All right.

Good afternoon.

Good afternoon, welcome.

All right.

Welcome everyone.

I would like to call to order this meeting of the San Jose City Council for the afternoon of June 9th.

Tony, would you please call the rule?

Kamei?

Here.

Campos.

Present.

Tordillos.

Here.

Cohen.

Ortiz.

Mulcahi.

Here.

To one?

Kendellas?

Here.

Casey?

Here.

Foley?

Here.

Mayhan.

Here.

You have a quorum.

Thank you.

I'd like to remind those joining remotely today that the Zoom link is available on the agenda for the city council meeting.

If you are participating online and wish to speak, please use the Zoom application and raise, I'm sorry, select the raise hand feature.

Speakers will be called in order when it is your turn.

The city clerk will enable you to speak, and a notification will appear on your screen, letting you know that you may unmute and provide your comments.

All right, we are back to both in person and virtual comments after a hiatus of a couple of years.

So if you were able, please stand and join us in the Pledge of Allegiance.

Pledge of allegiance.

Thank you.

Today's invocation by U.S.

women's national soccer team legend and Bay FC co-founder and co-owner Leslie Osborne.

Councilmember Mulcahy, please tell us more.

Thank you, Mayor.

It is my sincere pleasure to welcome and introduce Leslie Osborne, co-founder of Bay FC and a legend of the U.S.

women's national team.

Leslie and her fellow co-founders, San Jose Natives and Legends in their own right, Brandy Chastain, Danielle Slayton, and Allie Wagner built Bay FC from the ground up in 2023.

In just two seasons, they became the winningest expansion team in NWSL history right here in San Jose at PayPal Park in District 6.

Yeah, that's an applause.

And this matters directly to what we're doing today.

As we deliberate our city budget, women's sports are not just a cultural asset, they are an economic engine.

San Jose hosted the 2025 NWSL championship at PayPal Park, drawing fans from across the country.

According to the Sports Business Journal, women's sports are now a proven driver of hotel revenue, local spending, and jobs.

And cities that invested early are seeing those returns.

San Jose is one of the leading examples.

Please welcome Leslie Osborne, who will deliver today's invocation.

Thank you.

I'm pretty sure you just did part of my speech.

So thank you.

If you would have told me 20 years later we'd be launching a women's professional soccer team here, I don't know if I would have believed you.

Coming out here to the Bay Area opened my eyes.

There's something special here.

The innovativeness, the willingness for people to take risks, the diversity, the community, how people show up for sports, how passionate you all are.

The Bay Area needed a place for women's soccer.

The fact that we didn't have a women's professional sports team at all four years ago was absolutely crazy.

So we set out on a dream to bring Bay FC to life.

And now every week you can come and watch the beautiful game here at PayPal Park.

Little girls and boys have the dream to go on and play women's professional soccer.

Now with the Valkyries and the PWHL coming here.

What an amazing world in time that our kids believe that anything is possible.

The beauty, everything to do here, the diversity.

This is a place where football, soccer, has been long lived.

In 1994, Brazil stayed in Los Cados, and my co-founders tell me about the memories that they had being downtown, being surrounded by Brazil, and how that impacted their trajectory.

So many people will fall in love with this beautiful game.

It's the world's game.

It's the one thing that doesn't matter.

Culture, background, all the negativity and politics happening.

Everyone can lean into this beautiful game and experience the wins, the losses, the passion to see the flags, to see people dressed up so prideful for their country.

We are about to embark on an amazing time in something that only happens once a generation.

And I'm so honored to call the Bay Area a host city.

What better place to have six games?

Maybe the US, if they win their group, they'll be here.

Fingers and toes.

Okay.

To be able to be here and experience a World Cup.

I think you just said we've already shown that we can prove championships.

Look at the Super Bowl in 2016, and then 10 years later, look what we did this past Super Bowl, the economic impact that it had on the Bay Area.

Absolutely incredible.

The NWSL championship.

We've shown over and over that we can produce these massive events.

And we have a special opportunity for so many people to fall in love with the game.

For so many people after the World Cup to be done, they're gonna be like, how can we follow the game?

That's where Bay FC comes in.

That's where the San Jose earthquakes come in.

Now you have leagues and teams to continue to watch this game.

And I couldn't be more honored to be here and be part of it.

I'm also a member for the Bay Area Host Committee Advisory Board, and I'm so proud to be on that board.

What we've accomplished, no other city would take on so many championships and opportunities to host in one city in one year.

And here we go.

We're about to show the world how special of a place this is.

And for all the people that are come and gonna eat at our restaurants and experience our community, go to a Bay of C game, go to an earthquakes game.

How lucky are they and how lucky are we that we get to show them our home?

I have goosebumps because I am so proud.

Yes, I'm from Wisconsin, but the Bay Area is my home.

Thank you all for having me, and let's go, USA.

Thanks so much, Leslie.

Go team USA.

Thank you, Counselor Mulcay.

Very appropriate invocation for the moment we are in.

Very exciting few weeks ahead for all of us.

We're on to our ceremonial items, Councilor Casey.

If you would join me at the podium, we will recognize and proclaim America's 250th Independence Day.

I think I refer to it.

Okay, then I'll introduce you.

Is that okay?

Yeah, you want to leave this here?

Yeah.

Okay.

Wow, the folks trail in here.

Welcome.

Good afternoon.

As our nation approaches this 250th anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence, we have an opportunity to reflect on both the ideals that founded our country and the work that remains to fully realize them.

Today I'm honored to present this proclamation recognizing July 4th, 2026 as America's 250th Independence Day in San Jose.

We also recognize the daughters of the American Revolution for their longstanding commitment to preserving our nation's history and promoting civic engagement.

As we celebrate this milestone, we reaffirmed the United States was founded on the promise of equity and equality for all, and that each of us shares a responsibility to help fulfill that promise for our future generations.

And now I will turn it over to Susan Ross, the region for our local daughters of American Revolution to share a few words.

Okay, a little short.

All right, thank you, Mayor Mahan and George, for the introduction.

And we are indeed have a lot of pressure to receive this proclamation today, and thank you so much.

We are thrilled to be here.

So we are next door to the Red Cross and down the street from the White House.

Also, we do Memorial Day observance in Saratoga, as well as reach across America in the Madronia Cemetery in Saratoga.

We also sponsor essays, uh the American History Essay and the Video Contest.

We give medals and awards to JROTC and ROTC students locally.

So uh, and of course, lineage-wise, we all have proven lineage direct line back to the American Revolutionary Patriots, and that includes birth, marriage, and death.

So we've done a lot of genealogy.

So thank you very much for having us today.

A fun trivia fact, our council member David Cohen actually had his high school graduation in the DAR building in Washington, D.C.

I'd invite my council members if they'd like to come down and take a picture of the folks.

And now uh Mayor Mayhem will pronounce or present a proclamation.

I'm pleased to proclaim America's 250th Independence Day.

I want to give this to you and thank you for being here.

Thank you so much.

And we'll put you here for a photo, maybe in the middle.

Does that work?

And do you want this?

Are you?

Oh, thank you.

I think so, Georgia.

But I'm not solid.

I'm sure you get in there somewhere, but I'm not going to come over.

Because you usually can't see it.

That's behind everyone.

America.

Happy birthday, America.

Thank you, here we go.

Congratulations.

Okay.

Oh, we're going to be five online.

Thank you so much.

And somebody else has got to hold this one.

Yeah, do you want me to hand that off to say?

We're going to be able to do that.

Thank you very much.

Thank you so much for one.

Thank you, ladies.

Well done.

Thank you.

Happy Independence Day.

All right.

Thank you, Councillor Casey.

Council members Tordillos, Cohen, Ortiz, and Candelas.

If you would join me here at the podium, we will recognize and proclaim June 12th as Philippines Independence Day.

We'll invite our guests down as well.

Good afternoon, everyone.

In just a moment, I will turn the mic over to Michelle Amores, Division Manager at the King Library and South Branches, who will be speaking on behalf of the Filipino-American City employees of San Jose, as well as the Biennean Filipino American Foundation.

It's my special honor to introduce Michelle this afternoon as the first Filipino American ever elected to the San Jose City Council.

And I know how meaningful representation is to our constituents and how crucial it is that all members of our diverse and beautiful city have a voice in our local city government.

San Jose Filipino, San Jose's Filipino-American community has made an incredible impact on our culture, economy, and local history.

And I feel that Bayonian perfectly expresses this spirit of excellence.

Bienen is a Filipino concept that refers to communal unity and mutual cooperation and is grounded in service to others as part of a greater whole.

So it's my pleasure to introduce Michelle Lamores.

Orsula and Ron.

Sorry.

Trying to figure out who's behind me.

Um and of course the rest of our Phil Am community out there.

It's truly an honor to stand before you today in recognition of the 128th Philippine Independence Day.

Alongside our fellow Cababayans who found their home away from home here in California and specifically here in San Jose.

Thank you, our Mayor Matt Maehan, City Manager, all the audience, and all the council members, especially Councilmember Candeles, Ortiz Cohen, and our very own Anthony Tardillos for acknowledging the historical historical significance of today's um proclamation and supporting us in our commitment to memorialize and instill Philippine history, culture, and traditions.

After years of struggle, brave men fighting for their rights, the declaration of independence was prepared and signed with the United States Army witnessing the proclamation on June twelfth, eighteen ninety-eight, as the Philippine flag was proudly raised while our army marched and sang the national anthem.

Today, approximately 4.6 million people of Filipino descent currently live in the in the United States, making them the third largest Asian American group in the country, according to Pew research.

Roughly 1.7 million live in California, and about 104,000 live here in Santa Clara County, making it about 5.5% of the county's total population.

This makes the county home to one of the largest Filipino communities in California after Los Angeles.

I know I'm such a librarian.

But the numbers speaks.

As you can see, many of our fellow Filipinos continue to thrive in the country, and no matter what struggles they face, they remain resilient.

Thank you to the members of our Filipino community for their dedication, whether you work as a civil servant like me in government, in healthcare, technology industries, and the military, and so on.

Together we celebrate our independence.

Thank you.

Thank you.

Thank you for being here.

Thank you.

All right, and last but not least, Councilman Ortiz and Tordillas, you're already here.

