not just decision making, but also pushing decisions through a complex implementation maze.

Experiencing Paris makes that contrast vivid.

For me, the lesson isn't that we should copy Paris project for project.

Our context, laws, and constraints are different.

The lesson is about alignment.

How much more a city can accomplish when vision, governance structure, and administrative culture are all pulling in the same direction?

The question I brought back is this what would it take to close the gap between vision and execution in San Jose to match our ambition with the same kind of follow through that we saw in Paris.

This trip gave me a clear picture of what it looks like when a city decides where it wants to go and then actually gets there.

I just want to finish by thanking the reimagining, the Civic Commons and Blood Better Block Foundation for organizing such a fantastic visit.

And to the Knight Foundation, Kresge, JPB, and William Penn Foundations for supporting this important work.

And just put it on your calendar that starting May 12th, San Jose will host over 150 delegates for the reimagining Civic Commons studio number 11, diverse cultures, common ground.

Many of the folks at this podium will be a part of that.

And I hope that many of you will become guests and participate.

Thank you very much, Vice Mayor.

That concludes my travel report.

Wonderful.

Sounds like a wonderful trip, and hopefully we might be able to implement some of those things in the city of San Jose.

Before I proceed into item 2.10, I'd like to go to any public comment on the consent.

Yes, we have six speaker cards as I call your names.

Please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Sean, Jordan, Laila, John, Drusy, and Philip.

Hi, Jordan Muldau, resident of District 3, and also the chairperson of the Bicycle Pedestrian Advisory Committee here speaking on behalf of myself.

I came here to talk about item 212, but thank you, Councilmember Mulcahy, for that great report from Paris.

They are doing a lot of great things in terms of livable streets for everyone.

And I just want to call attention to the council that there are so many additional things that we could be using this money for besides simple repavings.

To my knowledge, we typically use basically all of this money for asphalt and painted lines and ADA curb ramps.

But SB1 goes far beyond that.

We can use it for safety projects as well.

We can use it to do plastic delineators or no parking zones at intersections, all sorts of things.

I really encourage the council and the DOT to think larger.

What could we do to get to you know the livable streets that Paris has?

Part of it means rethinking how we spend the money that we have access to.

Pavement maintenance program is just that it's maintenance, it's maintaining the status quo.

We need to make different decisions about how we spend our money in order to bring us to the livable streets that we say that we want.

Of course, we do work on Vision Zero, but because we spend all this money on simply uh putting asphalt down in the same places, we end up having to rely on very hard to get grants for our big safety projects.

So I really encourage us to move the needle and spend the money a little differently.

Thank you.

Um I'm just I don't understand why uh 210 is here.

It didn't go through the proper channels, it didn't go to HCDC.

Um, there's no public comment about it, there's no public interaction at all.

And this is a huge deal.

I mean, as you know, I work with unhoused people every day, and I'm dealing with people who are in permanent supportive housing who can't pay their rent as it is.

I don't know why we would make it harder.

I'm at the jungle every day, and people are just hoping they can get into permanent supportive housing.

And this is going to make permanent supportive housing farther away for them.

It's going to make it where they're like, why am I even going to try and get into permanent supportive housing?

It's something that's unaffordable to me.

Why would we make it permanent supportive housing unaffordable to people?

Like what are we doing?

And why isn't there public comment involved in this?

Why didn't we follow the proper channels?

You take things like this to HCDC.

HCDC rec does their recommendation, and then it's agendized for council, and then council has discussion and votes on it.

Why is it on consent?

Like this is like a travel item.

Or this is something like paying for 4th of July.

It just seems really shady.

And I don't understand.

Like, why is it being handled this way?

I am hoping, Candelas, that that's why you're taking it off.

I'm hoping that you're going to address it and say, hey, we should take this back to HCDC.

It should go through the right channels.

But I don't understand.

I really don't understand why you would want to scare a bunch of people who already live in PSH and then scare away people who want to get into PSH.

And then the people who are just got into some housing at Srone, those people have to deal with the flooding.

They don't have Wi-Fi.

The second Rue 2.

So what you're giving people is crap, and now you're gonna charge them money for it.

Great.

My name is Juzy.

I'm also here to speak to item 210 in the consent calendar, which would authorize the city to raise rent on permanent supportive housing.

Um I also agree that this item should not be voted on as part of the consent calendar, but it should go to HCDC as per the usual processes, so that community members can give their input.

HCDC can give a recommendation, and the item can proceed to a dedicated city council vote.

Our unhoused community members and housing insecure people uh are you know in need of a lot of support in these times, as we just talked about with the proclamation of May Day.

Working people are under increased pressure, increased housing costs, cost of living, gas is up.

Uh, and I think now is not the time to just unilaterally make these decisions behind closed doors instead of allowing the community to have full engagement in the process.

Thank you.

Hello, uh, my name is Lila.

I'm also here to talk about item two one uh two one zero um on uh you know not having the uh HCB, not having that item be on the consent calendar.

Um this would potentially uh raise rent on permanent supportive housing, which should not be done without taking the people's judgment into mind.

Uh this item should not be voted on as part of the consent calendar, it should go through HC HCDC as part of the normal process so that community members can give their input.

The streets of California can be a death sentence to many, so it should go through the proper channels.

It should go through the HCDC so they can give the proper recommendation, and the item can then proceed to a dedicated city council vote.

The people must always have their voices heard.

Thank you.

Hello, city council and staff.

Uh, my name is Philip.

I'm a San Jose State alumni and I work in San Jose.

I'm an SCIU521 steward.

I'm here to speak against uh the item 2.10 on the consent calendar.

Uh this shouldn't be there.

There needs to be a regular process for allowing community input through the HCDC.

Uh, we can't we can't be ham fisted with this issue.

It's it's really not democracy without community buy-in and support.

When it's just literally one person deciding whether or not to raise rent on folks struggling to survive with with even these necessary housing options, that's that's not good.

So yeah.

Thank you.

Hi there, my name is John.

I'm a San Jose State alumni and member of Students for a Democratic Society.

I'm also speaking out on the consent calendar item 210, urging for it to go through the proper channels of HCDC.

Uh this has grave implications for our housing insecure and unhoused members of our community.

It should be opened up to wider public discussion.

Um things are hard enough as is with the rising cost of living and an item like this uh warrants more attention and should not be unilaterally decided upon or hidden away in the consent calendar.

Back to council.

Thank you.

I'd like to turn to Councilmember Candelas who pulled this item.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I do have a few questions for Eric on this.

And while you come down, I I I I guess I wanted to ask a little bit of clarity given some concerns I've heard from housing advocates.

Specifically on uh I guess on the intent and this the short-term impact on the item.

And one of the first question I have is what properties are we looking at with regards to quote unquote floating up rents?

So thank you, Councilmember Condelas.

This is Eric Sullybond, Director of Housing.

So I'll give some brief context.

What the language does, it changes zero rents for those who are inoccupied rent and occupied units.

What this provides is it extends existing authority to negotiate pre-construction for the funding of deeply affordable housing, given ever increasing rising cost and limitations on loans that we can provide out.

This adds additional flexibility within the existing caps for both the low and moderate income site, which is 60% AMI and below, and then measure E, which goes up to 120% and below, and it stays within the statutory.

As issued by LITEC as well as any existing federal funds for vouchers.

Got it.

Okay, all right.

That that's that's helpful.

Uh that's helpful to understand.

And um, I guess one of the concerns uh we heard is um uh what uh would happen to the units that get floated.

Will they get displaced to the folks that are living there?

Nothing applies related to this provision for change for an added negotiating leverage as well as ability, because it cannot impact any existing occupied units.

So we'll not, as an example for severely distressed 100 percent PSH buildings that are financially in disrepair.

This would allow for opportunities to mix AMIs below the existing 50 percent AMI caps so we can refinance the project and provide stabilization of the units.

Wonderful.

Thank you.

Thank you for that clarity.

And obviously, any transitional costs uh for the tenant, uh, that would obviously relocation would be covered, correct?

Correct.

Okay, all right, great.

Thank you.

I I appreciate the time.

And that those are all the questions I had.

And um uh with that, I'll I'll move approval of the consent calendar in its entirety.

Thank you.

I have a motion and a second.

Councilmember Tordias.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you, Eric, for the clarifications there.

I'm also supportive of this item, recognizing that in uh you know, throughout the city, but particularly in district three, we have a number of 100 percent affordable projects that are under severe financial distress.

Uh so being able to act nimbly here to step in and stabilize these projects, address the very real possibility of losing these projects entirely, in which case we don't have any of the affordable units.

Uh, and and again, just highlighting some of the language in the ordinance that uh the authority here is specifically to limit any increases to the extent and only for the period of time necessary for the financial feasibility of the project.

Uh so I think this is a very narrowly tailored update to the ordinance and the authority being granted.

Uh and I think it addresses a real challenge that we're seeing with some of our affordable housing projects.

So I support it.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Collen.

Yeah, thank you.

Eric, I'm gonna just ask for some more clarification.

You gave a lot of technical speak there, so I just want to kind of make sure it it's clear.

Um can you just describe an example for us of how this would apply?

And I know that there was an example at a project that's there's two examples that you gave.

One for a project that's currently that hasn't opened yet that's under construction that might need additional resources to make it pencil out, and another for a project that needs upgrading of an existing where there's already people living there.

Can you just talk about how this would apply?

Yes, thank you, Councilmember Cohen.

Uh so in an existing project that's going to pre-construction financing, there has been added costs.

And since we have certain loan caps on what we can provide to each project, this provides alternate flexibility within the limitations as set by TCAC.

So, what that means specifically is as you look at the distribution across the units is where they are in their existing area meeting and income levels 50 percent, 40 percent, 30 percent.

What it provides for is for those units that are 30 percent and below, we can't adjust to them because there are certain requirements with TCAC.

But at 40 percent, 50 percent, we can mix and match some of those AMIs to allow for additional revenues to go to the project to cover additional costs.

That's an example for a pre-construction project or a project under construction, getting near to construction completion.

For alternative projects, as I mentioned prior, that are already existing, that may already have existing vacant units that we're not leasing up because of other material issues with the project, of which, as councilmember Tordios had mentioned, there are at least two that are severely financial distressed.

We will again mix and match the AMI levels so that we're able to put the project on a more stable financial footing.

So it will decrease some of the 40% up to 50%, make some adjustments to other AMI levels while still maintaining the requirements of the tax credit requirements.

And any adjustment that's made on a unit's position on this affordability scale would only apply upon vacancy and wouldn't apply to somebody who's currently there.

Is that correct?

It only applies upon vacancy, has to be a fully vacant unit in order for it to apply.

There'll be no adjustments.

No adjustments to any existing tenants at any time during the process.

Right.

Okay, thank you so much.

Appreciate it.

Thank you.

Councilmember Tordillos.

You forgot something.

Yes, I did.

Sorry, Eric.

One more quick question here.

Uh, just in the interest of transparency, I'm curious as we do see uh, you know, any of these float-ups on any of these projects, whether pre-construction or uh distressed existing assets.

Would it be possible to get a report back to council?

Are there as an info uh memo or an update to CED, just kind of outlaying uh kind of what has been done?

Yes.

Yes, so I have to provide as part of my delegation of authority report uh monthly updates on it.

So any utilization will be included in that report, which I distribute out, and this would be included in that.

Perfect, thank you.

Thank you.

Seeing no other hands, let's vote.

Motion passed unanimously with one absent.

Thank you.

Next item, we're moving item 7.1 immediately following the consent.

This is a park master plan, an official name for a future park located on Rinconata Drive.

And I understand we have a presentation.

Good afternoon, council members.

My name is Raymond Constantino.

I'm the deputy director of the Capital Projects for Parks Recreation Neighbor Services.

And this afternoon we'll be presenting on the park master plan and official name for the future park located along Rinconada Drive.

And I'm gonna pass it along to my colleague Han Lei Wang, who will talk about the presentation.

Hi, good afternoon, council in the room.

My name is Hangley Wong.

Um, I am with Bjarnez.

So today we are presenting this CARS department collaboration between Parks Recreation Neighborhood Services and also Publi Works.

So we are seeking your approval to adopt the master plan and the official name for a future 1.2 acre neighborhood park located at the terminus of Reconada Drive, adjacent to Almaden Expressway.

This project funded through PW Major T Clean Water Projects will transform a currently undeveloped site into a community surfing park that integrates green swing water infrastructure, recreational amenities and pulling their gardens with native planting shaped by extensive community input.

Under this partnership, Metro T is funded through is funding the park construction at no cost to PRNS.

This project also supports a CT's compliance with the San Francisco Bay Keeper Consent Decree, which requires the CD to invest in greenstone water infrastructure improvements by August 2026.

Jason Fund Probably Works will walk you through the proposed park master plan, including the site design and key features.

Mary Beth will then present the park naming process and the recommendation to adopt Bill Key Park as the official name.

Both items were recommended for approval by the parks and recreation commission.

With that, I will turn it over to our colleague from Paul A Works to walk you through the project.

Thank you, Honle.

Uh good afternoon, Vice Mayor, City Council.

My name is Jason Day.

I'm a senior engineer with Public Works Transportation and Hydraulic Services, Storm CIP.