We're going to recognize and proclaim June as Portuguese Heritage Month, and we'll invite our guests on down as well.

Good afternoon, everyone.

Today, alongside the mayor and councilmember Anthony Tordillos, of course, my colleagues on the San Jose City Council, I am proud and honored to proclaim June as the third annual Portuguese Heritage Month in San Jose.

Portuguese immigrants first arrived in California in the 1840s.

And today, San Jose is home to one of the largest Portuguese American communities in the United States, with the vibrant little Portugal neighborhood in East San Jose, crossing both District 5 and District 3 districts in the city of San Jose.

It is my distinct honor to welcome two distinguished dignitaries representing the Republic of Portugal to San Jose.

And I'm going to do my best to pronounce the names.

My apologies.

For five decades, POSU has served our community by helping families navigate citizenship, health care, social services, and Portuguese language education, preserving a proud heritage for future generations.

So today we celebrate not only Portugal's rich cultural legacy, but also the values of community service and opportunity.

And for honoring the Day of Portugal in this city.

I'd like also to extend the special word of appreciation to Councilmember Peter Ortiz for his leadership and commitment in ensuring that Portuguese heritage continues to be recognized and celebrated year after year.

The Portuguese American community has helped shape this region through hard work, entrepreneurship, public service, and civic engagement.

It is a community that has embraced opportunity while preserving its language, traditions, and cultural identity.

Today we also celebrate the organizations that keep the heritage alive.

In particular, I would like to recognize POSO as it marks 50 years of service to the community.

For five decades, POSO has supported individuals and families, opened doors to opportunity and strengthened the bonds that unite this community.

Its work reflects values that are deeply shared by Portugal, which are solidarity, inclusion, and service to the others.

So Portugal is proud of its communities abroad.

And wherever Portuguese communities live, they strengthen the ties between nations and serve as ambassadors of our culture, our values, and our spirit of openness to the world.

Thank you once again to Mayor Mayhan, to San José City Council, to Councilmember Peter Ortiz, and to all those who work through the year to preserve and celebrate Portuguese heritage.

So I wish you a happy Portugal day.

Muito obrigado.

Thank you very much.

Good afternoon, everyone.

It's my honor to be here representing Posso to accept a proclamation for the Portuguese community.

POSO has been a partner of the City of San Jose now since 1982.

And the city has helped us to serve many, many thousands of people.

The Portuguese came to California in the 1840s, but they've been in San Jose since the 1850s and have contributed a tremendous amount to the city's culture and the city's economy.

And the city of San Jose has given back to our community as well.

POSO started reaching out to the city in the early 80s to help us provide service to our community, and they have continuously helped us with grants and contracts, with advice with lots and lots of different support.

And they've also supported the Portuguese Heritage Society of California in establishing the Portuguese Museum at History Park.

I'll give you a little bit of information about what POSO does currently to give you an idea of the difference.

This year, just up until the end of May, this fiscal year, POSO has already served 3,792 people with 18,000, 185,000, pardon me, 185,597 different units of service.

Anyone who comes to our door.

And the city of San Jose currently, we have a contract that supports our home delivered meal program.

We delivered, we deliver frozen meals to singers and also hot meals.

Currently, we have already served this fiscal year 49,930 meals to homebound singers.

These are people who can't leave their homes and are dependent on the food that we deliver to maintain their health.

We also, the city of San Jose also offers us some funding for transportation services, and we've helped people with 3,169 rides this year to come to the center to go to different places of doctors.

This is also in conjunction with our patient navigation program.

So it's a we provide tremendous, tremendous help in our community thanks to the city of San Jose and their support.

I particularly want to thank the mayor, Mayor Mahan, Councilmember Ortiz, who's been not only responsible for this proclamation today, but has been a supporter of Pulso Always and the entire city council.

Thank you so much, San Jose.

Thank you.

Thank you.

If we can squeeze in, we can put a better photo that way.

Okay.

Safe travels.

Thank you.

I would love that.

Someday.

It's a beautiful country.

Thank you.

Pleasure.

All the best.

Safe travels.

Thank you.

Saturday.

Yeah, I'll see you Saturday.

Good.

Thank you for being here.

It was a pleasure.

Thank you so much for seeing Saturday.

Let me work on it.

I look forward to it.

Thank you for being small.

All right.

We're on to orders of the day.

I'm not aware of any requested changes to the printed agenda.

Colleagues not seeing any.

Today we adjourned the San Jose City Council meeting in memory of Rod Diradon Sr., a man who dedicated his life to connecting our communities.

We're joined by some of Rod's loved ones today, including his wife Gloria and children Rod Jr.

and Mary.

Thank you all so much for being here.

Few people have left a greater impact on our region than Rod.

His name, Mark San Jose's regional transit hub for good reason.

Rod believed Silicon Valley's transit system should rival those of Paris, Stuttgart, Tokyo, and Toronto.

And he spent every day working to make that vision a reality.

As a Santa Clara County supervisor, Rod secured the county's first dedicated transit funding measure and established the light rail system and bus service we all know today.

He chaired the Bay Area's three regional governments: the Metropolitan Transportation Commission, the Bay Area Quality Air Quality Management District, and the Association of Bay Area Governments, and nine successful rail system development project boards.

He preserved and modernized Caltrain and championed bringing BART to Silicon Valley.

Rod was behind nearly every major transportation investment our region has made in the last half century.

And every step of the way, he put our community first.

And as one of the early conservationists here in Silicon Valley, he fought to preserve Coyote Valley, championing measures and initiatives to ensure that in addition to a growing transportation network, generations would be able to enjoy the beauty of our open spaces.

He was a true champion for the public good.

And I would expect nothing less from a man who started his career serving two combat tours as a naval officer during the Vietnam War.

On a personal level, Rod became a friend and mentor when Sylvia and I moved back to San Jose.

He recruited me into Rotary, shared lessons from his time in public office, kept us updated on the many transportation and climate trends he was tracking, and always reminded me to get home to spend time with our kids.

Today our thoughts and prayers are with Gloria, Rod Jr., Mary, and all of Rod's family, friends, colleagues, and the countless people whose lives were touched by his leadership, including the city council and so many of our city staff members.

Rod's vision to connect our communities does not end here.

We will carry it forward, continuing his work to ring the bay in rail and bring greater access and opportunity to every corner of San Jose and our wider Bay Area.

His wife Gloria and son Rod Jr.

will offer a few remarks, and I appreciate, and I think Sabra's here as well.

Just want to appreciate you all for being here.

Thank you.

Hi, Gloria.

Hi, Matt.

Thank you, Mayor Matt, and thank you for the honor of honoring Rod today and asking us here to help with that.

Rod was very fond and supportive of each one of you.

You know, I spend my days sometimes in San Francisco.

That's where my job is.

And there's a lot of talk these days about the concept of civic backbone.

That what is it that enables a city to solve its problems productively and effectively?

And the narrative today is many large American cities don't really have a very functional civic backbone.

San Francisco has gotten a particularly bad rap on this, with billionaires setting up a new city in Solano County and saying San Francisco really can't solve its issues of homelessness and crime and needles and all of that and uh high housing prices.

As I've thought about this and some projects we're working on at the Commonwealth Club to try to help restore civic backbone for San Francisco, I've been thinking about San Jose and thinking about how really comparatively San Jose does have a strong and functioning civic backbone.

And if there is a backbone, Rod was sort of the spinal cord for that backbone.

He strongly believed that there needed to be a system of citizen engagement, very strong organizations, and that those created the ability for functional problem solving.

Rod was involved in everything.

And Matt, you went over some of the areas.

I mean, in addition to transportation and the environment, he was a co-founder of the Open Space Authority trying to inhibit sprawl, which San Jose did some of in earlier years.

He was also involved in building a healthcare infrastructure.

In his last days, he told the story of how he finally got Mike Honda's vote to approve the first bond issue for Valley Medical Center.

It was an interesting story, which I'll I'll tell you, share with you all someday.

Um also contributed significantly.

He believed that policy should be data-based and research-based, very earlier than our era of big data and AI.

He created the Diradon Research Institute to inform public policy with public opinion polls and data.

Later the Maneta Transportation Institute to do the same with transportation.

He was involved in rotary.

He was involved in the scouts.

He was involved in education, the military.

He was still a member of the VFW and military organizations.

He mentored, he trained, he uplifted the entire system of civic backbone for our region.

In fact, he told one more story in his last days of how his fraternity service project when he was in college at San Jose State was to do the initial building of the Happy Hollow Park and Zoo.

They dug the pond, they placed rocks.

They dug pathways.

So he was involved.

He was a builder from very, very early on.

And I think his efforts are a main reason we have a healthier civic society and problem solving ability here.

He was involved in every way in helping to construct that.

So again, thank you for honoring him.

And as you said, Matt, we all have a lot to do to keep up his legacy and keep this civic civically engaged structure strong and intact.

Thank you.

Thank you so much, Gloria.

That was very beautiful, fitting tribute.

And uh civic backbone is now something I think we're all gonna be reflecting on.

We appreciate that.

And our thoughts and prayers are with all of you and the entire Dirdon family.

Thank you for being here today.

Thanks, Rod.

Okay, we are on to closed session report.

Assume there is not one.

There was no closed session.

Okay, I said it for the record.

I guess we're good.

We'll move on.

Next is consent.

Are there any items council would like to pull from consent?

Not seeing any.

Do we have a motion?

Move for approval.

Second.

Thank you.

Tony, do we have public comment on consent?

Yes, I have Sean and Lillian come on down.

Um as a reminder, speakers must comply with the city's code of conduct for public meetings.

Please direct comments to the body, limit remarks to the agenda item, and observe the time limit, conduct that materially materially disrupts the meeting or interferes with others' ability to participate, may result in muting or removal as authorized by law.

Go ahead.

That was a great speaker.

Can't think of what it's called, so great speaker.

You get what I'm saying.

Following uh the Deirdon speech, I mean, you think of what a great leader is.

And so that makes me think that when people are taking time off for um runs for election.

Um, you know, it would be like a a violation if you said, hey, I'm uh taking time off to do this, but we're we focus on the consent calendar.

I am which item uh the item about uh taking time off.

It's 2.4, I think.

Go ahead.

Am I correct?

Then don't give me that face.

Not that I know of.

Go ahead.

You're talking about.

There's one about absences.

So that's what I'm addressing.

Can I have my time back?

Can I have my time back?

No, since you're actually there's nothing on 2.4, that's just that's there's no request.

That's just a header, but there's no item underneath it.

There's no item.

There's no item.

Okay, we're on to are there any other consent speakers?

Well, I will still have that behind you.

That's my name.

You can talk about that under open forum.

Yeah, next speaker.

Lillian Koenig, District 3, uh consent item on housing 2.8, 26.678.

I just want to make sure that I'm on the right consent item.

Okay.

Um, basically, the consent item speaks about um the director of housing department public subsidy reporting.

Uh, what does that mean?

What does public subsidy reporting?

And it's what I read in that.

Um, I wrote this so quickly.

Uh, summary and outcome of your CSG advisors, project financial feasibility work and housing policy analysis.

What does that mean with affordability for seniors?

Uh we are currently experienced rent increases in affordable housing, and so when you are giving an increase of a quarter million dollars to your advisors, it would be in the best interest of seniors to do some policy analysis on how.

Thank you.

That's your time.

We're one minute.

Back to council.

There are no hands online.

Back to council.

Thank you, Tony.

Can we back to the council?

Let's vote on consent.

Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you, Tony.

We are on to item 6.1, actions related to the 9885 regional wastewater facilities, security and access control, camera and card reader construction award.

We do not have a staff presentation, but we do have staff available to answer questions.

Let's start with public comment if we have any.

I have no cards or hands.

Okay, thank you, Tony.

Coming back to the council on item 6.1.

We'll start with Councilmember Condelas.

Thank you, Mayor.

This is an item we heard in uh in the TPAC committee last week, and um it's essentially a an upgrading of the security perimeter around uh the regional wastewater facility.

The TPAC took a um uh approval and recommended approval of this item uh which uh would hopefully enhance the security and protection of our wastewater facility for our city and uh with that I will move approval of the staff recommendation for the site.

Great.

Thank you.

Appreciate the quick summary and the motion.

I don't see any other hands.

Tony, let's vote.

Motion passes unanimously.

Thank you.

All right, we're on to item 3.1 report of the city manager.

Jennifer.

Thank you very much, Mayor and City Council.

Um, in just two days from today, on Thursday, June 11th, FIFA World Cup starts, and the South Bay Area will proudly host its first FIFA match.

This is a historic moment and is the result of an extensive amount of preparation in San Jose and across our region for the most watched sporting event in the world.

As the Bay Area gets ready to welcome visitors from across the country and world, the City of San Jose and our many partners are prepared to host exciting events throughout our great city.

Last year, the city developed a SJ 26 strategic plan with the city manager's office 2026 sports and special events director, Tommy O'Hare, leading the charge, collaborating and coordinating with city departments and external partners to help our city put its best face forward and ensure our residents and visitors have multiple ways to celebrate.

Building from the SJ 26 strategic plans, branding, marketing, sponsorships, small business, and policy work streams for FIFA World Cup.

We've expanded our events and experiences for our community and visitors.

Behind the scenes, teams across multiple city departments and partner agencies have been working together to make sure residents and visitors fly, stay, and play, and are informed and supported while enjoying what San Jose has to offer.

Through these coordinated efforts, San Jose will transform into a citywide celebration featuring watch parties and family-friendly activities in every city council district for everyone to enjoy.

I want to thank the San Jose Sports Authority, Team San Jose, San Jose Earthquakes, Sharks Sports and Entertainment, SAP Center, San Jose State University, San Jose Downtown Association, San Jose Chamber of Commerce, SV Creates, and all the key community stakeholders who've been an integral part of planning such meaningful experiences for our community and visitors alike.

I also want to sincerely thank the mayor and the entire city council for their visionary leadership and direction, which laid the groundwork for a strong framework that has guided the city administration in delivering an exceptional and historic year of sports in San Jose.

A huge thanks goes to, and this takes a village, the airport, City Manager's Office of Economic Development and Cultural Affairs, City Manager's Office of Emergency Management, Fire, Housing, Parks, Recreation, and Neighborhood Services, Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement, Police, Public Works, Transportation, and the City Attorney's Office, also to Tommy O'Hare and Deputy City Manager Rosalind Huey.

We have employees from various departments in the audience who are helping to ensure an amazing FIFA experience for our community.

Thank you very much, and thank you, team, and back to you.

That is the end of my report.

Thanks so much, Jennifer.

Thank you all for the incredible team effort as our city manager outlined.

We are truly on the global stage in San Jose has shown through uh Super Bowl March Madness, and now I know we will through World Cup.

Really excited about everything we've done together.

Thank you all.

Have a great rest of your day.

Okay.

Mayor's June budget message for fiscal year 2026, 2027.

I'm going to give some remarks, and then we will actually.

Yeah, I'll give some opening remarks.

And actually, why don't we go to public comment first?

Because I want to talk a little bit about the reconciliation memo we put forward.

Tony, do we have public comment?

Yes, I have several um speaker cards.

So currently I have about 10.

Okay.

Um I have no hands yet online.

If you're online and you wish to speak, please select raise your hand.

Um before I call the names, I just want to remind that speakers must comply with the city's code of conduct for public meetings.

Comments must be directed to the body and remarks limited to the agenda item and observe the time limit.

Conduct conduct that materials materially disrupts the meeting or interferes with others' ability to participate may result in muting or removal as authorized by law.

Um Hiini Gonzalez.

Um I can't read the name, but it's it looks like it starts with an M with Somos Mayfair.

Um Damanis, De Manis, um come on down, Gennaro Velasquez, and Sandra Munoz.

You'll have one minute to speak, and you can speak in any order.

And then I'll call a few more names in a couple minutes.

See Aliviamos esta carga financiera.

I would also like to see the small local businesses that are just starting to recover during these difficult years and facing extremely high costs be able to recover and operate successfully in East San Jose by reducing their taxes and business license fees so that micro and small businesses can become an absolute priority in this economic recovery.

Next speaker.

My name is Damas Estrada, and I'm representing Somo's Maffer and also District Five.

It is also important that you prioritize the prevention of homelessness within the municipal budget.

The most cost-effective strategy to combat homelessness is first and foremost to prevent it.

I appreciate the mayor's additional investment in preventing homelessness and urge him to continue strengthening programs that provide rental assistance, this stabilization of housing and prevention of evictions.

Thank you, next speaker.

I'm here to ask you to approve a budget that prioritizes accessibility.

Affordability is the main challenge facing San Jose residents and deserves the same level of attention and responsibility as the city's other important priorities.

At the beginning of this fiscal year, community organizers cannot wait for a crisis to become severe to build personal legal and infrastructural capacity for dysfunction and rapid response systems.

Immigrant families are a social part of San Jose and are present.

Thank you for your leadership and consideration.

I respectfully ask you to support our proposal.

Thank you.

Thank you, next speaker.

No.

Good afternoon.

My name is Joana Becerra, I'm community Organizer Guidamigos de Guadalupe.

For the past few weeks, we have a shared our stories, our concerns.

Our hosts for San Jose.

Thank you to the mayor and conceal members, Ortiz, Casey, Campos, Candela, Sandan.

Who listened to our community and supported releasing the full one million dollars?

These funds will help families prepare, get support, and stay together during difficult times.

Thank you.

Thank you, next speaker, Sean, and then after Sean, I'll call Carmen on Zoom.

Hello, mayor, city council.

I want to just say thank you, mayor.

Thank you, District 7, Biendon, Peter Ortiz, Casey, Jorge, Campos, and Domingo Candelas for your memos.

We really appreciate it.

When we started this process in the beginning of the boy, I ask you one question.

I ask you who do you love?

You have shown me who do you love?

And thank you so much.

And I want to give you a shout out to a special thank you to Peter Ortiz for being our champion, my man.

Thank you for showing up for our community.

And thank you.

Thank you.

You guys have proven what we always have known that this city stands with immigrants, no matter what.

Thank you for your support.

Appreciate it.

Thank you, next speaker.

Good afternoon.

My name is Anna Cortez, a community organizer with CSO San Jose and a resident of DS District 7.

Thank you, Campos, Ortiz, Candelas, Casey, and Don for allocating the full 1 million towards immigrant immigration legal and defense services for the community of San Jose.

Thank you for standing in solidarity with the immigrant community.

You are present in San Jose.

These resources have a great impact in it in our community.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, next speaker.

Hello, I want to thank the mayor for allocating the full million dollars for our immigrant communities and council member combos, council member Ortiz, Councilmember Candels, sorry, my vision, and Councilmember Casey.

Thank you.

Thank you, next speaker.

I have concerns about page 228, this new EEP team.

I don't know why we need more police for unhoused people.

We are policing unhoused people into the point that we are just pushing them into jail.

Is this how we're gonna save our budget crisis?

We're just gonna put more money of pushing unhoused people into jail and make that's how that's gonna be the county funds.

We are deeply concerned.

We are concerned that unhoused, undocumented people are just being left out there.

Um these are the people who have signed up for services and they're not getting them because there's no housing for them to get, and this happened at Columbus, and it's happening again at the jungle, and this is a problem, and you need to protect them as well.

We definitely need to give the million dollars immediately uh to great groups that are doing great work, but we also need to make sure that our unhoused undocumented people are being protected as well, and leaving people at the jungle and re-arresting them over and over and over again is no help.

Don't vote for the EAP.

Thank you, Carmen on Zoom, followed by Mike in person.

Carmen, go ahead.

Hi, my name is Carmen, and I'm the director of patient organizing LCC.

I just wanted to take the moment to thank the mayor instead of the city council members for investing the full one million for immigration services.

The federal administration has already caused so much harm by trying to criminalize, dehumanize, and villainize our immigrant brothers and sisters, and we cannot continue to allow that to happen.

Though counties and cities are limited with what they can do.

There are opportunities like providing money for immigration services and resources to ensure that our people continue to stay protected and are provided guidance when things do go down.

Thank you once again.

I know that we had originally asked um at the beginning of the year, or at last year being uh 500 million.

Now it's one million.

I think this is gonna be a creative service for our community, and this is but truly reflects that you guys stand with our people because we all belong here, and San Jose has is a very diverse city.