Next slide, please.

Oh green.

Oh, back one.

There we go.

All right.

Uh so we're excited to PublicWorks and PRNS partnered together to identify and deliver a new park while also constructing new green stormwater infrastructure.

Uh the site location is in Council District 9.

Uh, we're in between Guadalupe River, Highway 87, uh, Elmond Expressway, and Kirtner Avenue area in San Jose.

And as Hanley already said, uh, this project's fully funded by Measure T Clean Water.

Next slide.

So after a few iterations, uh, staff in the community ended up at this park layout.

On the left hand side, we have a roughly 9,000 square foot bioretention basin.

On the right hand side, we have uh play equipment, uh a little green space, and pollinator gardens throughout the park.

We also are providing walking trails throughout this new 1.2-acre site while also connecting Grinconata Drive and Pebble Beach Drive, which is on the lower side, lower right-hand side of the screen.

This slide we are showing off our River Oaks project, which we did a ribbon cutting for last year in District 4.

Uh this kind of showcased our first uh shot at building a large green stormwater infrastructure in the city while also creating new recreation space for the public to use.

And a little sample of what we're going to be doing on this this new park.

On the right-hand side, we do have some sample play equipment that staff are considering using at this location.

Next slide.

And we did do some extensive public outreach.

We've worked with some of the local stakeholders in the community.

We've also had two community meetings and also two public uh surveys that went out.

And Mary Beth from BRNS will be expanding on that.

Thank you, Jason.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council members.

I'm Mary Beth Bowman, part-time planner with Parks Recreation Neighborhood Services.

I am managing managing the park naming for this park site.

The park naming process has basically two main parts.

Part one focuses on public engagement via two online community surveys.

First, a name suggestion survey and then a ranked choice voting survey.

Part two, for part two, staff conducts analysis and makes a recommendation to the decision-making bodies, which is why we're here today.

Before the second survey voting begins, staff's research and vet name suggestions against City Council Policy 75, which you see here.

To qualify, name options must meet at least one of the council policy criteria.

Next slide, please.

The first survey was a name suggestion survey and park uh design concept survey.

Survey participants had the opportunity to rank four staff provided name suggestions and offer new names for consideration.

The survey results you see here are from survey number two, the ranked choice voting survey.

Survey two number two focused on the park naming and allowed participants to rank six names options in order of their preference.

SurveyMonkey assigned each name option a weighted score reflecting participants' overall preferences.

The name Bill Key Park received the highest ranked score, followed by Wester Sweet Park, Kirtner Park, Tulares Park, Cal Park, and finally Rinconata Park.

Next slide, please.

If adopted, the name Bill Key Park would honor Bill Key, a successful Chinese American businessman, business leader, and a community organizer in San Jose from 1939 to 1947.

Bill Key helped lead an effort to preserve the original Um Sung Temple, the last remaining structure from the Heinlandville Chinatown.

He managed the national dollar store, the only Chinese-owned and managed department store at the time.

He was a business leader, actively involved in the business community during a period of anti-Chinese discrimination.

Members of the Bill Key family are here in support of this council item.

With that, I'll hand it back to Han Lee.

Thank you.

Thank you, Jason and Mary Beth.

To summarize, the staff is requesting approval of the park master plan for this future 1.2 acre neighborhood park and adoption to an official park name in accordance with Council Policy 7-5.

Seventh PRC recommended Bill Key Park based on community input.

Or you may also choose an output of name from the list generated through the public outreach process.

So this is Klugar presentation.

We are happy to answer if you have a new question.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation, and I'm very happy to have another park come in to be improved at District 9 in a sorely needed area that's been really used for illegal dumpings and and such.

Do we have any members of the public who wish to speak?

We have five speaker cards.

Brenda, Jerry, Kelly, Connie, and Lena.

Please make our way to the podium.

Hello.

This is a very proud moment for me because exactly 80 years ago, my father stood before the San Jose City Council as a leader of the Chinese community, asking the city not to demolish the last remaining building of a dying Chinatown.

He asked them to give him a three-year reprieve to save this historic 1888 building.

But unfortunately, we moved away and with no leader to speak up for the Chinese community, the city ultimately demolished the building, and a historic landmark for the Chinese community was gone forever.

My father was disappointed that the city he loved could not have been kinder to the Chinese community.

Let's fast forward 40 years to 1989 when I told my father I had formed an organization called the Chinese Historical and Cultural Project.

And our goal was to build a replica of that temple building that he had tried to save, install a museum inside, and place it in your city history San Jose Park.

Although he was very ill at that time, he beamed when being honored for his part in preserving history at our first museum building fundraising when I told him it was his part that had started this museum project.

Sadly, he passed away the next day.

But he felt his failed efforts had brought a happy result anyway.

Oops, got to pass.

Following the dream, the CHCP in 1991 opened the museum doors, and we gave it as a gift to the city of San Jose as a token of friendship from the Chinese community.

My dad would be proud to see that the city of San Jose and CHCP had had a 30-year contractual partnership to next speaker, please.

That's exciting.

I am I'm Kelly Matsura, the granddaughter of Bill Key.

My grandfather was a farm boy for the first 20 years of his life, helping his father as a farm labor contractor to support a family of 12 and having to abandon high school to go to work.

Taking a Christmas job in 1920 to earn money at a small Chinese owned department store, his life made a swift turn.

As a manager of one of the largest department stores of downtown San Jose's population of about 50,000.

Working seven days a week, he became such a well-respected leader among his fellow businessmen.

He was notably the first Chinese at that time to be asked to join the San Jose Rotary, the Merchants Association, the Masonic Club, and the Order of the Shrine and Scottish Right Fraternity.

He worked doubly hard, knowing that he needed to be a role model for the Chinese for a Chinese man to assimilate in a not so welcoming period time for Asians during the Depression and World War II.

He prided his efforts to further the expansion and development of downtown San Jose business.

He once told the family the pride he felt being part of a team with then Mayor Ernie Renzel and historian Clyde Arbuckle that he helped bring the first big company IBM to this farming community of San Jose in the 1940s.

If he were here today, I know he would want to shake the hands of the San Jose City Council, who in 2020 issued a resolution of apology for discriminating actions fostered by the City of San Jose in the city's past history, including when they destroyed the last vestige of San Jose's last Chinatown, which he tried to save.

So on behalf of myself and the three generations of the Bill Key family, who are still proud Santa Clara Valley citizens, we thank you for the consideration of honoring him with a park naming for his leadership in San Jose's developing economy.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, City Council members.

My name is Brenda Wong, and I've been a board member of the Chinese Historical and Cultural Project since 2006.

And also a past board president.

I'd like to first thank the Parks Recreation and Neighborhood Services for their open park naming process and seeking input from the community.

May is AAPI Heritage Month, and we are so pleased for the City Council to consider ethnic and cultural diversity.

We're recognizing citizens and contributions to San Jose.

CHCP supports the recommendation of naming the park for Bill Key, because his life demonstrated the effort and impact of a community pioneer who integrated into this city both vocationally and civically, and who brought attention to the plight of a historically relevant 1888 community treasure, the Unsing Gung Temple in San Jose's last Chinatown.

The current opportunity to rename a park after Bill Key is tangible evidence of the city's work to recognize and celebrate the contributions of AAPIs.

Bill Key is a reminder that relationships which are bridge building and have wide community impact can connect people over a common interest and help to reveal and preserve that which is initially lesser known or valued.

We hope you will vote to name a park after Bill Key on the 35th anniversary of our museum and the fifth anniversary of San Jose City Council's 2021 Historic Resolution Apologizing for the City's role in the past acts of discrimination against the city, Chinese immigrant community and their descendants.

Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Hello, I'm Connie Yong Yu, the author of Chinatown San Jose USA.

I consulted on Heinlandville Park, which was dedicated three years ago.

It is on the site of San Jose's longest lasting Chinatown, and it's in Japan Town.

It's a beautiful park for community gatherings, picnics, but also a place of learning.

At 4 p.m.

today, I will be giving a tour to teachers in Highlandville, a presentation on the history of the struggle of Chinese and Chinese Americans in San Jose and Santa Clara County.

I will be thrilled to tell the teachers today that San Jose's new newest park will be named after Chinese American Bill Key, whose civic leadership wisdom and public service will inspire their students and generations to come.

Thank you.

Speaker, please.

Thank you for your time and attention.

I would like to just uh say a few words to Jerry and her family.

Continuing the Wang family tradition in San Jose, established by your dear father and loving grandfather, whose history roots will continue with the future generation by visiting the park named after him.

Lessons in history of this lovely park, named after a distinguished citizen of San Jose, and the first Chinese member of the San Jose Rotary Club.

And once this is named, uh we will send an announcement to 1.2 million Rotarians all over the world and to let them know that San Jose is not just the city of chips and technology, and this park will pay tribute to the city's founder, such as your father was.

Please, if you find during the digging, something that looks like maybe a dish, a fork, or anything to do with the life of the Chinese community that actually occupied the space where the Fairmont Hotel was.

Please call us right away.

Don't throw it away.

And so they were very, very kind, and they called me many times.

And what we found were actually dishes and bones because there was a dining room there.

And in order.

Thank you.

That's your time.

Thank you.

What?

That's your time, thank you.

Where is your name?

Back to council.

Thank you very much.

I'm I'm so touched by all the members of the family and community members that were here to speak on behalf of Bill Key.

I had a whole speech going over his history, but you already recapped how beautiful it was and what he contributed to San Jose.

But what you didn't highlight was the legacy that he left behind through you, Jerry, and the future work that you did at History San Jose and bringing uh restoring a building there.

It's really remarkable what his impact on the city of San Jose.

And as a Rotarian, I was very proud to see his name come forward and see that he was the first Chinese American Rotarian of our club.

It's during those times, it was quite an achievement to have someone of Chinese Chinese ancestry become a member of a club that was predominantly white men.

So I'm I'm very excited that he his name came forward and to learn all there was to learn about him.

Further, as this is the District 9 park, I'm really excited to have a park that is in an area that could really use one.

It's in it's surrounded by uh apartment buildings.

There's a lot of dense housing right there, and it would be nice to have some place for the children to play and picnic, and not to mention the environmental aspect of it is a huge benefit.

Of the people who came to see the park and who were there in our first uh meeting of five people, we were standing out there in the cold.

My district office was very much involved in this.

The people who were there were pollinators.

They wanted to make sure that we had pollinator gardens there, which you saw that in the plan.

So I I am so proud to hear the stories of Bill Key.

I'm proud that you took your time to come here and share them with us.

I'm proud that we get to create from this vacant land a really beautiful park that will not only carry a beautiful man's memory and name, but also will be wonderful in creating memories for the children and the families who grow up around it.

So with that, I know it's not tradition, but I am going to move approval of this item.

Exactly.

Okay, seeing no other hands.

Oh, I'm sorry, I do see a hand.

She's got her hand.

Councilmember Kamei.

As a Chinese American, I am so proud of this moment.

And you know, I didn't have the honor of knowing Bill Key, but I've known Jerry Key Wong for a very long, long time.

So the tradition of uh community service, of civic engagement, you know, has been going on for generations.

So this is a this is a wonderful testament of the history of all that Bill Key did for the community, how much he cared about San Jose and the community.

And so uh it when this came forward, I thought this is a wonderful thing.

And uh, and I'm really glad that it will celebrate and memorialize the contributions of the family and the legacy of Bill Key and his contributions to the community.

So uh it makes me very proud, and I know that many generations to come will also learn more about the work that he did and what the family has been involved with.

So thank you for being here, and uh I'm delighted to have this before us.

Thank you.

Now seeing no further hands, let's vote.

Thank you for those comments.

Motion passes unanimously, and one absent.

Thank you.

Moving on to the agenda, item 3.1, report of the city manager.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

I have no report today.

Okay, next item is item 3.3, police staffing expenditures and workload audit report.

See the auditor Joe Royce is coming down.

What wonderful stories to be crying?

Very touching.

Very good.

Good afternoon.

I'm Joyce City Auditor.

I'm in the box with Katanjali Mandrakar, Michael O'Connell, and Dill Nozick, Kodoy Berkinova to present our follow-up audit report on police staffing expenditures and workload.

Also in the box is Chief Paul Joseph from the San Jose Police Department.

This report is a follow-up to the city auditors 2021 Audit of Police Staffing Expenditures and Workload, the objective of which was to review and compare the police department staffing, expending and calls for service over time, including the allocation of staff by bureau or division and use of overtime.

It had 10 recommendations, including adding more sworn officers in the context of the city's overall budget, improving management of overtime, optimizing the deployment of patrol staff by analyzing alternate shift schedules, tracking calls that could be diverted to non-sworn staff, and reassessing how community service officers or CSOs are deployed.

At the time of this audit, nine of the ten recommendations had been implemented.

We're following up on the 2012 one audit as the City Council has identified increasing community safety as one of its five focus areas, with a long-term goal that San Jose residents live in a community with responsive emergency services and safe streets and roads.

Since the previous audit, the Department has continued to face staffing challenges and has struggled to meet its respond its goals and respondent calls for service.