So thank you once again.

We appreciate it, Mike Sodegren.

Um after Mike will be Jordan on Zoom.

I was not planning to speak today.

Um I did uh see the endone memo, and I just wanted to comment briefly, it's going to be a very neutral position out of PAC San Jose.

Um we do realize that one of the reasons why um the historic resources inventory needed updating was a request out of the business community, and we just want to acknowledge that.

We also want to acknowledge the importance of the things that were brought up in your message.

So thank you.

Thank you.

Jordan, followed by Lori.

Hi, Jordan.

I think I'm very resident.

I just wanted to speak in support of the memos that were authored by Councilmember Compos, Ortiz, Casey, and Condelis.

Uh, and particularly I want to speak up in favor of continuing the MBA 7 uh business tax modernization study.

If you crunch the numbers in table three that are included in the MBA, you can see that a vast majority of the business tax for San Jose is paid by very small businesses with less than 35 employees.

And so, contrary to what we heard a lot of the public comments, if we continue to do the analysis on the business tax, there's definitely uh room to reduce the tax burden on small businesses if we consider how we shift the tax burden.

Thank you.

Lori.

Hi, this is Lori Catcher, uh District 6 resident and member of Surge Santa Clara County.

Um I also I'm so grateful to all of the amazing organizing that our ummigration partners have done and for the mayor and city council following through and providing the total one million for immigration defense.

Thank you so much.

I also want to say that I have concerns and would like to hear council discussion on the EEP and the coordination with police as it regards to our unhoused neighbors, who not unlike our immigrants being um unfairly detained, our unhoused community is being unfairly targeted and scapegoated when we have an affordability crisis.

Um I would like to hear discussion on this and um and hope that our council will use compassion and care and not policing.

Thank you back to council.

Thank you.

Thank you, Tony, and thank you to our public speakers today.

I'm gonna give uh a bit of context around the budget and um and then walk through um where I think we have a fair bit of consensus from the different memos and then talk a little bit about our process around deliberations here.

So, first um today the city council will consider adoption of the June budget message, a plan that balances our financial obligations while continuing to reflect San Jose's values, priorities, and commitment to results.

This budget closes a significant projected shortfall while protecting critical services, maintaining our focus, and preparing San Jose for the uncertainty ahead.

I want to thank our city manager Jennifer McGuire, assistant city manager Lee Wilcox, as well as their very capable budget office led by Director Jim Shannon, assistant budget director Bonnie Young, Deputy Budget Director Claudia Chang, and the entire budget office team for their hard work and dedication in presenting a balanced budget in a challenging fiscal environment.

I also want to thank my budget director Stephen Kane, supported by budget and innovation advisor Keith Herzberg, and thank you to my acting chief policy officer, Alejandro Lenis Chantres, who's head up our heading up our policy team, the rest of that team, and my chief of staff, Sarah Sarrate.

Thank you as well to my Brownack colleagues, Vice Mayor Foley, Council members Kameh Cohen, and Tordillos, each of whom contributed throughout the process.

We had a lot of collaboration.

We spent many hours weighing trade-offs and working toward a budget that keeps San Jose moving forward while addressing that projected shortfall.

And thank you to the entire council for your thoughtful participation, starting with priority setting through the March message, our budget study sessions, the hearing last night and today, and I want to thank the council for submitting thoughtful budget documents, which in total recommended more than 11 million dollars in proposed one-time spending.

Even with this year's budget constraints, 67 of the proposed 78 budget documents are incorporated into this June budget message.

And finally, I want to thank members of the public for continuing to engage throughout the process and holding your city hall accountable for focusing on the priorities that matter most: reducing unsheltered homelessness, improving public safety, building more housing, cleaning up our neighborhoods, strengthening our economy, and the many other investments, partnerships, and city services that lift up our entire community.

This is a fiscally responsible, service-sustaining and focus-driven budget.

It fully resolves the projected $50.3 million structural shortfall on an ongoing basis and positions the city to address an additional projected $26.8 million structural shortfall next year.

It identifies new revenues and reduces costs associated with homelessness related programs.

This budget additionally protects our city workforce as much as possible.

While it does include a net reduction of 85 roles, the majority are vacant positions, and displaced employees will have an opportunity to be reassigned.

At the same time, we are maintaining our current investments in library hours and park maintenance core services that residents rely on every day.

And even in a difficult budget climate, we have much to be proud of.

Homelessness is moving in the right direction.

Over the last several years, San Jose has created more than 2,000 safe and managed alternatives to the streets and achieved roughly a one-third reduction in unsheltered homelessness since the point in time count in 2019.

We have dramatically expanded shelter capacity, reduced the number and size of encampments, and are now focused on making this progress sustainable for the long term.

Next, neighborhood cleanliness is improving.

77% of San Joseans now rate their own neighborhood as clean.

This budget continues investments in graffiti eradication, illegal dumping response, beautification, vacant building enforcement, and neighborhood-based cleanup efforts.

Public safety is also improving.

Gun violence in San Jose dropped by more than 70% between 2021 and 2025, the largest reduction among cities included in that analysis.

We've seen crime rates more broadly drop in recent years, and this budget continues our focus on community safety, traffic safety, emergency preparedness, youth violence prevention, technology supported public safety strategies, and a new paramedicine pilot out in the field.

Housing production is gaining momentum.

The multifamily incentive program helped jumpstart construction of 2,216 new homes this past year, with more than 800 additional homes expected to begin construction later this year.

We are continuing to streamline approvals, remove unnecessary costs, support adaptive reuse, and test new models like live SJ and ADU home ownership opportunities.

Our economy continues to grow.

San Jose has seen 10 consecutive years of net new business growth and major investments in our grid and our experience economy, helping us prepare our city for future job growth.

We are also investing in children, youth, seniors, and families, who we explicitly agreed to protect even in a difficult budget cycle.

This budget advances the children and youth services master plan with nearly one million dollars in funding.

It supports the demonstration sites in Mayfair Poco Way and the Seven Trees Santee neighborhoods, youth enrichment, older adult wellness, tutoring, arts programming, and community based services across San Jose.

We have also allocated one million dollars for immigration services.

And I want to recognize this entire body because I do want to make very clear, and I'm going to move now to speaking to the reconciliation memo I put forward, that there is absolutely no lack of solidarity on this dias.

I know every single council member wants to do the most we possibly can to protect our vulnerable immigrant neighbors.

And I will say just another word on immigration funding in a moment.

I put forward a reconciliation memo for council consideration that I hope will be the starting point for our conversation.

It does not include every recommendation put forward in my colleagues' memos, but it does attempt to create a foundation or starting point that I think the vast majority, if not all of us, can agree with.

And then, as a process point, I would recommend that folks who want to update the motion, assuming there is a motion along these lines, offer motions to amend.

So we can take each additional item individually and have a vote of the council on that item.

And I'll give an example of that at the end and kind of repeat that before I turn to colleagues.

The reconciliation memo that I've put forward for council consideration and what I hope is a jumping off point is an adoption of the June message.

Acceptance, recommendation two, acceptance of council members Kamei Tordillos and Cohen's memo on 6526, which preserves the California room for one additional year.

One-time funding meant to be a bridge to identify a more sustainable operating model, assuming we still face an uh operating shortfall next year.

Recommendation three accepts recommendations one, two, and four from council members Campos, Ortiz, Candelas, and Casey Memo, also dated 6.5 2026.

On recommendation one, we I'm simply noting that the funding will continue to be allocated as it has been previously, which is essentially tearing off of the county's procurement for these services.

I noticed in the public hearing last night, there was at least one nonprofit that thought that this item was directly allocating funding to them.

I do not believe that to be true, so this will be the exact same process we used this fiscal year for allocating funds to organizations that provide these services within the existing procurement model.

And again, on that first point about immigration-related services, I will just say, and if colleagues in my brown act want to add to this, please do the thinking behind a reserve, which is actually what the county's doing.

Just to be clear, the county is holding some dollars back, is that if immigration enforcement were to escalate significantly, if we outlay the full million now, we will have less capacity to add additional funding later.

In fact, my expectation is with this budget situation, there will be no additional funding.

And so the thinking was to follow the county's model and hold some dollars back so we would have more capacity in the event that the situation changes.

But I just want to be clear, I can tell you for a fact, talking to all my Brown Act colleagues, no lack of solidarity, no desire to give less than a million, but to try to be strategic about how we allocate those million dollars.

And I suspect there's broadly consensus here, but I am recommending we allocate the full one million through the process the city manager is currently using.

On item, or sorry, recommendation three.

I suspect we'll have a conversation about business tax uh research.

I personally don't believe this is the right time, but we can have that conversation, and if folks want to bring forward a motion to amend, I think we should discuss, debate, and have a vote on that motion.

And then item five, recommendation five is now a moot point if we adopt the previous memo that resolves the California room.

That issue is now addressed and and has an I an immediate funding source identified rather than waiting for the annual report.

Recommendation four.

Amend the council members' Campos Ortiz Dewan, Candelas, and Casey memo dated 6526 to direct the city manager to return in the fall with an analysis of the growing cost of living for residents, outlining the main cost drivers for our residents, areas where the city can potentially influence costs for a large share of our residents, and just to include the income side of the equation, look at strategies that might help our residents grow their income.

Again, my intention being where the city could have an impact, since this is a policy discussion and a budget discussion for the city, and include insights that might inform future updates to city council focus areas and associated indicators and problem areas.

I believe it's premature at this moment to commit to a sixth focus area.

We that might be a lack of focus.

We might want to modify them.

We might want to incorporate and bake affordability into existing focus areas.

We know we're doing some of this work already under Build More Housing and Grow the Economy, but I think it's very appropriate, and I appreciate the the uh the memo from colleagues to look at what we know is one of the biggest challenges for our residents, which is costs are going up faster than incomes.

It is too expensive to live in our city and really the state more broadly.

And I think we absolutely should analyze that and then have a more thoughtful discussion about how does that potentially update the focus areas, whatever they might be next year.

Um, so appreciate that direction.

This keeps the direction but just slightly modifies it.

Recommendation five accept and amend recommendation three from Council Mr.

DeWan's memo that came out uh a day or two ago.

This was dated 6 8 26, and this would direct the city manager to apply for the safer grant.

Um, with uh the note, you know, work uh collaborating with local 230 and other partners while ensuring that the required local match and other ineligible grant costs can be accommodated within the city's limited budgetary resources.

Wanted to include that disclaimer for clarity after consultation with the city manager's office.

Recommendation six, direct the city manager to allocate $50,000 to the San Jose Police Foundation for their annual major award summary.

This was an oversight on my part.

We received this request and accidentally left it out of our spreadsheet as we were making budget trade-offs through the process, and uh we did identify funding that has been rebudgeted.

This came out of MBA 26.

This is a this one time funding, a donor appreciation wall that has rolled over since 2223.

So rebudgeted again and again.

So I apologize to colleagues and the San Jose Police Foundation for missing that request.

Um I did suggest here less than was asked for, just to be clear.

But I this is in line with what we contributed last year.

Okay.

Now I know there are some recs that were not included, including business tax, research, um, one or two others.

Councilmore Dewan had a couple recs I did not include.

What I would suggest again for just an orderly process is if colleagues want to assuming we have this as a motion, uh, offer amendments, we should take them up individually, discuss debate, vote on them, and try to modify from a foundation.

Just because in March we had a bit of a messy process, we were all taking notes trying to figure out what was in, what was out, get the language down.

I thought we could try to modify this if it if it pleases the council, might make it easier.

Okay, or you guys can just throw it out and start over.

All right.

Vice Mayor, I will turn to you.

Thank you.

Just one thing about the men, the amendment.

So if we're voting on amendment, we vote on the amendment.

We if it if we pass the amendment, then it becomes part of the underlying main motion.

Uh first, I want to thank all the members of the public who were here last night to offer their input and those who came today to offer their input.

I'd also like to thank Mayor Mahan and his staff for crafting a June budget message that accurately reflects the values and priorities of our residents, particularly in a such a challenging budget year.

I also would like to thank the city manager Jennifer McGuire, Assistant City Manager Lee Wilcox, and of course Jim Shannon budget director for all of your efforts, and I'd like to thank my staff too.

This is my last budget cycle.

Woohoo!

Really excited about it.

I'm grateful for the mayor's collaboration with myself and my colleagues, council members Kamei, Tordillos, and Cohen, who all helped to inform the June message.

This budget message is stronger because of their input, as well as because of all the thoughtful budget documents submitted by the entire council.

All of us, the administration, the mayor, and this council have had to make some tough choices due to the significant shortfall we face.

I know that we are all approaching these difficult decisions with an eye toward fairness and minimizing negative impacts on our residents and our city employees.

This budget message continues to address our focus areas, community safety, ending unsheltered homelessness, neighborhood cleanup, building housing, and growing our economy.

We know from multiple surveys, as the mayor referenced earlier, that our residents are that these priorities are important to our residents.

In a time of budget shortfall, we tend to focus on what's being cut, and rightfully so.

However, I wanted to take a moment to highlight a few services that through the hard work of the administration and others, we were able to preserve or even expand.

This budget includes no cuts to library branch hours, including Sunday hours, which I and Councilmember Cohen were so proud to help champion in 2023.

This budget doesn't cut any currently occupied crossing guard positions and will not affect existing crossing guard services.

This budget maintains a $1 million investment to support immigrant communities at a time when our immigrant neighbors are unfortunately under attack by our federal government.

The proposed budget includes a commitment to implement the Children and Youth Service Master Plan, which will work to improve opportunity and outcomes for our San Jose young people.

The proposed budget includes an investment in our Vision Zero program to evaluate the effectiveness of our efforts to improve safety on our streets.

Thank you to the city manager for including this in the proposed budget.

As a strong advocate for Vision Zero who continues to advocate for Vision Zero in this budget, I was just pleased to see this investment.

Also thank you to the mayor for incorporating the budget document I submitted that maintains 300,000 for our critical senior health and wellness grant program.

I'd like to thank my colleagues for the thoughtful memos submitted.

I appreciate that all the proposals are clear-eyed about trade-offs and identifies funds for every proposal.

All the memos submitted are reasonable and identify some important services that should be considered considered for funding, including the California Room and the Youth Jobs Initiative.

However, we should be clear, particularly with the California Room, that this is a one-time funding.

The library parcel tax is not a sustainable ongoing funding source.

We should explore alternative funding for the California Room from outside sources such as philanthropic donations.

While I appreciate the efforts around business tax modernization and believe that we should always be looking for ways to solve our structural budget issues, now is not the time to explore an increase to the business tax.

I am concerned about the impacts on San Jose small businesses, as well as our ability to attract large businesses to relocate to San Jose, should we raise our business tax or restructure in a way that is detrimental to businesses.

Table three of MBA number seven shows clearly that a large majority of our business tax revenues comes from small businesses with 35 employees or less.

That is a simple rec reflection of the fact that a large majority of our businesses to in San Jose are small businesses and may be affected by any change to our business license tax.

So any changes to that to business tax regime with an eye towards increasing revenue will necessarily need to increase taxes on small businesses to see any significance or worthwhile increase in business tax revenue to the city.

The memo submitted by the mayor this afternoon reconciles the various council member memos submitted under the budget and incorporates the majority of the items in the council memos.

It does a good job of reconciling the various proposals and presenting a strong budget direction that will be good for San Jose and our Red residents.

As this is my last budget, it's my honor to move the following.

I'm not going to read the full blue memo as the mayor already did, but I will move uh the memo submitted by the mayor and all the addendums included with it.

Thank you, Vice Mayor, and thanks for always being a voice for balance and compromise and finding a path forward through these budget processes that could be really challenging, but we appreciate your service to our city.

You've been a leader in many ways, but especially through these budget processes.

Thank you.

All right.

Uh let's turn to uh Councilmember Peter Ortiz next.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, thank you, Vice Mayor, for the motion and your service on the city council has been a pleasure to serve with you.

Um, I just want to start out by expressing my appreciation both to the the mayor, the budget office, and the city manager's office, and really all city staff who worked through what was an incredibly difficult budget year.

Despite significant fiscal challenges, I'm grateful that this budget takes a thoughtful approach to minimizing impacts on both our residents and our city workforce while maintaining our core services.

I'm also thankful that several priorities uh our budget Brown Act advocated for were included in this year's June budget message.

Specifically from my office, I believe these investments will make a meaningful difference in District 5 and across our great city.

Some of them are including funding for a proactive beautify San Jose hotspot team, an East San Jose economic revitalization framework to support economic development in our district, a repairs and improvements for the Clyde L.

Fisher school field to help the Eastridge Little League finally have a home field for their games.

Support for the School of Arts and Culture and their programming, the FIFA 2026 Eastside Small Business Activation Program, support for the establishment of a business association along the east end of Story Road, and support for the City Peace Project's intervention and mentorship services for youth, especially at-risk youth who are vulnerable to gang recruitment.

Funding for with purpose, a local nonprofit providing free haircuts and grooming services to under-resourced residents.

And of course, funding for the children and youth master plan, which is vital for the development of our youth in the Mayfair and Pocaway neighborhoods.

I agree with the mayor when he says that we really have a united message when it comes to standing up for our immigrant community, both through our funding allocations and through the multiple policies we've introduced on this dice to support our residents.

When we talk about immigration services, we're talking about keeping families together, helping people navigate complex legal systems, making sure our neighbors can live with dignity and without fear.

At a time when we could see increased immigration enforcement activity in our region, and this is not a myth.

You know, there's rumors that there will be an ice detention center in South County.

Um the need for these services is only growing.

And the time for waiting is over.

Just today, uh an ICE vehicle was spotted in my district pulling over residents and asking them for citizenship.

Nobody knows this more clearly than our nonprofit partners who have been on the front lines providing legal representation, know your rights education, case management, and other critical services to our immigrant families.

Providing access to the full funding upfront will allow these organizations to build capacity before a crisis occurs rather than waiting until needs escalate.

Finally, I do want to advocate strongly to support a new council focus area focused on reducing the cost of living, also affordability.

Our residents consistently tell us that while housing affordability remains a major concern, they are also struggling with the rising cost of food, gas, utilities, child care, and other necessities.

The city's own community survey identified reducing the cost of living as a top concern for residents in both 2024 and 2025.

According to an NBC article, authored on February 3rd, San Jose was rated the least affordable city in the world.

A CNBC article authored October of last year states the cost of living in our city is over 120% of the national average.

And in order to live comfortably in this city, you have to have a combined income of over 260,000.

Yeah, 260, 100,000 annually.

That's not sustainable.

That's not the reality for our everyday residents.

And so I want to be clear.

This is a growing concern that deserves to be heard and advocated for here on the DIES.

By creating a dedicated focus area, we can apply the same data driven framework that has helped us address all these other concerns by this council.

And you know, by simply ignoring affordability and thinking that only uh spending our efforts on economic development will solve the problem.

Well, that's trickle-down economics.

That didn't work when Reagan was president, it's not going to work now.

We have to make affordability a priority in our city, or the residents who have built this city, will be continue to be pushed out of it.

Um, and so I uh thank you, and I look forward to supporting this budget.

Thank you so much.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Appreciate it.

Let me go to Councilmore Kameh.

Thank you so much for um all of the different perspectives last night as well as today on this budget.

Um this started out to be a very, very, very difficult year.

I want to thank the residents of uh San Jose who voted in favor of the TOT.

We would be having a very, very different discussion in trying to do a greater cut on many of our services today.

So I I just want to recognize that uh that was uh uh you know the citizens of San Jose saying yes, you know, this is this is something that we want to do, so I appreciate that.

And you know, I want to acknowledge the work of the budget office.

Um I certainly uh have uh done a lot of the bothering and the phone calling and the this and the that, and so I do I do appreciate how you know we all have worked together with the city manager's office and uh my colleagues uh in our Brown Act.

Uh I want to say thank you because you know, as we start balancing things, you know, when you pull from one side, something else has to give.

And I recognize that, you know, not everything uh uh is is able to get funded.

Uh so um it is uh it is that balancing act.

Um I want to thank uh everyone who worked on the uh memo for the California room, and I do understand that it is a one-time monies, but I will say that um the California Room, as was mentioned yesterday by some of the speakers, goes beyond San Jose, it really is not just a countywide, but perhaps regionally uh, you know, and uh and I know that uh its importance I think is recognized beyond our city limits.