In fiscal year 24-25, the Department's overall expenditures totaled $561 million and an increase from around 459 million dollars in fiscal year 1920, as was reported in the 2021 audit.

Budgeting staffing levels in the department are lower than 20 years ago, particularly among sworn officers, and recent turnovers led to vacancies and a decline in the number of active sworn officers.

As I previously mentioned, the city has prioritize increasing community community safety as one of its five city council focus areas.

And the department has undertaken several staffing and deployment initiatives to improve services, as I'll discuss briefly in later slides.

Our first finding was that the department is using multiple strategies to improve response times.

Although the police department responded to fewer calls for service in recent years, the department continues to struggle to meet response time goals.

We found in 24-25, the average response time for priority one calls was 8.1 minutes exceeding the six minute target.

And similar to the 2021 audit, calls for service varied across police districts, resulting in an uneven distribution of workload, and response times have similarly varied across police districts.

The Department has initiated a redistricting effort to address these concerns and has piloted other efforts to improve performance, such as piloting combined two-person cars, district-wide dispatch in some areas of the city, and others.

We want to note that we also found that current response time calculations included calls downgraded to a lower priority, which may not provide the most accurate indicator of performance.

To increase transparency and improve response time calculations.

In this finding, we recommend the department include outcomes from its redistrict efforts, redistricting efforts and future focus area reporting, and update response time reporting to exclude downgraded calls.

Our second finding is the department continues to face staffing challenges and relies on overtime to meet operational needs.

Despite recent efforts to improve hiring and retention, persistent staffing challenges have increased the department's reliance on overtime.

Although the number of budgeted positions increased from the prior audit, the department has fewer active sworn officers or had fewer active sworn officers at the time of the audit and has seen rising separation rates among recruits and early career officers.

As a result, the patrol shifts were routinely staffed on overtime, and overtime accounted for nearly one quarter of all sworn hours worked.

We noted that 124 sworn staff worked over 1,000 hours of overtime in fiscal year 24-25, which raises concerns about sustainability and officer wellness.

I would like to note that the department has implemented new recruiting initiatives and retention incentives are included in the most recent labor agreement with the San Jose Police Officers Association, so we are hopeful of improvements moving forward.

However, in fiscal year 2425, overtime costs reached 72 million dollars, a 53 percent increase over five years.

At the time of the audit, in addition to staffing patrol shifts, we noted that overtime hours were frequently spent on follow-up and report writing, often without the required documentation or appropriate supervisory approval.

In February of this year, the department updated their overtime controls over follow-up and reporting.

Ensuring these new controls are followed and monitored for compliance will be important given the increasing costs over the past five years.

In this finding to increase transparency and retention efforts and better management overtime, we recommend the department augment its current reporting with outcomes of current hiring and retention efforts, and develop a process to monitor compliance with overtime approvals.

Our third and last finding is that community service officers continue to be a valuable resource for the department.

Since the 2021 audit, the department restructured its CSO program to streamline reporting relationships, improve operational accountability and better integrate CSOs and patrol operations.

In fiscal year 24-25, CSOs responded to more than 19,000 calls for service.

However, we found that unlike other areas of police operations, the department does not track performance metrics to assess the CSO's program's effectiveness.

And addressing inconsistency inconsistencies between the duty manual designated CSO dispatchable call types and actual field response can support more effective deployment.

To further improve the CSO program, we recommend department develop and track performance metrics for the CSO program and update the CSO dispatchable call list in the duty manual.

I do want to note that the second recommendation is not meant to restrict the types of calls that CSOs may respond to, but just update the list of call types outlined in the duty manual that are prioritized for CSO response by dispatch.

A separate section of the duty manual describes other types of calls that fall within the duties and responsibilities regularly undertaken by CSOs, and our recommendation is not meant to affect that language.

The report includes a total of eight recommendations.

I want to thank the police department for their time and insight during the audit process.

I ask you to accept the report.

Happy to answer questions, but first I'll turn it over to the chief for the administration's response.

Thank you.

Thanks, Joe.

Paul Joseph, Chief of Police.

Uh appreciate the work of the city auditor.

We also agree with the findings of the report.

I I think the one just the one area I want would like to point out was something that he highlighted there at the end, is that we're not looking to change anything in the duty manual regarding the CSO's uh calls to which they may respond.

We appreciate the operational flexibility, even if they don't respond frequently to those types of calls.

Um but other than that, you know, the these uh I think all these recommendations are reasonable and and implementable.

Thank you.

Do we have any members of the public who is to speak?

We have one speaker card, Ted.

Please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

You shouldn't have to check an email while you're on the meeting.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon.

My name is Ted Scarlet.

Some of the things I'd like to share are too personal.

However, just let you know, one time call for service.

It took over seven hours for a police officer to finally get there.

Uh I've asked for somebody to look at this situation that occurred where we should have had one call for service to police, and it should have ended the whole fiasco that then evolved.

It ended up being over 20 calls over a two-month period.

And the police wouldn't listen to me.

In fact, one of the people that Peter's bakery, the guy that assaulted the people at Peter's Breakery, he was in the house that I was at.

And I was making calls about my safety.

I emailed the mayor several times, got nothing.

I barricaded myself in the master bedroom for a couple of weeks.

And it ended with my motorcycle being my crashed motorcycle being stolen out of the driveway, which I know who did it.

I can't get any uh buddy to listen.

And but in the in the past, you could get a hold of the the chief.

And I'm talking, you know, 20, 30 years ago.

You could call, you could you could actually get an appointment with the chief.

And it's not even necessary for me to go to that level.

There's somebody should be listening to me.

So you look at the cost, you look at the manpower.

This is a this is a case study of resources not being used properly.

And um, on the other hand, though, the 20 for more than 20 years, the police department has been underfunded.

We don't have enough officers, and it's remarkable what they do.

Um, but I have these thank you.

That's your time.

We also have Mike and Brian.

Please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

I think Stephen's talked about.

Yeah.

See, they're talking about six or eight-minute response times.

More like 80-minute response times if they respond at all.

When they show up, it's with anger or nonchalance, which is even worse.

And uh there just needs to be more funding put put towards the department.

But it seems to be the more funding they put towards it.

What do they do?

They put uh put a speed trap on Alaman and Expressway at Bryant Avenue and bankrupt the overtime with a bunch of people giving out speeding tickets.

Okay, great.

On the pothole down with an expressway, I realize that's county.

But yeah, I mean, uh, I had a police captain say, yeah, we we bankrupt the overtime, you know, because these guys wanted to give out tickets.

Well, that's not policing, right?

That's revenue.

And I've just find it very disheartening how long it takes to show up or not at all.

I had a situation with a friend of mine.

Spike was stolen, had an air tag on it, he knew right where it was, and the police never showed up.

They kept calling saying we're gonna show up, but we don't know how long it's gonna be.

Mind you, this was I don't know, maybe about a less than a mile from the police precinct, which is at Oak Ridge Mall.

And uh I was in the car with the guy, and uh we waited for hours and hours.

I had to leave eventually, I had to go do something, but it took hours and hours, and it he never got his bike back.

They never showed up.

I mean, they knew where it was.

Can you imagine?

I mean, well, could you imagine if it happened to any one of you on this on this dais?

I don't think that would happen to you guys.

Maybe it would, I don't know.

Maybe maybe they're nonchalant about you guys too.

I don't know.

But uh there also needs to be overnight patrols.

That's when a lot of crimes happen, especially in the 95118.

It's like it's like the it's like the district that care forgot.

But uh bottom line is the these numbers eight minutes.

No, I don't even believe that one.

More like eighty minutes or not at all.

Thanks a lot, everybody.

Good afternoon, counselors Brian Kurt, Council members, excuse me, Brian Kurtz, San Jose Downtown Association and Downtown D3 residents.

Uh I was here for another agenda item and was listening in and debated whether or not I wanted to speak today.

And and uh while I I will say skimmed that very, very lengthy report on the agenda item uh and took a look at the recommendations.

I wanted to emphasize the importance of not only this report, but how it relates to the continuous budgeting process.

And we we know in working with our our uh central division and chief joseph how much downtown is reliant upon overtime for regular policing efforts.

And downtown is the city's backyard.

This is a place that is while represented by two council members, is is frankly represented by the entire dais up here.

This is the place where people come for daytime activities for weekend activities, going to see a sharks game, a concert uh for uh uh uh art museum and children's museum, and it's very it's so incredibly important for us as a community to continue investing in community safety and public safety for our downtown neighborhood in addition to other parts of the city as well.

Um I appreciate a very close relationship with SJPD so far and look forward to that expanding even further.

And uh and also working with each of your offices and the city manager's office on additional ideas and solutions for community safety improvements in partnership with SJPD going forward.

So uh we appreciate your time today and the continued discussion.

Thank you.

Back to council.

Thank you.

Thank you for the members of the public who spoke, and Joe and Chief, thank you for your presentations.

And let's go to council, council member Campos.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I also want to begin my remarks by thanking Joe uh Royce and the city auditors office for preparing this report.

The findings and the recommendations include uh thoughtful proposals to tighten controls, increase transparency, and ensure compliance with city policies and procedures.

I'm also grateful to Chief Joseph and the city administration for your collaboration and acceptance of the auditors' recommendations.

I would also like to thank the city auditor and his team, as well as Deputy Chief Gina Tabaldi and Deputy City Manager Jennifer Shembri for helping uh my team prepare the memo that I've co-written with the mayor and council members Cohen and Candelas.

My colleagues and I recommend acceptance of the report and the city administration's response, and we also provide additional recommendations to help the council and the public monitor implementation of the auditors' recommendations and continue working to reduce overtime expenses without compromising community safety.

And so before I move to approve our memo, I have uh one question for the administration.

Um can the city manager's office provide an update regarding alternate response and the trust program Councilmember, just really quickly, are you asking for that update right now, or would you like a more formal response in the form of an info memo or something through this year's budget process?

Just an update right now, um, recognizing the police over time.

That'd be great.

We can have deputy city manager Jennifer Shemri come down and update you.

Thank you.

Good afternoon, Jennifer Shambri, Deputy City Manager.

Um, so as you may recall, the council funded a trust vehicle and that was supposed to be specific to San Jose in addition um to the county trust vehicles.

Uh we did receive information uh last fall that the county had run out of funding for the San Jose Trust vehicle.

That funding was supposed to last a year and it did not.

Um we've been working with the county on that issue, and we've asked them for some additional information to analyze that.

So at the moment, um there is no specific San Jose Trust vehicle.

Um and so that is where we are right now, and as you also know the county is um in the middle of their budget discussions, so I think there is kind of a lot up in the air uh related to this issue, and we'll just continue monitoring and working with them on it.

I appreciate that response.

I have heard from community members um how uh successful and well utilized the trust program is.

I um acknowledge that when funding um is limited and this the fact that this is um you know a program that it requires county support as well.

Um I I just want to uplift that as a tool that our community has really reflected um the the use and the appreciation for an alternative response and just given today's audits and and looking at how much time um how much overtime is being spent uh going to just answering regular calls.

I just wanted to uplift um the trust program is something that I'd I'd like to see us continue to explore in whatever way possible.

I understand that limitations with the county um are prec precluding us from doing it right now, um, but it just it remains a uh source of support from our community and how we are managing our response to all crises crisis in the city.

So thank you for that information.

And with that, I move to approve the memo from uh the mayor, council member Cohen, Councilmember Candelas, and myself.

Thank you.

Thank you.

We have a motion and a second.

Councilmember Ortiz.

Thank you.

Uh wanna thank my colleagues for their memo.

I'll be sure to support it.

Um I also just want to thank both the city auditor and our chief of police for the work that's was put into this um report.

You know, I want to acknowledge you know the level of spending on overtime.

It is it is a a concern, uh, especially during a budget shortfall like ours.

But that being said, you know, from conversations with with my local captain with with the chief of police uh as well, many of the overtime hours that our officers have been uh clocked in doing, um, it's been doing essential work.

You know, my district has real public safety concerns, including vandalism and attacks on small business owners.

I think we had somebody mention Peter's Bakery.

Um luckily our police department was able to catch that individual uh recently, drug use at local parks.

I know the chief of police and the captain are aware of that.

We used to have our own um park division division within the police department.

Um now, unfortunately, due to budget um shortfalls that's have to that's had to go away.

And we had individuals, you know, drinking in parks, do doing drugs, you know, um making parks less safe for families.

And when I call my captain, he says, okay, I'll have you know overtime officers do it because that's the only resource that that honestly we have.

We have you know speeding right now in the Cassell neighborhood, we have a lot of speeding due to the VTA construction.

I think me and the chief just got an email from a constituent asking for you know speed traps and for speed enforcement, you know, in many ways my constituents are begging, advocating for for these these services.

And so I do want to just make sure that you know I don't think that you know I want to be clear, our officers aren't being predatory with these hours, they're not necessarily wasting the public's purse.

These are these are services and resources that our constituents need that our residents uh actually require in order to live in a a safe neighborhood.

And honestly, we need we need more.

Uh and I know that you know trust was mentioned that was something that I advocated tirelessly for um during I think it was the first budget cycle that I was ever uh a part of.

Um but now I think there was uh an article that just came out that a lot of the alternative first response teams are being cut by the county.