So uh with that knowledge, I think that there may be opportunities to see who will be our uh partners in being able to support the California room, and I certainly commit to being able to uh try to obtain some funding, some additional fundings for uh future years.

Uh and that this is in fact bridge funding that we have uh today.

Um and um the uh the uh citizens did vote for uh several measures in the June primary, and I think that we do need to continue to be creative in terms of looking at other revenue sources, and I think that we have to uh really uh dig in terms of of looking at what are the potential uh avenues uh for um being able to have revenue.

But I wrote I don't think that at this time having a business tax is something that uh we should we should pursue.

Uh we may in the future.

If anything, it's not gonna be something that would be here in 2028.

Uh, you know, so it's gonna be some time anyway.

So I think that we ought to keep that in the back burner and be able to try to do something uh in the future, but not right now.

And with that, I will be supporting the motion.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Comments, we go to Councilmember Condelas.

Uh thank you.

Um, mayor, colleagues and and members of the of my Brown Act for the partnership and engagement throughout this budget process.

Um, you know, I also appreciate Jim Shannon and the entire budget team for the messages, the countless phone calls, uh helping us navigate uh, you know, essentially finding dollars in uh what started out as and continues to be a really difficult uh and uncertain budget year.

Um, you know, I I think uh where we got to with the proposed budget and and you know my colleagues' memo is is some is a is a place that you know gives me a little bit of optimism but you know uh it's it wasn't short of effort uh not just from us on this end but also the administration.

So thanks again for for your work um and your commitment to figuring out how how we tread forward uh given our our situation, you know.

Um I do want to start off with, you know, thanks to the dozens and dozens of people, the hundreds of people that engaged uh my office, especially my my residence as part of this budget process, whether it was through the budget town halls, uh the neighborhood association meetings, uh the conversations at the coffee shop.

Uh, I think residents made it clear what what matters most to them.

Uh we uh submitted a number of budget documents uh to the mayor uh for consideration and and and we're we're happy uh for the support of our 4th of July celebration at Lake Cunningham, uh the continuation of neighborhood empowerment and beautification efforts through our district eight beautified pilot program, uh, investment in the community emergency response team or CERT programming for seniors and youth in our libraries and community centers, as well as investments in gang prevention and parent support programs.

Um, you know, these are the priorities that came from our community and and and especially thankful for everybody who spoke up and advocated for their investments.

Uh yesterday morning, I was actually uh in the East East Hills uh with firefighters from stations 11, 24, and 31 along with uh Fire Chief Sapien with residents of the villages in my district, and we were talking about some of the proposed operational uh changes as part of the budget and what they mean for for them.

Um, you know, this is it was very informative and and very much appreciated.

I think we plan on leaning in uh to these changes and and you know working closely um as part of our our budget reality with outside sources.

How are we tapping into grants from the state from the Santa Clara Academy Fire Safe Council?

That's all important as part of our of our of our job, and and something I really wanted to uplift so thank you uh Chief for coming out and uh the the firefighters at those stations to to meet with our residents um you know as as part of uh the the mayor's blue memo I I also uh I'm grateful for the inclusion of our um of our direction with regards to essentially one million dollars for emergency for immigrant immigration response um you know uh obviously council member ortiz you were um uh a staunch advocate for for the issue as as as in our Brown Act and and your leadership on it was was pivotal as well as the many uh advocates um uh who who came out yesterday um I counted over 30 I kept count so gracias gracias por un idiot uh polera subos um it's it's something that we are facing the reality as as a city with what ICE is doing and and the impact they're having on our neighbors and uh I think leaning in making these resources available uh allows our partners to maintain that capacity and build upon uh the issues that are happening on the ground so I'm I'm especially appreciative and happy to be uh uh uh leading on that effort um uh another recommendation I also want to highlight which uh was included as part of the mayor's blue memo this afternoon was an investment on the creation or the continuation of the summer jobs through the youth uh summer jobs initiative 30 young people are gonna have an opportunity to have jobs this summer which we know uh are our is the busiest time for um you know those people looking to recruit our young people to do something bad so um this is gonna give our young people an opportunity to make some money gain some experience and and stay connected so um I I appreciate this investment um real quickly I got an opportunity to go to the California room last week um it was a blast um I got to uh look in for those of you haven't gone I had there's newspaper clippings and articles from uh elections that happened you know 30 40 years ago and and found some some really cool stuff and am appreciative of my colleagues for the memo that's this they submitted and and for it being included as as part of the uh mayor's memo this afternoon um I do I do have a question though uh with regards to the affordability inclusion um and the direction to return in the fall um specifically what does that look like um with regards to this direction and to see if you can perhaps opine on that mayor.

Yeah absolutely the um original direction in the group memo that that you signed on to uh ask the city manager to come back in the fall so we're keeping that said for consideration as part of fiscal year 2728 budget process I think about it the same I'm suggesting the same thing this would be potential updates to focus areas I think the big shift here that may be worth more discussion is rather than direct the city manager to think about it simply as a new focus area that stands on its own I'd like to see the analysis look at what's driving cost what are the levers the city has on the cost side and where might we actually help increase incomes for people so that we can then decide does it stand alone as its own focus area in which case do we need to have a discussion about our six focus areas too much or does the analysis lend itself to maybe baking it into other focus areas and modifying them so it's meant to be kind of agnostic and leave that conversation for it's not weighing in either way.

So question for council in the future yeah you know I again I think it's important for us to be be clear because I mean you technically returning to to the council in the fall could look like an info memo and what what I I would like to see is a robust um uh conversation whether it's through a study session or a standalone uh meeting to be able to to do do just that and and I don't think it's an either-or conversation I I think it's a, you know, uh based on what we're hearing, not just in in the community surveys, but you know, anecdotally on the streets um with our residents and you know uh the the cost of groceries I I think it's it's uh it's a worthwhile conversation as long as the direction is clear that we are returning uh to to the body for a a substantive conversation on on the core issue at hand, which is you know everything's so expensive.

Uh uh, and how what we can do and what levers we can pull as a as city leaders.

I think that's that's what we're we're all hoping for, and something I'd do.

Okay, perfect.

And then uh as long as it's not just an info memo, I'm um, I'm supportive.

No, this would be an agendized item.

I and I I was gonna leave it to the city manager to recommend whether or not it be a major item for a city council meeting or a study session.

I was thinking about it more as a standalone item where we would have a full we would have a staff report and time for discussion, and that that would then inform presumably priority setting in February.

Fair enough.

And and uh, and and that's that's that's something that I I would uh definitely be supportive of and and um appreciate the clarity.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, okay, and so lastly, I I do uh again want to thank the administration.

Uh I did, you know, we did have um an exploration on the business tax uh conversation, and you know, but I I think there's a little bit of also misinformation as part of what we were proposing.

I think it's important for us to have a dialogue with our business community and and have um the the opportunity to see what what we're gonna be or what the city um is evaluating uh as part of the the modernization combo conversation, but as part of the MBA it clearly states that um we we we are committed to longstanding economic uh development strategy focused on on business growth and job creation um and isn't necessarily a tax increase given you know as part of that engagement and the work that that is uh is set to to happen um you know there may be a an opportunity to lessen the burden on our small businesses given given that but um clearly I don't think there's an appetite um amongst uh my colleagues on this but you know I I would uh continue to um press the administration to think creatively.

This isn't uh a conversation or direction to go increase taxes.

That's not what we're saying is where where can we look at um at our uh the assessment of what we're charging and what it is for our business community to thrive, and where can we um optimize or modernize our our our business tax to make us competitive and and uh while the the memorandum the MBA was was helpful, I think there's also an opportunity, but um I think um there's um that that conversation is is still um uh forthcoming and and and I look forward to talking to my colleagues on a possible pathway forward.

Thank you.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Turn to Councilmember Cohen.

Yeah, thank you.

Um and I I first want to start with the same thanks everyone else is giving to the administration, to the mayor's office, to uh particularly the budget office.

You know, the process that we have in the city is quite impressive actually if you look at it in terms of how we work on the budget and how responsive administration is to all of the different needs.

We have 11, 10 member council members and a mayor who are all have interest in this budget, and impressively when we call and say, I how do we make sure that we can get this one thing funded, we get a call within a day from you from the budget office.

And so I I want to really thank you for that.

I mean, I I was asking about how we spend how we can fund $3,000 for a gate, and you spent just as much time talking to that as you might talk about you know a million dollars for another ask.

So I you know that nothing's too small and and it's it's it works works very well.

This year it could have been this conversation could have been much worse.

I mean, we I feel like we're kind of coming to a consensus as a team in a year where um we're we were leading into it about talking about making very difficult decisions and what was one of the worst budgets that we've had since I've been on council.

It's obviously not in the history of budgets, an absolutely dismal budget, but it is not a great budget.

Um and I've been through bad budgets as a school board member in the past and know how hard it can be and and everyone has made it easy by understanding the gravity of the situation and working hard on it together.

So I want to thank everyone for that.

I also want to thank uh the voters in the city.

It was a two-thirds margin, actually, to pass measure A, which is a very impressive number, um, and it it it definitely things would have been very different today.

We would have been having much tougher conversations.

I was not uh relishing the idea of you know what major cuts to city services we may have had to make if that had revenue hadn't materialized.

Um we can be hopeful that next year though things will be better, and that we won't be having those conversations, but obviously they are because there's the alternative path, which is that next year things will be worse, and we'll have to be having more difficult conversations.

Um and I know Vice Mayor Foley's thankful she won't be part of that.

Um but uh it's it's definitely um or maybe she she wishes she would be part of help making them of protecting the key services that we've all fought for.

Um I do want to I do want to um thank my the colleagues my colleagues who are in the other uh Brown Act group.

Um everybody had very thoughtful um input.

And I I want to I want to thank them particularly for um continuing to keep thinking about what we need to do in the long term to make sure our city is fiscally fiscally solvent.

Um, you know, it's never a pleasant conversation to talk about what kinds of taxes and how to make changes to taxes, but I think it is important to continue to say all tax, all discussions about revenue should be on the table.

We are continuing to operate at what is right on the margin of a balanced budget every year, even when during good times.