Um, not because they don't want to fund them, but but just because of the budget shortfall.

And so if anything, um we're probably gonna see police respond to uh even more of these types of uh of cases.

And so I just want to you know clarify that this is this is an issue.

We need to make sure that we are curbing this type of uh uh spending.

Um but you know, also um the residents of my district are truly grateful for the services that are being provided.

Um and and you know, we we're gonna have to work together in partnership with the chief, the council and and the chief in partnership with um administration to develop uh um you know ways to mitigate this these um these uh overtime hours.

But it's not as it's not a simple, it's not a simple uh you know wand that we can wave and just make that go away because you know many times when I talk to my my my chief, I'm saying, hey, there's there's people continuing to come to this site, they're tagging up, they're breaking into schools.

You know, Alan Rock, it's closing a lot of the schools right now, several schools, and people have been going on to that property and partying and and doing different, you know, have having parties paying people to come onto the to property to have parties.

When I called the captain, you know, it takes two calls for a specific area, two high priority calls to wipe out the existing assigned officers, right?

And two calls happen like that.

Um, and unless we're we're calling overtime officers, there's gonna be a lot of calls.

I know that people have have raised about the response time that that um that it's not um at a level that's acceptable by the community.

But if we weren't using these overtime hours, it would honestly be a lot worse.

And so I just want to acknowledge that you know I don't think that this is something uh negative by the officers, but it's just a system of how our funding is.

Um I have confidence in the chief and then the administration and the city council to move forward and address this.

Thank you.

Thank you for those thoughts, Councilmember.

Councilmember Duan.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

Thank you for the report, the audits and the presentation.

District 7 have the same problems as District 5, District 3, and many others.

And with this cutting of the overtime expenditure, one of the critical function is the walking beat officer that help to keep D7 safe, and I believe that is going to be cut.

Is that correct, Chief?

It's already been cut.

We are we are cutting the walking beats citywide with the exception of the downtown core.

So I if I was a resident in another part of the city, which is the underserved community, I would imagine I would be pretty upset because as a citizen, I pay the same taxes as downtown.

And I would highly suggest that the citizen in in D7, D5, and so on, should stand up and said we deserve the same services.

And if we don't, then when we're talking about fair and equitable, it's not.

And so District 7, we we have quite a bit of because the the freeway contact from 280, 680 to 101 and 880, you know, just close by the criminal from other city tend to look for easy escape route out of the city.

And by not investing um walking beats, and I feel that we are cheating the taxpayer in the underserved area.

And not to say that I don't recognize that district seven has become safer, but there's always more work to be done.

And I'm here, you know, I understand that Brian Kurtz, uh, you know, he's advocating for downtown.

Well, as a council member of the district seven, I'm advocating for my district for my residents, whom you know it's been like this for I don't know, 40, 50, 60 years.

When are we gonna talk about hey, let's get more resources to where is needed the most, not because of FIFA, not because of Super Bowl, because the right thing to do.

With that, I yield my time.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Councilmember Cullen.

Yeah, thank you.

And as always, thank you, Joe and your team for um audit report.

It's always helpful to get another perspective on this.

You know, I don't I was trying to figure out what questions I want to ask because as you know, I've been concerned about overtime for a while in the police budget, particularly because it feels like we're not able to predict in advance exactly how much we're going to use, and that makes our budgeting difficult and uncertain.

Um I'm just gonna ask one question today, and then I'll think about it some more as we get into the budget season.

Um, but overtime spending seems to be growing at a at a pretty high rate.

And I'm trying to understand.

I mean, our staffing hasn't dropped significantly in five years, but our overtime spending has grown.

What's the percentage?

40, 50 percent in five years.

So I I'm still trying to wrap my head around that and understand what is it we're doing differently, what is causing that growth, that high growth rate, because it it feels unsustainable to me.

Staffing has actually decreased somewhat, not drastically, but somewhat in the last five years.

I would say that the nature of policing, for one thing, has changed tremendously.

Um our emphasis on de-escalation means that our approach to calls, which in the past might have been weighted more towards expediency, is now weighted more towards peaceful outcomes.

I think that's a a win for everybody, but it is in fact time consuming.

There are more and more requirements of the officers on each and every call, more report writing requirements, more administrative requirements, uh requirements that they fill out state mandated data sheets, requirements that they view their body warrant cameras before writing all reports.

Um there's a lot of reasons why overtime is increasing.

I would say that, you know, I, as chief, have probably erred on the side of public safety over financial stewardship.

I want to deliver you a safe city.

Um, you know, we don't capture uh we don't capture the Valley Fair shooter without a fair amount of overtime.

We don't capture uh, you know, some of the some of the high profile criminals that that you have seen us identify and arrest.

Uh the the Kim Hung jewelry robbers, you know, where over 25 people come from another community into into this city and and drive a truck to the front of a store and throw an 88-year-old man on the ground wearing hoodies and driving stolen cars.

That's not easy to track all those people down.

But I would say that the investment in public safety that we made to apprehend as many of those people as possible, makes us in Councilmember Duan's words not an inviting target.

It shows that San Jose is the city where if you come and commit a crime, we will find you, we will track you down.

We we could do less on some of those cases and spend less, but I feel that not I mean, there it's you know, obviously hard to place a value on reducing victimization in the city, but I think that absolutely the city is getting a return on its investment.

In addition to that, I would say that we have been on an endless quest to try to be more efficient, more effective.

We've called we've we've gotten rid of certain specialized units and put officers back in patrol to try to reduce overtime.

We are doing a redistricting project that we hope will balance out our calls for service load more evenly throughout the city, improve response times, and reduce overtime.

We're looking at acquiring a software program that will help officers write reports in a more speedy manner, because we do recognize that report writing, which is an absolutely essential function, it's a necessary function, an unavoidable function of police work.

If it can be done faster and more efficiently, we think that will be a tremendous savings of uh of money.

So it's not like we're not trying.

And in, you know, ultimately this comes down to the fact that we have a police department that is half the size of an average police department, and yet we've delivered the safest big city in America.

We've done that by working very hard, by working very long hours.

Um we will we are not unaware of our need to contribute to reducing this city's deficit, and we are proceeding with haste towards doing that.

But I would say that you've gotten great value for the dollars that have been spent thus far.

Yeah, and I I obviously appreciate, as you know, the work that the department does and um the great success that we have in keeping our city safe.

Um I guess it would be helpful.

I mean, it's useful for me to see data over time you know, in terms of what our crime rates are, what our solve rates are, and how you know the spending changes have have had an impact on that, because you know it it it just sometimes doesn't necessarily feel like feel like it lines up, but I I mean I understand that your role your job is to do everything you can to to maximize safety.

Our job is to do the same, but also to manage the entire budget of the city and make trade-off decisions about all the services that we provide, and it becomes harder and harder the more we're spending in one function of the city.

That's so that's why I'm always thinking about that.

But I appreciate your your mention about redistricting.

I'm hopeful that the more for the flexibility that will derive from our renewed districts and the way we're going to deploy our beats will provide efficiencies and improve response times without having to spend more to do it.

So uh thank you for that.

I'm anxiously awaiting that as you know.

Um but appreciate the the response.

If I could add just a couple of things to what the what the chief what the chief said.

Um as as we did report in the in in the report, uh active sworn officers, the number of active sworn officers has come down, which has been a real has really impacted the ability to kind of hit those those mandatory minimum uh number of officers uh on a on a per shift basis.

And we we did look at that and did see, you know, actively staffing uh regular shifts on overtime was something we were seeing, and that is one of the biggest components of overtime.

I just want to kind of highlight the the memo from the the mayor and the three council members really highlighted some reporting on disaggregated data around overtime, which is really important because each type of overtime has a different sort of control around it for the mandatory minimum staffing.

Obviously, there's minimum staffing requirements, which kind of drives a lot of what's going on there.

There's going to be specific activities or events.

We mentioned uh foot controls or something else that might have been on overtime.

Those are going to be driven by different set of controls.

And then the follow-up and report writing, uh, we noted in the report had a certain set of control structure around it.

Uh more recently it's been updated, so we want to kind of that's one of our recommendations, kind of monitor that.

So there's different control structure, including looking at these different types of re uh overtime, looking at the controls around them, and I think some of the reporting and some of the elements in the memo about a qualitative analysis of changes from the overtime memo earlier in the year, the disaggregated data and the progress report, and these areas will be really important moving forward from an oversight standpoint.

Um, but um at a high level stepping back until we really address some of the retention issues and the hiring issues, we're going to continue to have overtime issues.

Can you hear me?

Yes.

Okay.

Jennifer, please.

Thank you.

I just wanted to also add to the conversation because as you all are aware, um, because the overtime has been kind of unsustainable and and not unbudgeted, you know, this particular police chief, which I'm very grateful, um, has really doubled down on making sure we're using our overtime resources as efficiently and effectively as possible.

And you all approved some budget actions uh almost two months ago that uh made some changes in the areas that weren't really risky for the city.

Um we will be, you know, we obviously are continuing to try to staff up and we're seeing more applications, correct chief, uh coming now, because there was obviously a big lull uh after 2020 and it's starting to rise up.

That was a national issue.

Um we will still be spending millions of dollars on overtime uh for the activities that our police department absolutely has to do to keep this community safe, but we have to do it responsibly and as efficiently and effectively as possible.

So, you know, as we go forward, not only will the overtime control, the the budget actions that you've all approved, the overtime controls that the chief has put in place, along with the continuing to right size their overtime budget, because I think we pointed out that there are some areas that where it has not been right sized, but we'll have to phase that in given our budget constraints over the next couple of years.

Um you'll see some proposals related to that in the city manager's proposed budget that will release uh probably late on Friday.

So we've got a multi-pronged strategy because we will hopefully remain, and we're gonna be all hands-in to the safest, largest city in America.

And I do appreciate you, Chief specifically, for all you're doing to making sure we're making the right decisions with our limited resources and all of uh the council's support on for our police department.

Thank you.

Thank you for that.

Councilmember Duan.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, I just have a quick question for you, Chief.

If comparing to the geographical or the population to other metropolitan, the same size city, how many officers would you say you would need well I I'll give you I'll give you a national average, which is about 2.2 officers per thousand population.

It's the average police department in the United States.

We have about one per thousand.

So my understanding is that we got one officer per thousand on the national average is two point two.

And if you compare that to San Francisco, what San Francisco, which you know, we're 180 square miles, there are about 50.

We have a population of approximately a million, they have about 800,000 population.

I believe their authorized strength is closer to 2,000 uh officers.

And I don't know how many they actually have.

I know they're also struggling with recruitment and retention, so uh, but I think that I believe that's their authorized strength.

Thank you.

And you know, with the 1,000 police officers that we have.

It's incredible that we become the safest large city in the nation.

And that's through a lot of revamping our policy, cutting our budget, but yet our police men and women working harder to make our city safe.

And um, I just want to make sure that we recognize that, and then we continue to support our police and fire to create a safe city because without safe city, no one will ever want to invest or do businesses here.

Thank you.

Agreed, making sure that we have a safe city is extremely important.

That's what our residents want, and that's what we strive to achieve with a very small police force, but well won, well managed and with the use of technology helps to create the efficiencies that we have from the police department.

And I, for one, am uh thrilled to see the traffic cops out giving tickets in space places and speeding when they're speeding along, especially near schools, near uh areas that are a lot of pedestrians and risk of injuries.

Uh so I'm I'm pleased to see the the work of the police off police department, and I support the police department completely.

With that, I see no further hands.

Let's vote.

Motion passed unanimously, one absent.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation.

Next is item 3.4, spring 2026 intergovernmental relations report.

Good afternoon, Vice Mayor, Council members, and members of the public.

My name is Emily Lamb, and I am the director of the City Manager's Office of Administration Policy and Intergovernmental Relations.

I'm joined today by our intergovernment intergovernmental relations team, Han Kang, Steve Stamos, and Nicholas Ochoa.

Additionally, our lobbying partners from Sacramento are here.

Steve Cruz and Nick Romo from Cruise Strategies.

I'd also like to take the opportunity to thank the city departments as well as Ryan and Alejandra and the mayor's office for strengthening our work in the intergovernmental relations realm.

So with that, I will turn it over to Han for our presentation today.

Thank you very much and good afternoon.

So what I'll do is share highlights and also some updates from the IGR report.

There are two slides, one that's really focused on updates from the federal government, and the other that's focused on the state government.

So with regards to the federal update, we're engaging very closely with our members of Congress on the appropriations process.

And this would include resources that really support the city's homelessness response, affordable housing programs, libraries, water infrastructure, among other activities.

And this is actually in contrast to the president's budget requests, which sought to reduce or eliminate the funding for these programs.

Now the work on appropriations also includes the work on earmarks.

Very grateful to representatives Kana, Licardo, and Panetta for advancing $16 million for eight projects.

Now, the number one project is aligned with the city's priority on affordable housing.

This actually would support affordable home mobile home repairs for senior citizens.

And there are other projects that would actually support the city's priorities in parks as well as the fire department and the police department as well.

We also really hope to see the good news from our senators because we also did submit requests to both senators as well.

And we're going to continue to identify funding opportunities outside of these earmark resources.

So we joined joined a coalition with other cities to actually oppose the two rules.

One was actually issued by the or proposed by the General Services Administration, which would mandate the city and other federal funding recipients to comply with registration requirements that are inconsistent with the city's approaches and values to serve vulnerable and underserved populations.

Now, this is important for the city because we actually must renew our registration in August, specifically for resources that go to the airport.

And for the housing and urban development, the proposed rule would actually restrict housing assistance for all households in which at least one member may not be eligible because of their citizenship or immigration status.

Now for both rules, there's no fixed timeline for when the federal government agencies will actually issue these rules.

We're hoping that they don't, but if they do, we are ready to respond.

Now, on to the state updates.

With regards to the FY 26 to 27 budget, we're very encouraged to see what was released in the Senate leadership plan known as the Foundation for Future.

In particular, we're really encouraged to see the responsible budgeting as a key priority.

And also $1 billion for the homeless housing assistance and prevention program, for one billion for both round seven and round eight.

And we're also very eager to see a very similar kind of conclusion from the Assembly members, and we're really looking forward to that.

Now, we're also engaging with our state delegation and working with the mayor's office to issue a letter in advance of the May revision that would reiterate the city's priorities.

And we're also going to issue an info memo once the May revision is released.

In terms of the city sponsored bill, very similar to last year.

There are two bills that the city is sponsoring.

One is Senate Bill 1375, which would expedite on the Dirida Don Station Modernization by actually waiving an environmental review.

Also has added benefits of cost savings and creating jobs and actually creating a new category of exemption from the California Environmental Quality Act that could benefit other transit projects as well.

Really grateful to Senator Cortesi as the author and also our colleagues from the Department of Transportation for working really closely with us on this bill.

The second sponsored bill is Assembly Bill 1941.

This would actually target groups that steal metal from street lights, from train tracks and telecom cables that have been reported, both in this city as well as other Bay Area cities.

It would actually also improve the metal theft info sharing with the California Department of Justice and actually builds on a city sponsored bill last year.

This is Assembly Bill 476, which made it harder to sell stolen metal.

And also really thankful to Assemblymember Gonzalez as the author for this bill.

Now, both of these bills passed out of their policy committees.

They've been referred to the appropriations committees, and we're looking forward to the hearings on these bills.

Now, on the four advocacy items, single stairwell reform.

First, really thanks to Councilmember Tordillos for joining me in the committee hearing.

Really appreciate your testimony in support of this bill.

And what this bill would do, or what it was proposed to do, was to allow for the construction of single stairwell buildings that are higher than three stories.

Now, this bill was presented without a committee vote, and it will likely not move forward in this current legislative session.

However, we will continue to engage with Assemblymember Lee as well as other legislators and stakeholders to allow for this kind of construction, but to do it in a way that also prioritizes public safety.

With regards to the taxation on private detention facilities, so this refers to Assembly Bill 1633.

It was heard yesterday as well as other times during this month.

I'm actually quite pleased to see that the bill analysis reflects the input that we provided to both the principal consultant of the committee as well as Assemblymember Haney's team.

And we also really appreciate the interest that Congressman Licardo has shown on this bill, and we're going to be meeting with his team later this week to solicit additional ideas on what we could do to regulate these detention facilities in the state.

On electric bike safety, really appreciate the memos that we've received from the mayor, the vice mayor, as well as council members, including you, Councilmember Candelas, really to elevate this as a priority.

And you, all of you have our commitment to double down on our engagement with legislators and stakeholders to promote both access and safety.

And then finally, on card rooms.

So in March, the California Gaming Association actually filed two lawsuits against the Attorney General.

And this lawsuit would seek to block the California Department of Justice regulations, which would restrict the operations of the card rooms.

The city actually filed a declaration in support of the litigation because we specifically highlighted the revenue as well as the job losses to the city.

And we are monitoring the court actions and we will be providing updates as well.

So this concludes our presentation.

We are asking the council to accept the report and also to reaffirm the city positions in the legislative logs for both at the federal level and at the state level.

Also want to take this opportunity to thank my colleague Nicholas Ochoa for really stepping up.

While my other colleague, Steve Stamos was out on a well deserved parental break.

Really appreciate your interest and your engagement on intergovernmental relations.

We are presenting this just before the public service recognition week.

So this gives you a preview of what public service looks like to our team.

Thank you for the presentation.

I'm disappointed about the single staircase and also the card room activity or lack of activity, let me put it that way.

But I'm sure my colleagues have a lot to say about those those issues.

Before we move to the my colleagues, do we have any members of the public who wish to speak?

Jordan, please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Jordan Mulden, President Chair of BPAC, again, speaking for myself.

I'd like to thank the council for your attention to bicycle safety.

Our transportation system should never lead to loss of life or life changing injuries.

I'm here to urge the council to adopt the single signer memo from Vice Mayor Foley regarding access to electric bikes as a transportation mode, and I thank her for her partnership with BPAC.

We always need to be boldly pushing the envelope at all levels of government for street safety.

Regarding legislative advocacy, there are safety bills that are not currently in the matrix that I recommend supporting or monitoring.

This includes AB 2276, the stop super speeders bill, which would mandate intelligent speed assistance devices for persons who have multiple convictions for extreme speeding.

AB 1569, which is a K through 12 e-bike uh safety course, AB 1830, which is for ignition interlock devices for DUI drivers, and AB 2168, which is reform and acceleration of the state ATP, which funds a lot of our safety projects.

While hospitals have reported an alarming rise in trauma relating to e-bikes, it's likely that much of the trauma is actually related to the proliferation of electric motorcycles or electric mopeds.

The Maneta Transportation Institute has reported that they've seen that 90% of e-bikes in schoolyards are actually these much more powerful electric motorcycles.

I urge your support for SB 1167, which would regulate the e-motorcycles and prevent them from being marketed to children as e-bikes.

AB 1557 from the group memo is well intentioned, but it creates its own types of safety risks.

The 250 watt restriction in particular makes it difficult to go up hills, uh, especially if you're a heavier individual.

Thank you, Jordan.

Thank you.

Back to council.

Thank you, Jordan, for your comments.

Uh, we all received a written uh brief from you as well.

Uh Councilmember Candelas.

Um thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um, uh yeah, I just wanted to take a moment um to thank Han, Emily, and everybody in the IGR team for uh your advocacy uh for our city in both DC and Sacramento, frankly.

Um and also thank my colleagues in our Brown Act for your work and uh putting together the memo around um e-bikes or electric bikes.

Uh the mayor, uh councilmember compost, cohen, and and Kamei.

Um, you know, I also want to thank you, Vice Mayor Foley, uh, for your memo to ensure that we're not restricting access or mobility options uh for our residents for our residents' equity is important and something that is foundational to me and also my council district and you know, not just that, your your um work throughout the years uh on Vision Zero and ensuring that we are doing everything we can as a city to make sure that our residents uh both uh walkers, bikers, mopedders um, are safe getting to and from work, school, church, whatever.

Um, and and it's important that we do not target e-bikes as a mode of transportation.

I'm gonna just start out and say that.

Um, the goal of our memo was to address the misuse of of e-bikes and the uh proliferation of illegal e-bikes, especially amongst our youth.

Um the reality is the state is grappling with this emergent technology and how to adequately regulate it.

Um cities uh across the state are seeing.

In fact, last week, Councilmember Cohen and I attended our League of Cities meeting.

Um, and we heard from city leaders across the state from Sacramento, uh, folks uh in um uh San Diego, in Fresno, Alameda.

It's it's across the state.

This is a major concern for for a lot of people.

And in fact, this morning I also attended um the Viva Escuela event that our Department of Transportation walk and roll program puts together, uh, where they promote safe passage to schools.

Um and uh it was at one of our elementary schools, and in fact, I saw a sixth grader uh riding an e-bike uh to the event.

And so, you know, I've had numerous conversations with folks this morning.

I was talking to to uh a lot of folks who are seeing electric bikes getting faster, uh modified or or what they're calling as jailbroken, which allows them to go beyond the uh allotted speed limits, um, and and increasingly so by people who aren't or young people who aren't supposed to be using them, riders under the age of 16.

And so, you know, part of my fervor and and the passion that I speak on this on this item is because uh last month in my district I had a seventh grader die using an e-bike.

He was wearing a helmet.

Um, and uh he in fact he was on the sidewalk.

But um this is the the the type of incident that really um puts that the onus on us as leaders to do something and to ensure that we are um stepping up in a time where um all of us are you know not all of us on the dice, but everybody's increasingly distracted while driving.

There's so many other things that are happening.

Um, but you know, we're we're seeing in incidents like this across our city, downtown, uh off the Alameda, Willow Glen, Almadin.

Uh at the time it was a third pedestrian fatality, and and since then I think we had one just a few days back.

Um and and I can't imagine what the the pain that the families are going through because it's it's sad and it's preventable fatalities.

And we have a vision zero policy, which I talk about, and and it's it shouldn't just be words on paper, it should be everything in our power to make sure that we're addressing um those those kind of uh fatalities.

I uh in fact I called uh State Senator Dave Cortesi's uh staff as soon as I met with the families uh who are uh uh related to to the the child and uh to to see what we can do to advance and prevent you know future incidents like this, and uh you know I I was especially happy to make it a point on our men in our memo to not be overly prescriptive and to build on on previous conversations we had with local and and state led just legislators by directing our IG I IGR team to advocate uh for policies that better regulate essentially the dangers of of these electric bicycles to ultimately protect our families and you know I I uh understand the vice mayor's memo uh adds direction to our memo.

Um and and I guess I I I'd like a little bit of clarity from from staff uh in understanding uh both both memos' direction.

Um you know, for example, how would you navigate a conflict between mobility and safety?

Um given the direction that these memos have provided.

Um I I'd I'd be curious to to hear the approach that staff would take.

Councilmember, thank you very much for your question and also your energy uh in this matter.

And I'm really glad that you mentioned the seventh grader and the pedestrian, and I hope that the families could also accept our condolences as well.

So these are the individuals that we keep front and center as we double down on our engagement with legislators and stakeholders on e-bike access and safety.

And in terms of uh access, mobility and safety, we actually see them as complementary and not competing goals.

And what we really envision is making sure that people have affordable access and use of e-bikes in a way that minimizes the risks of injuries and deaths.

And so specific interventions as examples that we may be seeking in bill language would be things like education and outreach, which is actually part of assembly bill 1569, which Jordan, thank you very much for identifying that bill.

Uh and also design and infrastructure solutions that our colleagues in the Department of Transportation and also public works have been promoting right now in the city.

I mean, I see that.

I see the construction going on.

And there's some other solutions that are also possible as well.

No, thank you for that.

I I mean, obviously, you know a bill changes dramatically from committee to committee, and as it goes through the legislative process, that's the you know that's that's obvious, and it's not as as simple as support or pose.

Um, you know, it's my goal that um the direction um does just what you said, and it's it and it's hopefully provides that flexibility with staff that uh, for example, could support if amended.

Um, if you know, for example, AB 1942, for example, the EB, the e-bike accountability act is something that that was mentioned uh in Jordan's email, actually.

See, Jordan, I read your emails.

Um, but you know, that it was something that was mentioned, and and you know, while um uh there's a few organizations, including uh the bicycle coalition that do not support it, there are other municipalities that do.

And the California Police Chiefs Association supported it, we had a robust conversations at the League of Cities about this because we chose um on that body to uh supportive amended because one of the concerns was it would increase the cost of of being a bike rider because of the registration requirement.

So uh uh one of the recommendations that that folks had was put a cap on it, put a cap on the fees that you can charge, and that way we meet the goal of making sure that folks are educated and that uh the law enforcement has the tools to be able to identify e-bikes and um and and to make sure that we we are doing everything we can as policymakers to push good policy.

So in that case, it would be a supportive amended, and I would hope that given the flexibility uh that we I know we made sure of in our memo uh because we wrote it, um, that it'll give you the same flexibility uh that uh that we have in um or that that is uh part of the intent that we we had and included as part of the vice mayor's uh memorandum.

And and is that clear.

Yes.

Okay, perfect.

And then um, you know, uh, you know, I I just want to close with um, you know, it's important for all of us to have a voice and have a say as to how policy is created, whether it's here in Sacramento, and I I just wanted to thank my colleagues for for their uh collaborative memorandums or vice mayor for your memorandum and and look forward to to seeing what we can do to create guardrails uh in the name of safety for our community.

Um and with that, um, you know, I'll I'll move uh essentially both of our memos, Vice Mayor.

I'll move your your memo with with the clarity provided uh uh in the questions and follow-up.

Second.

Thank you.

Thank you for moving my memo.

I appreciate that.

There's both part.

I know they're together.

Councilmember Duan Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh thank you for the report.

Uh and I really enjoy you know the briefing from the IGR team.

I just want to take a moment to recognize the report from Cal Fire and State Fire Marshal Office in response to AB 835.

This is not an easy assignment balancing the urgency of California housing needs with the fundamental responsibility, responsibility, responsibility to protect life and safety.

The report took a cautious uh cautious stance on a single stair design, stating they do not fully substitute for two exit, even with modern protection like sprinklers and alarms.