And if we're never gonna look at other alternative revenues, we're not gonna ever be in the ability in the in the place to be able to grow the services and protect the residents in the way we want to do it.

So I I think it's continue, it's always worth having those conversations.

I you know, I I hear people say it's not the right time to have the conversation.

I don't know that it's ever the right time for people who would be affected by a tax change to have a conversation about it.

Um, but it in some sense it's never the wrong time for us to be thinking about how we make our revenue streams more healthy as a city.

So I will uh I'm happy to continue to to have that conversation in the future.

Um I want to particularly thank the advocates and folks who have been on the front lines of the immigration issue.

Um, you know, it's I'm I'm particularly worried about what may be to come by an administration that can be that appears to be completely unconstrained by any uh rules and may become more emboldened with time.

We see what may be happening in the South Bay right now, and and I'm expecting that to lead to something more serious.

My concern has always been not should we fund it, but what do we do in case things get even worse, right?

What where what what kind of additional resources do we have and we don't have them?

And it should be clear that you know we're investing in a program that we hope is being built to be ready to respond.

Um but we have to be uh um clear-eyed about our limits as a city to be the front to be the uh ability to step up further when it needs to be.

I mean, obviously, we will continue as a city to be um working on the programs and protections that we need to do we need to have in place, but we we unfortunately don't have the resources to do even more as a uh as a parent of a child who lives in Minneapolis and was there for the uh entire um past year.

I'm particularly fearful of based on the stories that I heard just from her and her neighborhood, um, about what it could look like in San Jose if something like that were to happen here.

And so I I'm I'm um we we need to be prepared and thoughtful.

But um I'm I'm I'm I want to thank the folks, particularly at uh Somos and other groups who have spoken with me over the last week about um about uh the importance of this money for up front to make sure that they have the capacity to be ready to react and for their advocacy, and I think it's important that we invest uh the full amount up front, and I'm I'm glad that we're we're doing that.

Um I want to just mention a couple of other things that I'm happy that we have in the budget support for organizations that do great work in our community.

I thank my colleagues for figuring out a way to keep our city forest operating for another year.

Uh they do important work, and we heard we just heard yesterday at our T and E committee meeting about the 2100 trees the city planted, probably another thousand that our city forest planted in the city just in the last 12 months.

Probably 20 that probably over 3,000 trees over one year, and our city forest is an important part of that, and we would be in more difficult position without them.

So I'm glad we're we found a way to at least and many of these cases we're putting in band-aids for a year, but I'm hopeful that we can continue to find ways to sustain these organizations in the future.

Um, same thing for the California room.

Hopefully, our budget will be better, and we can continue to provide that as a core service.

That room has been part of that library since it opened 25 years ago, and it can should continue to be so.

Um there are amazing things happening there every day, and we need to continue to make sure that those are accessible to the community.

And then you know, other nonprofits in our city like Silicon Valley Ed Foundation and others are getting grants in this budget, and I'm thankful for for the my colleagues who are supportive of that.

So with that, I will um just I'll leave it at that and just thank my colleagues for a thoughtful budget process and look forward to uh casting a vote.

Thanks so much, counselor.

Appreciate you highlighting all those issues.

Let me turn now to Councilmember Mulkey.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so being out of a group, um Brown Act makes the administration and the budget office your best friend, your only friend in this process, really.

Um but seriously, I just want to say thank you to all of the support we received during the process.

Um, you know, it is interesting um walking around a little bit on eggshells, you know.

Not sure you're supposed to overhear a conversation or not, but um, but seriously, I just want to say thank you to Jim and um Lee and Jennifer and the rest of the crew for their support of our process and all the different departments who worked with us on budget documents um throughout this uh process.

Um, want to thank the mayor for including several key district six initiatives from our budget document proposals, most of which build on work in our parks, including Guadalupe, Rose Garden, and Bram Hall, initiatives around Deirdon Station and SAP, much needed blight reduction in and around the Buena Vista neighborhood there around West San Carlos, and finally some resources to get us going to celebrate in 2027, everyone, the 250th birthday of the city of San Jose.

One thing we didn't get support, yeah.

Got a lot of history people in the audience, I think, today.

Um, one of the things we didn't get support for was the work to streamline activation of vacant buildings and how to demolish vacant buildings without getting a building permit first to agre to address the vacant building blight.

Um, those colleagues that we work together on that.

We will be back because I think this is a really important part of our work, especially I think it really does apply to economic development in the long run.

I just want to show support for um items addressed today, and I can't say any better than my colleagues already have about the million dollars for immigrant defense and legal services.

I want to give a special shout out to the amigos de Guadalupe for hosting me and several colleagues on May 9th, um, with their community telling us real stories about uh what they're facing.

So thank you for that.

I want to um also acknowledge the creative funding for the California room, and as one of the voices at prior meetings, encouraging the public to take a greater role in fundraising to better support budget fluctuations to keep that California room thriving.

I've appreciated conversations with our city librarian, the creative Jill Bourne.

Thank you, and members of the historic resources community like Ben Leach and Mike Sodergren from PAC SJ, who all seem to be up for the challenge, was talked about already today, making this a priority for fundraising and understand that as a responsibility moving forward.

I've got a couple of questions, and one is on the Campos and Company memo number four.

I love the youth jobs initiative, and I appreciate getting that sort of back into the prioritization.

I wanted to just understand um with the challenges at the animal care and services by moving the 54,000 from the foundation reserve, are we at risk of any services or any needs at ACS?

Yeah, my understanding is there's no service impact.

This is funding to establish a foundation, but I don't know, Jennifer, in your gym, if you want to add a little more.

Yeah, that's correct.

This is this is money that we re we put into the budget a couple of years ago, and we want to establish an animal foundation, animal care foundation.

We think it'll be very successful, like our library and parks foundation, etc.

Um, this will be enough money for us to get started this year.

We've been we're really focusing on obviously the transition of the services, you know, uh continuing the good work that Public Works has done with addressing all the audit recommendations as it transitions over to parks department and increasing our spay and neuter capacity and rebuilding um the community trust that is ongoing as we speak.

The foundation will come into place as well, but we think those other elements are important to have to start a strong foundation.

So this is enough money for us to begin the work.

We may need additional money in the following fiscal year.

That will be a TBD, but I think we're okay with with the amount of money that's been uh that's remaining for us.

Great, thank you for that.

And then on campus number two, I'd love the San Jose State University, our Spartan neighbors go Spartans.

Um I'm just curious, is there a way for is there a committee where this work would sort of feed to so that you know, might give the students an opportunity to sort of report out as the process ensues.

Um I don't know if that was thought of as part of the work that they'll be doing.

You're talking about the community.

So this would actually be coming back.

Do you want to explain?

Yeah, do you want to explain what the process is?

This is not being prioritized yet, but we are picking up the rec, which would bring it back.

Go ahead and so um under Jennifer's direction, planning, building, coding enforcement, as well as just the CED CSA will be coming forward after summer with all of the policy work underway so that the council has a better lens into that policy work and go through prioritization exercise.

So ultimately, this recommendation would go into that body of work for the council to discuss and to see if we even move forward with it.

Okay, great.

Thank you for that.

And I still think though, I just want to add on to what Leah said.

We would still have a conversation with San Jose State and for the direction to see what could be possible there to relieve some of the workload.

But again, that's a something we'll have to analyze.

Um the goal of, and that was in our manager's budget addendum is we would like to get our planning capacity to not be oversubscribed to give some room because there's lots of new things that are important to do, and so there'll be some trade-offs that we will bring forward very responsibly to the council to to right size our planning staff with the policy work.

Great.

Um, Mayor's blue memo for A on the cost of living.

I really appreciated the way uh you went about addressing that, getting the information we want, I think is really the most important part.

Appreciate you, Councilmember Condelas, for um, you know, sort of understanding that and getting the clarifications you just did in that conversation.

Um, you know, if we if you hadn't taken the business tax modernization piece sort of off the table for now, I probably would have you know said that I don't support that now.

What I do support is that as our economy grows and gets healthier, I'd be open for us working directly, and you said this directly with the business associations chambers and businesses to create a system that is based on benchmark rates with pure cities, timely billing and collections using uh I think Maria's new and improved technology, and resulting in a fairer system with a much higher net collection rate, which I know is critically important.

And the last thing I just wanted to address is um again uh councilmember Kamei kind of stole the thunder, acknowledging the voters, but I'll do that again.

And just the reality is the MVPs of today are the voters who overwhelmingly supported measure A, making today's decision a little bit easier.

So, but I do want to just double down on something that I've talked about.

So I supported the TOT increase that recently crushed it on the June 2nd ballot.

Our smart voting public softw this for what it is attacks on visitors and overnight guests.

I supported it, even though it's a tough pill for hotel years to swallow, but I'm playing the long game.

I am on record, and I need to remind and we need to remind ourselves that we cannot get cozy with this new revenue and lean on it for the general fund forever.

As we get healthier, we have to fight to restore resources to our arts, culture, and tourism community, like the council did back in 1990 after a prior TOT increase.

Our cultural and tourism industries, backed by our labor partners, IATC Local 134, sign and display, Teamsters, and the hardest working people in the hotel business, Unite Here Local 19.

They work hard for San Jose.

They are the key drivers of the TOT.

They've earned our commitment to be willing to restore prior TOT council directed allocations that have been gutted over the years to bolster the general fund.

So while I'm not suggesting any action on this today, this one will be a test of our civic backbone moving forward.

And I'll keep saying this out loud until we find our way back to prioritizing these critical champions of our local economy.

With that, I will be supporting the motion on the floor.

Thank you.

Thank you, and well said.

I agree with that sentiment.

Let's go to Councilman Dewan next.

Thank you, Mayor.

Thank you to the city manager office.

Thank you to our city attorney and our colleagues both on my Brown Act and on the Mayor Brown Act as well, to include uh Council Mabel Mokey as well.

It's it's extremely hard work.

We've been plugging at this for months on end, trying to put together a budget that we can all pass.

So I just want to say thank you to Mayor Matt Mahan for incorporating several of my budget requests into the June budget message and your reconciliation memorandum.