This redundancy is emphasized as a critical for unforeseen failure of complex fire event.

The report advised no expansion to six-story without an additional cow fire study.

Ultimately reinforce something we know to be true.

Redundancy in fire protection save lives.

As we look to the future innovation, may we move carefully, responsibly, and above all else, keep the life and safety of our constituent at the center of every single decision.

And I just want to emphasize uh as a former Fari captain, and and you can go out there and talk to any firefighters in any station on any shift.

A single stairwell, even of four-story apartment building.

We call in a high-rise.

That will take majority of the resource of firefighter right here in the city.

As the large amount of resource going up the stair, they don't we don't use elevators.

You're talking about uh personnel with equipment going up the stairs, hoses in the smoke condition, water running down.

Think of a person with disability, paraplegic, even a quad to plegic using you know the stair tractor to bring them down.

You're not gonna have that opportunity.

Somebody's gonna get hurt, somebody's gonna die.

Many firefighters have slip and fall down stairwells, including myself.

In a heated smoky condition.

People will panic, people will do crazy things that you never thought they would, even a simple exit.

If you don't have a secondary exit, well, then we might as well build homes as just one door, one entry, one exit, and see what happened.

Save some money.

But people's lives are at stake.

If if it's your family and they live in an apartment, I wouldn't recommend to live in an apartment complex that have one single stairwell.

And both my brother and I retire from the San Jose Fire Department.

My cousin, who is a deputy chief and the fire marshal, and many, many, many friends throughout Calfire and many other entity.

They're all against it.

And we're talking about from people who have are experts.

And I would love to someday to invite all the council members who think it's great.

I'll put you right up in the training tower, put them smoke in there, have a bunch of firefighters go up on the fourth story and see what happened.

I'll yield my time.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Councilmember Tordillos.

Thank you, uh, Vice Mayor, and thank you, staff, for the excellent presentation.

And thank you also, Han for joining me up in uh Sacramento.

It was my first time at the Capitol testifying on a bill, so I appreciated having you there.

Uh, don't want to fully relitigate, you know, the single stair uh discussion, especially given that as we heard the bill is not moving forward this session, uh, so we have some time to regroup here.

Uh, but do want to make clear that you know, with the study that came out from the state fire marshal, that there was limitation.

There were limitations in that study, and there was also significant disagreement within the membership of the working group on both the scope of the study and the findings, uh, most notably the fact that the study explicitly did not compare the safety of the proposed single stair buildings with traditional single or two staircase buildings.

Uh, but did want to note that another recent study completed by uh the state of Minnesota did expressly look at that uh specific question and to uh Councilmember Dewan's point about you know these cascading failures that are possible in these buildings.

The Minnesota study actually did look at all of these different failure modes from uh sprinkler systems not activating to alarms not going off to doors in the unit with the fire being left open, you know, allowing smoke to escape.

And the findings from that more comprehensive study showed that eight-story single staircase buildings uh with these safeguards around four floor plates and max travel distances to exits, sprinkler requirements, pressurized stairs would actually be safer than the two-story alternative eight-story building that they analyze specifically because of the quicker travel distances and the lower occupancy load per four floor plate.

So I do not think that it is a foregone conclusion in any sense that single staircase buildings are unsafe.

And again, we can look at some of the studies that have been performed on the thousands of single staircase buildings that exist across this country and across the world that have shown that these buildings are safe.

Uh, on the topic of e-bike safety, I do want to thank Councilmember Candellas and Council Member Foley for the memos.

Uh, but do want to reframe the discussion just a little bit uh to point out that far and away, you know, on our roads, the most dangerous vehicles that exist for drivers, for cyclists, for pedestrians are cars.

And that while e-bike accident rates and injury rates have been going up, but currently still car injuries are over 100 times higher nationwide than e-bike injuries.

That's not to say that we shouldn't do something about some of the recent tragedies that we've heard.

I think it's just important that we dig into what actual safety concerns we're seeing.

Uh, what is the data show?

What do the trends show?

Uh so I do want to highlight uh, I think Jordan alluded to this in his uh letter as well, uh, the study from the Maneta Transportation Institute uh that came out last year that showed uh, you know, published some findings about e-bike safety.

Uh the two things that really stood out to me were that one, well, e-bike crashes have gone up, uh, they are still far less common than conventional bikes.

Uh so I think something that we should keep in mind here.

Uh but then the other one, and I think this one points more towards what sorts of legislation might be really important to prioritize here, is about the misclassification of e-moto's, uh, e motorcycles in particular and the severe safety concerns they are causing.

Uh, you know, they point to a survey of 12 different schools that were visited, uh, both middle and high schools in California, where they just surveyed what uh electric vehicles were parked on site, and they found that 88% of the ostensibly e-bikes that were parked on those campuses were not actually street legal e-bikes, uh, which I think points to a lot of the risk that we see with this unregulated market of overpowered e-mikes that are already not legal under California law, but that are being inappropriately either marketed uh to young people or being allowed to be retrofitted after the fact.

So I think that's really the highest priority thing that we should be focusing in on.

Uh I do have concerns about some of the bills that have been introduced in recent years in the legislature around e-bike regulation.

I think, you know, while well-intentioned, I have concerns about you know potentially overly onerous registration or license plate requirements on e-bikes as something that could uh you know make it more difficult for their uptake.

Uh and I think that making e-bikes accessible, kind of in the spirit of uh the vice mayor's memo is really important because fundamentally encouraging mode share away from single occupancy vehicles and towards active transportation, e-bikes, walking, uh mopeds, all of that is really going to be important to both our mobility goals, our safety goals, and our climate goals.

So we want to make sure that the uh requirements that we put in place are reasonable.

I also wanted to flag some concerns with AB 1557 in particular, which would lower some of the speed or change the classifications for e-bikes, uh, change some of the speed limits uh and the motor uh power limits.

Uh I think there's concerns though, just because this would kind of separate California from a regulatory standpoint from the rest of the country.

I think there's concerns about whether these types of e-bikes are even available in the market, whether the market would be able to respond quickly, uh, and uh whether that could make it again more difficult to acquire an e-bike.

Uh but I also think that some of those features are actually important safety features.

Uh, you know, if for anyone here who has biked in San Jose, where you have to navigate our growing and excellent uh you know protected bike lane network.

But when you come to gaps in those networks and suddenly you are in you know normal vehicle lanes contending with car traffic, you know, being able to have more pedal assists, being able to get up to 20 miles per hour and get closer to the prevailing speed of traffic, being able to have throttle available if you were older or uh differently abled and you need the you know extra boost to get up closer to the speeds of other vehicles or have a quicker start at a stop sign or traffic lights that you again are not in a dangerous situation where you were contending with cars.

A lot of these things that while they may pose safety concerns are also important safety features when you're actually riding an e-bike in some of these urban environments.

Uh, did want to also just uplift the bill that was mentioned by Jordan SB 1167, which does specifically zero in on the e-moto regulation in particular, adding manufacturer disclosure requirements so that if you manage to acquire one of these vehicles, the manufacturer has to tell you point blank this is not an e-bike, it is not road legal.

You know, you have to go and get a license, you have to get uh whatever it is.

I think would be a good first start here.

Also has some bans on using some of these vehicles on public roads, which I think would be uh important, as well as, and I think this one is really important, uh, standardizing labeling on e-bikes and also data collection practices.

So that in the future we can better suss out which of these accidents are from road legal, you know, class one and class two e-bikes versus which ones are from either aftermarket modifications or bikes that never should have been on our roads under current law anyway.

Uh so again, I think that there's a lot of nuance here.

It's an important problem to crack, uh, but I think it's important that we do it the right way, that we look at what the data says and we let that guide uh kind of the policy prescriptions that we pursue.

Uh so we'll be supporting uh the vice mayor and uh councilmember Candelas' memo.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Councilmember Campos.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thank you to our IGR team for their presentation, and thank you for my colleagues for your collaboration on our joint memo uh regarding e-bike safety in the state assembly, as my colleagues have shared.

We know that there is uh more work that needs to be done to ensure our streets are safe and accessible for our youth, um, especially in the periphery of our city, uh, places like South San Jose, East San Jose, um, that don't yet have that um transit-friendly, bike-friendly uh modes of transportation.

And and as we heard earlier uh this month about the last mile connectivity and how important it is to make sure that we're ensuring uh safety the entire ride through.

Um, I really appreciate uh my my colleagues uplifting um making sure our streets and our roads are safe and accessible for our youth, and it's important that we better understand how to work with our state partners and the bike industry to keep devices uh mislabeled as e-bikes out of the hands of our youth because while e-bike safety is critical, being hit by a vehicle remains the greatest threat to our pedestrians and our bicyclists.

And in 2026, we've already seen double the number of traffic fatalities at this point in comparison to 2025.

So we must continue investing in our vision zero and mobility plans to provide physical separation between vehicles, bicycles, and pedestrians.

And uh since um uh I I've taken office, I've had the pleasure of meeting with almost all of our district two principals, and they've made it very clear that traffic safety and safe routes to school are high priorities.

Um not too long ago, we also had an incident around Davis Middle School where a student uh pedestrian was struck by a car on their way to school.

And so that that is why this work is so critical because it ensures that we're working in lockstep with other levels of government to prioritize the safety of all our uh neighbors and neighborhoods.

I also um just want to uplift and inform my colleagues of Assembly Bill uh 1914 introduced by Assemblymember uh Chiavo.

This bill is simple and if approved will help ensure counties and cities are able to address child care needs in local planning efforts.

As important as our work is to increase residential capacity to meet both our community needs and state mandates, we can't neglect the demand for essential services, including child care.

And so uh I look forward to seeing this bill um progress in the state legislature because I do believe that it will help uh provide the tools and the support that cities need to ensure that all of our communities met needs are met, um, such as housing and child care.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Councilmember Collin.

Yeah, thank you.

Um and thank you, Councilmember Campos, for mentioning that last bill.

We had a vigorous discussion on that as well as well last week.

Unfortunately, many cities don't like it when the state tells them what they should evaluate.

So the League of Cities took a position not to support that bill, but um all that bill asks for is that when you're doing your next general plan amendment or housing element that you take into account child care needs, and I think it's a reasonable thing.

Um I want to mention, I just want to briefly talk about a couple of these bills that we've been talking about.

The single stair bill, I think that's an important example of when there are there's an in-between uh that actually is the correct answer.

Um the idea that every city around the state should be required to accept single stair bill is not realistic because of the different kinds of capacities they have for response.

Uh at the same time, there are places where it can work, as was pointed out by Councilmember Tordillos.

I think it's time for us as a city to start advocating, and we've done this before on bills that we think can help us but don't necessarily apply to others, but advocating for bills that provide um for the ability to do things in certain parts of the state that are not going to be blanket everywhere in the state.

So we ought to be thinking about how we can say that where there's a certain kind of of criteria met that this type of construction can be accepted.

So we ought to, anyway, some some for us to think about in our advocacy.

It shouldn't be a one-size-fits-all type of bill.

Um on the e-bikes, the thing that's most concerning to me is that parents don't know what they're buying their children, and that children under 16 are ending up on bikes that are inappropriate for them, and how we can enforce that.

And we heard from the police chiefs last week saying the issue is that they see an e-bike and they don't know by sight whether or not it's compliant.

They do confiscate e-bikes from children who are riding inappropriate e-bikes, but when you see an e-bike fly by, you don't know without some kind of registration marker on the bike what class it is.

Because children under 16 are only supposed to be riding class one e-bikes and not class two and class three.

So to me, legislation that helps identify the kind of bike and also therefore helps parents know what they should be buying their children because that's what's safe, I think is important.

And then the last thing I want to point out is I think we wouldn't be a good IGR report without reminding people about, first of all, the number of crazy ballot measures.

You're going to see a huge number of ballot measures this November on the ballot of the all kinds of crazy things.

But remind people that now that the just recently the ballot measure from Howard Jarvis has qualified for the ballot.

And if it were to pass measure E would be invalidated and all that revenue would be gone immediately starting in January of next year, along with the inability for any local revenue measure to be able to move forward without a two-thirds vote, including things like TOT and other things that we rely on as a city.

So it it's a all hands on deck moment to try to make sure that a ballot measure like that is not successful because of the rent risks to a city like ours.

So I just want to mention that.

Thank you.

Well, thank you for that really bad news.

We're gonna have to get behind that and or figure out what the implications are, and uh really you'll have to help educate us on that issue along with IGR.

Uh Councilmember Duan.

Uh actually, council member, may I move to go to Councilmember Mulcahy first since he hasn't spoken yet, and then I'll come back to you.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Um Thanks for the report and the efforts out of your office.

Um may have been listening in to the study session with PBCE.

Um I'm sure you were listening in to our CED committee meeting the other day, but this talk about you know, unfunded housing mandates coming down from Sacramento and each of those occasions, I've asked our PBCE staff, you know, what they're hearing from their compatriots around the state, and you know, is everybody feeling as uh overworked you know to to both interpret and then to apply, you know, these bills coming down.

And I'm wondering, are we doing anything?

I didn't see anything in the update, but I may have missed it.

You know, maybe Steve, if there's anything happening, you know, bubbling around the budget to support these unfunded mandates to sort of help cities get out of this, you know, challenging mess that we're in to both interpret our own local planning but also having to deal with what's coming down from the state.

Any comments on that, kind of in what you're seeing?

Thank you for your question.

Uh I wanted to provide a little context, then we can kick it over to our state lobbyists to comment about what's currently happening.

Um but one of the things that I should point out is that the legislature is on track to have made 450 changes to state housing law in just eight years.

So as you can guess, the you know, production of housing has been a huge priority for the State Legislature.

And so therefore there have been a lot of activities, um, as you mentioned, unfortunately, some of which have been unfunded.

We have worked very closely with PBCE and especially with the league on making sure that the legislature understands that when they pass these unfunded mandates, it makes it especially difficult.

I do believe we've made good progress over the last few years to really curb some of that.

And I think in particular with SB 79, we did work very closely with PBCE to minimize that, even though the end product still does put burden on us.

Um but I just wanted to provide that context before we kick it over to the state lobbyists.

Yes, um, thank you for the question, um, council member.

So, yeah, I would agree um with some of Emily's comments just with respect to the volume of bills and the legislatures, you know, in the last like five to ten years or so focused on uh planning and entitlements and sort of really sort of attacking that um those processes as the point of contention or where the backlog is for housing.

Um so I think as those bills have moved through, there's just been a strong appetite for more and more of them without a lot of consideration for the state costs and the mandated uh costs associated with that because of the political, you know, strong political desire to move forward with those.

I think we are starting to see uh somewhat of a shift this year as um I think as the housing experts and the policy committees look at the number of entitled units that are not being built and saying it's not all attributable to local governments not approving housing.

There's other factors involved, like financing and other things.

You look at some of the bills that uh we're supporting this year are not focused on that.

There are the the deposit, the condo deposit or the construction defects.

So they're starting to I think appreciate and understand that there are other factors, but it doesn't sh change or account um change the fact that there are a lot of bills that have been passed and they are now taking effect that the department has to deal with to implement.

Um so my hope is that it does get better.

I think um because of that, there has not been a lot of sympathy, to be honest, um, to try to provide funding associated with that.

The upside is though, as Emily pointed out, that a lot of those bills start out in original forms that actually put much more requirements and much more costs.

And as it they do go through the process, it's hard to see the success, but I think we have been successful, we as a city and working with the league in sort of getting things sort of scaled back uh to improve that that um picture.

Um but I think that's um I think in terms of what's what's happening and why you're seeing so much of it, but I hope that it can improve NO Lee, you may have some some comments as well.

I just wanted to separate from what's going on in uh Sacramento.

I mean Jennifer gets the opportunity to spend a lot of time um with her counterparts throughout the Bay Area and state, and I do as well.

It is a common thing.

San Jose is not even closely alone and feeling over-legislated by Sacramento on this.

And I I certainly think to Steve's point, I think you know, last year um and the first um year of the legislative session, around 2400 bills were introduced.

The sheer volume amount of them that dealt with housing was quite extraordinary.

This year and the second year, you know, it's about 1700.

Second year always being a little bit less.

Um there's far less not realizing that the legislator legislature has made these changes, but yet there's too many externalities around cost and a variety of other factors really driving housing.

So there seems to be a little bit of a back off, but it is a shared kind of overwhelmed feeling you know, across the state, cities, and counties around housing policy specifically.

Thank you.

Are you finished?

Is that it?

Yeah, I I didn't mean to sort of cut it off so quickly.

I'm not real really sure what to do with that.

I guess what we're recognizing is that we, you know, whether it's the administration or our, you know, consultants and lobbyists are recognizing that you know, all cities are overwhelmed.

I guess what you know, what we ultimately do with that and how we you know help facilitate a change in that way, I think it would be uh, you know, I'm interested in that and just want to see us from our IGR team continuing to pursue whether it's clean up uh legislation or whether it's you know advocating for resources to um you know support cities that are um already implementing a lot of these uh programs.

So I'll end it there.

Thank you for the report.

Thank you.

Councilmember Duan, I'm going to go to Councilmember Kameh again because she hasn't spoken.

Sorry about that.

Sorry.

I I wasn't gonna say anything, but my colleague here really um uh struck a nerve.

Uh at the CED meeting, you know, it was very clear that 90 percent of their workload uh is uh uh these mandates and or required, right?

And you know, they're they're demonstrating that they have of all the things that they have to do, what we want to do in terms of our priority is very tiny.

And so I'm thinking, hey, this can get really bad.

This can get worse.

So I guess the only thing that I'd like to say is we have to come up with some kind of strategy to inform uh our even even our delegation, right, in terms of the impacts of taking away local control.

And you know, I understand that everybody wants housing.

We all want housing, but the way that they've been able to like layer it year after year after year after year, when you have to deal with all these mandates with no money.

I mean, we're talking about zero.

Uh it's really really difficult, right?

So I think that it's about time that we start doing more in terms of being able to say, hey, if you're gonna do these things, something has to give, right?

Because we're at 90 percent of the workload.

There's not much more there.

So I think uh before it gets to 95 or 100 percent, I think that we really need to come up with some kind of strategy on how we're going to uh deal with this.

And uh I'm part of the Santa Clara Cities Association, and we're all feeling it.

We're all feeling every city in in in the county is feeling it.

So I just feel that uh we need to come up with a better way and not just well, you know, uh that's the way it's coming down.

No, I think we need to be a lot more proactive, even with our own delegation.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Councilmember Duan.

Thank you for being patient.

Oh, we got time.

We can stay here all night.

I'm just easy.

But anyway, you know, for for that study from Minnesota's I I can throw out cases after cases, like the Greenfeld Tower in London, 2017, 72 death, Bronx apartments, just a duplex, 17 fatalities because of stairwell failures or unable to escape.

Chicago fired 2004, six people were trapped and killed.

Ontario apartment, six people died.

New York apartment high rides within smoke filled stairwell with multiple people die.

Apartment fire in 1993, 10 residents die.

Against it.

And it's you know, we just be that the trade-off is not to many, many people out there, is not only a danger to the residents, but it's also a danger to firefighter that's going up.

When you trying to, you gotta remember multiple from rescue to companies going up there cutting the roof to companies going up for every personnel that going up, they're bringing bundle of holes, and then to breathing what you call the SCBA to go up there.

A large amount of equipment, a large amount of people, even in a three-story or even a two-story.

Think of it as higher we go, the more resource we need.

And so it's funny how we we we look at some of these one study and we said, oh, yeah, we can talk fast, we can talk about this study, but again, let look at all the cases, and more and more will happen.

I think that we're will be irresponsible if we trade human life for a little extra you know, reduce of cost, or is negligent that a single stairwell will add more volume to the bill.

I don't want to argue this to death, I can't, but I'll uh yield my time.

Thank you.

I'm hoping that we can put closure on this item and this memo.

Councilmember Tordillos, you have the last word on the fire issue.

I will keep it brief.

I would say every single one of those fires that uh Councilmember Duan referenced was a tragedy, and none of them were the type of building that we are talking about here.

That is why I think it's important that we don't over-index on individual tragedies like that, but look at the broader data, look at the specifics of what we've seen, and that data has shown that these buildings can be safe, including a study of over 4,000 single-stair buildings spanning 12 years of fire safety data that did not show a single fire death from these buildings.

Thank you.

Okay, my turn.

Truly, there's a lot of interest in what your team is up to, what the IGR team is doing.

And I I two things I just want to elevate a little bit.

You talked about them in your report, but I just wanted to give them a little public recognition, and that is SB 1375 Cortesi.

That's the bill that would exempt Deeradon station from CEQA, and that's really important legislation, and I want to thank the Senator for carrying that for us.

Additionally, um AB 1941, uh uh led by Gonzales, that is important because that's about the copper theft uh and other metals that we're seeing stolen throughout the city, throughout our utilities, our school districts feel it, VTA feels it, and it's extremely costly.

Not only that, it shuts down operations wherever it occurs.

So I just wanted to give a thank you to both Assemblyman Kong uh Gonzalez and Senator Cortesi for carrying those.

And then not too overemphasize the e-bikes.

But I I do want to emphasize what has already been stated a couple of times that it's important to note that the number of severe collisions and fatalities we have have been related to automobiles and not e-bikes.

I just in my district near Carleton Elementary.

Luckily, uh their home recovering, but those were serious crashes and serious injuries.

So we ought to be very concerned about e-bikes, but we ought to still be more concerned about the speed of automobiles and how they are traveling, how drivers are traveling distracted on our streets.

I think it's very important.

But I also want to uh recognize that it's really important that we reach out that the IGR team reaches out to the Silicon Valley Bike Coalition and our own Biped uh BIPAC committee, of which uh Jordan chairs when we're seeking input because there are mobility issues with how people get around the city and how they are able to get around.

So we want to make sure that we're not uh whatever anything we're doing, isn't making it more difficult for someone who is disable disabled or has mobility issues from using one of these e-bikes that could be life-changing for them.

So with that, I'm going to go to a vote.

Motion passes unanimously with one absent.

Okay, thank you for that very um impassionate discussion about uh everything.

Uh IGR always generates more conversation than you think it's going to, but it always does.

Next is item 3.5 amendments to city council policy one sixteen policy for the issuance of multifamily housing.

I don't think we have a report on this, so do we have a any members of the public who wish to speak?

No speaker cards for this item.

Do we have a motion then?

I have a motion.

Is there a second?

I have a motion and a second.

I see no hands raised.

Let's vote.

Motion passed unanimously.

The one absent.

Thank you.

And the next item, uh, last item before open forum is item 10.2 site development permit investing tentative map for certain real property located at Camden Avenue in single singletree way.

I know we have a presentation on this one.

Good afternoon, Honorable Vice Mayor and Council Members.

Many R Sandhir, Deputy Director of Planning, and I'm joined by Chris Burton, Director of Planning Building Code Enforcement, as well as Principal Planner David Keon, who is our in-house CEQA expert.

All right, the item before you today is uh located at 5670 Camden Avenue.

It is for a residential project.

Ummitted under the Housing Accountability Act, and specifically uh the builders remedy component of that law.

Uh the proposal uh includes a subdivision, as you can see in the image on the right to a school site, which was the former Cinnabar Elementary School.

Um, and the site is proposed to be subdivided into two main lots, uh, the one on the left to uh remain and to include the school buildings and the corporation yard, um, and the remainder of the site uh which includes the ball fields to be converted uh to residential development.

The site, the new lot with the residential development, would include access from Camden Avenue as well as from single treeway, and would be developed with 108 residential condo units in 32 three-story buildings.

Eight of the units proposed would be reserved for extremely low-income households.

And the project includes removal of 41 trees as well as state density bonus law waivers for rear setback requirements.

An environmental impact report was prepared for this project, which we'll discuss in a few slides down.

And this project includes a statement of overriding considerations for greenhouse gas emissions and vehicle miles traveled impacts, which is the reason why this Builders Remedy project is before council today, our first one before you.

Once the state updated the Builder's Remedy provisions under Assembly Bill 1893.

It was circulated from August through September, and we received 21 formal comment letters that were addressed and responded to in the final environmental impact report.

The EIR identified several mitigation measures that reduce impacts related to air quality, biological resources, cultural and tribal cultural resources, hazards and hazardous materials, as well as mitigation measures around greenhouse gas emissions and transportation.

However, despite these mitigation measures, the project still results in a significant and unavoidable impact to greenhouse gas emissions and transportation, primarily because of the project location in an area that is identified as an immetigable vehicle miles traveled area or VMT area, which triggers the requirement for a statement of overriding considerations.

So diving a little bit deeper into that requirement.

So council policy 5-1, which triggers the transportation analysis under CEQA, identifies the project site as an area where which is in which does not allow for mitigations for VMT.

And primarily the applicant or the project has to demonstrate what those community benefits or overriding benefits are that then the city council can weigh in on their consideration of compliance with CECWA.

So in this particular instance, the projects vehicle miles traveled was at 15.23 per capita, which means on average each individual who would be part of the residential community would be traveling more than 15 miles on average.

Vehicle miles traveled.

And thus the difference had to be offset with a contribution from the applicant of approximately $2 million.

This particular applicant has chosen to, in in lieu of paying that offset value to actually construct improvements, including a new traffic signal at the Camden Avenue and single way, single treeway intersection, as well as including new crosswalks.

And this was determined based on a lot of community input and concerns about traffic generation at this intersection.

So with that, uh staff feels that the applicant has provided community benefits with this project.

Specifically, they are providing a diverse income uh housing uh options with the extremely low income units at um eight units out of the 108 uh unit project.

Uh they are providing transportation improvements that offset the impact to the VMTs, and they're also proposing a hundred percent electric project.

This item was considered before the planning commission on March 25th, um, and several uh questions came up related to ingress and egress for emergency vehicles and the public during an emergency, particularly around the single treeway access point because that is a narrow street, uh, increase in the traffic volume and traffic safety on single treeway.

Um these were addressed because the fire department has reviewed these these plans um and there will be preemption for emergency vehicles during an emergency response at the stoplights.

Um the street, the single treeway itself has the capacity to accommodate uh the additional traffic that would be generated by this project, um, and includes uh red curved areas uh to to increase visibility and safety and is generally a lower speed street because of the the narrowness of the street itself.

Uh the other items related to were brought up at the commission were related to dirt on site and construction impacts to the school site.

Um and as I mentioned, the EIR evaluated these items, and there was an environmental site assessment and a health risk assessment that was prepared that has mitigation measures to address these concerns.

Uh and then finally the loss of the public school district land or PQP lands, uh public quasi public lands was also brought up.

However, uh, as mentioned previously, is this is a builders remedy project.

That cannot be a factor in the council's consideration of approval or denial.

Uh with that, staff and the planning commission recommends that the city council adopt the res resolutions that certify the environmental impact report, which includes the statement of overriding considerations and the mitigation monitoring and reporting program, approve the vesting tentative map to split the existing parcel, and approve the site development permit that allows for the 108 residential condominiums to move forward with the waiver requests.

That concludes staff's presentation, and we are available for any questions.

Thank you.

And the applicant is here as well and will probably like to speak.

Very good.

Thank you.

Does the applicant wish to speak?

Thank you.

Applicant gets five minutes.

Can you hear me?

Yeah, yeah, yeah.

Uh I have a brief presentation.

I'm gonna try to wrap up uh three years into uh three to five minutes.

So while he's getting it going, uh my name is Orville Power, and um I am the uh president of Mono Investments.

We are a home builder that builds in San Diego, uh the Bay Area as well as uh northern Nevada.

Okay.

Um so uh just to kind of clarify, we're builder, we're we're buying from the school district, school district is all ultimately exchanging uh with us, and I'll take you through that process.

Uh the first the first question you may have is you know, why is the school district selling their land?

Um uh a data point came up in our planning commission hearing that uh I thought was very interesting.

Uh the school district had 50,000 students at one point and now has 5500.

And so they had facility facilities for 50,000 students.

And um I think part of that uh what you'll see is that's because the lack of affordable housing, right?

That's occurring not only here in Silicon Valley, where it's exacerbated with very high uh incomes, but um you know, throughout the state.

So the school district uh went out for an RFP in uh August of 2022, of which we uh put in uh a bid.

Um we were actually the second bidder on that, the previous uh the bidder who won was an affordable housing developer and a and a um self-storage developer.

Um they ultimately determined that it wasn't feasible for them, and then we moved forward uh with a deal structure, which is an exchange agreement.

So ultimately what happens is we're buying the land, the school district is exchanging the land into an income-producing asset, which will then produce you know over a million dollars a year of income for for the school.

So, next question uh, you know, how do we develop the site?

So one thing I do want to mention is the site when we uh submitted our application was zoned for RM.

So it was already zoned for housing.

Um the PQP designation with it within the general plan is really what brought us here uh to you guys, or it would be uh less of a not discretionary process.

So um the other thing that we looked at was you know, what can we do on the site with without being here in front of the city council?

And um that was 667 affordable housing units with no parking as a kind of high end, which that didn't feel appropriate to us.

Um so my partner and I, Scott Murray kind of got to go know the area a bit better and and determined that um building something that was kind of in the fabric of the neighborhood is is the best approach, and that's how we always go about it.

Um you'll see a variety of pictures up here in the presentation that show uh buildings that are surrounding our site.

So then the next question is you know, what are what are our legal options for entitling this property?

Um option A was a general plan amendment, which is a discretionary action, and option B at the time was builder's remedy, which really limits the ability for denial.

So we moved forward with the builders' remedy application.

Uh you'll see in this slide here, uh, the existing school uh will remain, uh, and that's being leased out uh to a Montessori school, I believe.

Um, and then we'll be creating a new parcel, which is 6.67 acres in the back.

Um we'll be developing 108 uh three-story townhomes.

This is family focused product, three and four bedrooms, uh, 1700 to 1950 square feet.

Uh this uh slide here lays out our timeline.

So it's been three years already.

And just so everybody realizes, I I heard uh uh another data point, uh 450 housing laws in the last eight years, and and some housing units are not being produced.

Um we as developers take on a ton of risk.

When we start these projects, it's two, three years of entitlements, two, three years of building, and if it's a rental, it gets stabilized, and that's the point where you de-risk.

So we're signing on loans that could you know crush us to build these products.

And um uh it's you know, I think legislation legislators are putting on a lot of pressure, but um items aren't our housing isn't getting built because the the economy changes during the process.

So that if we can get these entitlements to go quicker, it it will enhance the increase the amount of units that are getting built.

Um so we held three community outreach meetings.

Um letters went out to 2,000 uh uh different uh uh people.

Um council member Casey, who was attended, I think all of them, and um was there before he was a council member.

Um and our initial meetings had 60 to 70 uh residents, and um ultimately I think we had six at Planning Commission hearing.

Uh primary concerns.

So thank you.

That's your time.

Thank you.

No, I'm sorry that's your time.

But maybe someone from the school districts wants to come down and speak for their two minutes.

Uh let's go to other members of the public who have comments.

Thank you for the presentation, by the way.

Thomas, Susan, and Vicky, please go ahead and make your way to the podium.

Thank you, board members.

Uh my name is Thomas Hislap, uh, longtime resident.

Um, I sent you some pictures so you could see what's being demolished.

It's not being uh moved, it can't be.

These are uh these are very important fields to the community.

They aren't just baseball fields and they're not being relocated.

They're gonna create new fields.

Very quickly, if you look at the numbers that it's gonna cost the taxpayers, it's gonna talk cost us 30.5 million dollars to move the to move the fields, it's it's um I'm sorry, 10.5 million dollars.

The land's 20, 30.5 million dollars.

I'm sorry, I thought it was eight, I thought it was seven affordable units, eight.

I've done my math at 4.2 million dollars per unit is what it's gonna cost the taxpayers.

He gets a hundred houses of affordable units.

When I did my uh research, uh I was not told that all this stuff was online.

I was told I wouldn't get it till the 30th.

I went online and I researched it and I found documentation about the contract.

The contract is a land exchange contract, and for you to enter into a land exchange contract, that vehicle, you have to have land to exchange.

On the 25th at the planning department, Scott Sheldon mentioned that there was no land that was identified.

And if you actually look at the contract, which you have to have land identified to be able to enter into that contract, the they've removed the language that it's a requirement.

So the vehicle to sell has been manipulated to do this.

On top of that, if you look at the way that they've given options to sell this property, it's actually with a cash out value to use whatever they want.

And land surplus cannot be used for programs and other things that she needs the money for.

It's the wrong vehicle that she needs this money for to use.

Lastly, in front of the planning department, Scott Sheldon told the planning department there were no soil issues at all.

They were very thank you.

That's your time.

And after that, we found out that they have an actual finish forming out.

Thank you very much, everybody.

I appreciate you.

Hi, uh, Susan Seffle, also long-term resident of Park Almond, which is uh where this project is gonna be next to.

Um, as Tom started out talking about uh issues with the uh ER during the planning commission meeting, it was spoken that there were no significant issues, yet if you actually look at a parallel project, the union district maintenance and operations building that was built on the same piece of property.

Um there were uh what they call highly significant issues, and they were to be mitigated to less significant.

Yet at the planning commission, it was pro spoken to as if there were no issues.

So we were coming we we are not don't believe that it was presented properly, and the so therefore approving the EIR without all the proper information and the mitigation patches written into it, um, would not be appropriate.

Um, and also just I have a little time.

Um this is our our baseball field.

We've been there since the houses have been there since 63, the fields have been there since 69, and the they are part of our community.

And as we sat here for the last few hours watching how happy you all are that a new park is coming online, you know, commemorated, it's great for the city, great for the neighborhoods, and yet you're taking away ours.

And it's just builders' remedy is tough, but there are ways to look at it where it doesn't meet that need.

It can't that there, the builder remedy doesn't necessarily negate all the all the negatives.

You know, you say, oh well, these negatives have but we need housing, we need housing.

Thank you.

That's your time.

Thank you.

Before the next speaker addresses us, I need to turn to council member colin.

He has a comment.

Yes, I will have to recuse myself from this item due to the VNACT.

So I'm going to step into the back.

Okay, thank you.

Thank you.

Hello.

Good afternoon, Vice Mayor Foley and Council members.

I am Vicki Brown, president of the Union School District Board of Education.

I've been on the board for 21 years.

Um as president, I'm here on behalf of our entire board to support uh the proposal in front of you.

One of my um fellow board members, Jen Petroff is here, and our superintendent Dr.

Kerry Andrews supporting Mana's uh proposal.

We've spent about four years on this going through different proposals and looking for what we thought would best fit our community and our schools.

We are the lowest funded from the state district in the entire county.

And we have to find other ways to produce revenue.

This is one of those legacy projects that will provide at the minimum one million dollars for our general fund every year.

That allows us to keep the best staff and to provide quality programs for our students in our district.

And we also hope that this will have an opportunity to gain a few more students.

Everybody in the county is looking for more students, and we hope that with through this housing that we would be able to have that.

And that is because we have worked with them along the way for four entire years, and we will be putting fields along with our refurbishment for our bond product our bond at Dartmouth Middle School.

And I think also the commission.

Thank you.

Thank you for the presentation and thank you for the members of the public who spoke.

And uh as it related to Cambriana at the Camden School, uh Cambrian School District and what happened there with the exchange and how uh funds were able to be generated by the exchange of the property and helping out that school district at that time.

So uh I I understand this it's a difficult time, especially with declining enrollment and the uh funding that your school district receives.

With that, I'll turn to the council member who represents this area, Councilmember Casey.

Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Uh wanna thank the folks that showed up to speak and Mana for being here as well.

Uh I was introduced to this project as Orville mentioned back when I was running for council, and there were 70 to 80 people there concerned.

Um and Chris and planning staff, you guys can refresh my memory.

At that time, the builders' remedy, the way the law was written.

Um, there was no cap in terms of the number of units that they could have imposed upon this property as long as they had 20 percent affordable.

So them mentioning they could have had a 600 or 700 unit project on Ed site is fairly accurate or not fairly as accurate, right?

That's correct.

Yeah, so this is a complex task.

Anytime you try to build this many units, if you add the extra layers of the builders' remedy and the fact that it's a school property as well, it just makes it even more difficult.

Um but I want to applaud Mana for their approach.

They engaged the community the entire process, and they could have just used the builders' remedy as a shield to kind of shove this through the process, but they didn't.

I think they were really thoughtful in terms of the way they decided to develop the project for it to conform and fit into the neighborhood.

Um so I applaud them for that.

I am obviously supportive of the project and make a motion to accept staff's recommendation.

Thank you.

I have a motion and a second.

Uh I'm sorry, one more point.

I apologize, if I may.

There was a comment made about, I think, in one of the um emails about a phase one, phase two scenario.

If you guys could just speak to that, there was nothing in phase one, I'm assuming that required a phase two analysis.

Was there more on this very land?

Could we have the applicant address that question?

There's an issue.

Yeah, there's no issues that we avoided phase one basic uh Sir.

That's what I mean.

Uh so the phase one because the majority of the valley has been agland, um, almost any phase one within the valley requires a phase two report just because of all the pesticides and stuff that are used.

So uh we did perform a phase two, it was completed uh I think about a month ago, and there it's clear there's there's no no uh pesticides in the soil.

So sorry, thank you.

Yeah, I just wanted to add that point.

Sorry, thank you.

Thank you.

I I appreciate this.

Well, while this property isn't in district nine, it's very close to district nine, and Dartmouth Middle School is in District Nine, so we share the the commonality and how we might be affected.

I don't like builders remedy, but we have to live with builders' remedy, and the uh the thoughtful number of units that are being proposed and the middle market that this will be addressing is really important when we're trying to build housing.

So I I know um Builders Remedy is very difficult because it takes away some of our control and some of our local authority.

Uh, but it can't you brought in a thoughtful project with eight affordable housing units uh built into it, bringing resources to the school district that they desperately need.

So I am happy happy to support this as well.

I see no hands raised, so let's vote.

Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you.

Um so I got multiple things that I would like to talk about, but I don't have enough time.

But today I'll talk about um the cost of housing.

Um I think that um they were charging three thousand per unit.

How is that gonna actually help out the economy or the situation?

Back in the day, it used to be a thousand two hundred per per unit for uh an actual housing, and there were still um homeless in the area.

So now they're actually making it more um more um c it costs more to actually be living here when that's not actually helping out.

That's actually making it worse.

There's actually people are not gonna be um leaving the city, they're just gonna go to to the streets, and that's actually gonna be making more crimes in the city.

So that's actually making more problems instead of making and then the the housing here, like all the houses they're they're way overpriced.

Um there the yards, I went to Texas and the yards out there, like even Texas um houses, they're all fucked up.

Like they're they're all built and stilts.

The the quality of houses throughout the whole United States, it's all horrible.

Um like and that's like right here, you building houses, they already have mold, like they don't cover them like on the wood when it rains.

And so throughout the like you're already having health problems when you're already like pre-building it.

So there's actually like things that need to be like more like concerning um and look for.

Um, but um but that's not like my responsibility because like I only have I'm I'm only a civilian, you know, but there's like things that um people that have power should look for.

Um thank you for listening to me.

Back to council.

Thank you.

We stand adjourned.