I'm very grateful that for the inclusion of funding for the new empowerment summit, the Little Saigon Gateway Monument Project and District 7 Cultural Festival and Communities events, these investments celebrate the diversity of our city, strengthen our neighborhood identity, support our news, and bring resident together across culture and generation.

To bring our community service to the highest point.

Help us fulfill the promise we made to voters when we approve Measure T, and invest in new public safety infrastructure.

Well, I really appreciate these inclusion of these priorities.

The creation of neighborhood safety overtime reserve for the San Jose Police Department.

For more than a decade, the area surrounding Tully Ballfields and Tully Branch Library was plagued by persistent criminal activity and severe quality of life issues.

Resident routinely report open drug use, discards needles, human waste, indecent exposure, an individual engaging in sexual act in public space that is frequent by children's and families.

These were repeated incidents involving individual and doing unconscionable act in view of our youth sport participant and spectator.

Participation in the Spartan Little League decline as parents become increasingly concerned about their children's safety.

Even the little league director was sexually assaulted in the vicinity of the ball field.

Senior felt unsafe using the library.

City employees report concern for their personal safety.

What should have been a community gathering place have become a place of many residents avoid?

The transformation of this area occurred because member of the San Jose Police Department dedicated significant time and effort to proactively enforcement and neighborhood stabilization effort.

They use the overtime resources.

Officer maintain a consistent present, address criminal behavior, and restore public confidence in the area.

Today, family are returning to the ball fields.

Children are playing sports again, and residents can enjoy public facilities with greater sense of safety.

That progress is the direct result of focused police work.

Unfortunately, when the police overtime funding was reduced, our ability to sustain these proactive efforts was reduced as well.

Officer already stretched thin responding to priority one and priority two calls involving threats to life and safety.

As a result, quality of life crimes and neighborhood concern often cannot, I repeat, cannot receive the immediate attention residents expect and deserve.

Public safety is a foundation of which every other city investment depends on.

For the reason, I respectfully motion for our council to support and include recommendation number two in my memorandum as a friendly and establish a neighborhood safety overtime reserve to provide supplementation overtime capacity for officer assigned to patrol district seven and address the persistent quality of life and public safety concern.

These are not the ones, these are the needs.

Together with the investment, including the mayor reconciliation memorandum, including supporting for Forest Station 32 through Safer Grant funding, youth for programmings, cultural investment, and immigration services.

These action request a balanced and responsible approach to public safety, community support, and quality of life for the resident of San Jose.

Thank you.

Thanks, Councilmember.

I'm not here in a second, so we're gonna we're gonna move on.

Well, we have it here a oh, is a friendly, I'm sorry.

Council member, are you asking for a friendly amendment?

Yes.

Then I'm sorry, I appreciate where you're coming from in relation to this, but we redo we asked the chief to reduce overtime expenditures a couple of months ago, and this was part of the proposal.

Any funds we restore restores more fun more cost to the overtime and wouldn't necessarily be allocated to district seven or any other specific district.

So I'm going to have to turn down your request for a friendly.

Vice Mayor, we we're asking to allocate and eliminate the two uh the historic building inventory fund of 250,000 from the planning the planning building and code enforcement department.

I I see that thank you, but I cannot accept it as a friendly amendment.

But you could uh uh move it as an amendment to the main motion.

Okay, well, move it to.

So, yeah, in that process, you just you're just um moving to amend.

If you have a second, we would actually vote on that amendment.

If it fails, it does not amend the motion.

If it passes, it is now part of the motion.

Um feel free to make your motion.

I have a couple of other comments on that specific proposal if it is moving uh to a vote, but please feel free to make it.

Well, I uh I like to move it to amend to amend the motion.

To amend the motion.

Okay.

Is there a second to amend the motion to include item two uh recommendation two from the memo from Councilmember DeWan posted on the eighth?

Okay, I'm not seeing a second.

I will just say, and then I'll turn um to Councilmember Tordillas.

I really you know appreciate you elevating the issue because I think we all experience the immense frustration our residents and small businesses feel with the quality of life issues that we're grappling with related to homelessness, untreated addiction and mental illness, uh blight, other forms of low-level property crime.

Um, I think the challenges with this particular approach are one, I I personally find value in doing the historic building's inventory.

Uh I think it will actually help us not only protect historic assets but actually make our development process more predictable and allow us to actually build more housing and support small business development and and pursue adaptive reuse and do it more efficiently.

There's been a long-standing development issue, so I see a lot of value in the work that this would be displacing.

I also think uh generally, and I I don't want to speak for the chief at all, if he has a different view, but um starting to assign overtime reserves by specific district, I think is potentially operationally a little bit problematic and something that I think the whole council would probably be interested in.

Finally, maybe most importantly, we have a really good response model for this that actually just needs more staffing and funding, which is the NCOL unit, which is doing amazing work out there, and we already have that mechanism.

And the big thing we've got to figure out if we want to do more policing of quality of life crime and the things you were describing is how do we expand in qual's reach?

How do we add another in-call team?

How do we are I think some folks call it NICO, whatever they call it?

The NQ in qual is what I call it.

Um, thank you.

I've heard different thanks, Jennifer.

But um, they're doing great work.

The question's just capacity, right?

And um, yeah, whether it's nickel, NyQuil, or NyQual or NyQuil.

Um but that's just a budget, I mean it's just a budget issue.

So I I just I think it's something we're gonna have to revisit in future years.

Um okay, we didn't have a second, so I'm gonna move us to Councilor Tordillos, and then we'll see if there's any further discussion before we vote.

Thank you, Mayor.

I want to start by just expressing my gratitude to all of our amazing city staff throughout this process.

You know, Jennifer, Lee, uh Jim, Jill, Eric, every other member of you know the senior staff who offered support and guidance and responded to cost estimates over the past few months.

Uh as others have said, it has been a difficult budget cycle, both in an absolute sense, uh, but also a difficult year for my first uh time navigating the budget process, so really appreciate all of the support from uh the city administration.

Uh but I will say that given where we started uh in this process a few months ago with a structural deficit of over 50 million dollars.

I think this council and the city administration should really be proud of the extent to which we've been able to minimize cuts to essential city services uh to the extent we have.

I also want to thank both the members of our Brown Act for their collaboration uh throughout this process, as well as the rest of the council for their thoughtful recommendations and memos.

I'm also excited by many of the policy commitments we've been able to uh secure in this budget, including proposals to further accelerate housing production, uh grow our economy, and support affordability for our residents, as well as continued investment and support for our immigrant community amidst continued attack from the federal administration and many of the meaningful investments secured here in District 3, including beautification initiatives downtown, support for our neighborhood business corridors throughout the district, investments in specifically late night public safety, support for businesses in our sofa district, and investment in community events that will really I think be a benefit to everyone in our city.

I also appreciate the memo in particular that touched on the importance of cost of living concerns.

And I agree with Councilmember Candellas that I do think that this analysis needs to come back for a full uh consideration discussion and direction with the full council.

At this point, I do agree with the way that this is framed in the reconciliation memo because I think I'm still open to either creating a dedicated new focus area around affordability or restructuring, potentially merging some of our existing focus areas so we can keep the numbers uh you know on the smaller end, or potentially, as the mayor said, incorporating new uh independent goals and indicators more horizontally across multiple focus areas.

I think the analysis that uh city staff will return with will help us to make those considerations carefully and diligently and you know, set us up for success in incorporating affordability as a really uh key part of next year's uh priority setting and budget season.

So, with that, thank you again uh for all of the collaboration, everyone.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Appreciate your comments.

Let's go now to Councilmember Campos.

Thank you, Mayor.

I uh want to start off by thanking you uh for submitting a budget message that minimizes cuts to high-impact youth serving programs that incorporates MBA 14 to continue implementing the Children and Youth Services Master Plan, and that accepts many of the council submitted budget documents.

So thank you.

I also want to thank Vice Mayor Foley, Councilmembers Kamei, Tordillos, and Cohen who provided valuable feedback as the budget message was written.

And of course, I uh have to acknowledge the hard work of the city manager's office, the budget team led by Jim Shannon, all of our department directors, as well as Stephen Keynes and Keith Hertzberg and the mayor's office for the many long nights and early mornings that you dedicated to put this document together.

Every year, this is a Herculean task, and with a $50 million deficit, this year is no exception.

I am also incredibly grateful to my colleagues, Council members Ortiz, Duan, Candelas, and Casey who worked on the thoughtful and important memos that we've submitted.

Together, I believe that all of our contributions have made the June budget message stronger and aligned with our community's priorities.

Thank you, Councilmember Mulcahi as well for the recommendations and the input that you provided in this process.

I want to speak specifically in support of the memo that we've submitted recommending the exploration of a new council focus area regarding affordability and the cost of living.

As our residents have struggled to contend with the dramatically escalating costs, particularly over this past year and a half.

This is why we've seen in the most recent two community opinion surveys increasing support for reducing the cost of living in general.

And we saw even in last week's council meeting that many of us were reluctant to increase garbage, recycling, waiter, water and sewer service rates on residents because we know that many households are already dealing with the increasing cost of gas, food, housing, and child care.

And in that meeting, I appreciate your observation and suggestion, Mayor, that there's an opportunity for longer-term policy work that your office and the council offices can engage with our professional staff, digging into the cost structure, thinking about where there might be efficiencies, trying to figure out if there are more equitable ways to price the service.

And as we think about affordability, we can also consider energy rates, other city fees and charges, the provision of free or reduced cost services provided by the library, PRNS, and other city departments, and intergovernmental work to influence our regional, state, and federal partners and to advocate on behalf of our residents.

Like unsheltered homelessness, building our economy, and increasing community safety, the high cost of living is a wicked problem.

The focus area framework built on the logic model created by the city administration has proven very effective in helping establish robust, robust work plans for tackling these tough issues.

My colleagues and I recommend applying that same logic model to the challenge of reducing the cost of living.

We are not prescribing exactly how to do this, but instead want to provide the flexibility staff will need to be creative about local solutions to this problem.

And I'm confident that the city administration can identify long-term and near-term goals that over time will provide the relief tens of thousands of households across San Jose are looking for.

Thank you again and appreciate everyone's hard work on this uh year's budget.

Thanks, Councilmember.

Appreciate your really thoughtful uh comments and continued advocacy for um for your constituents and really the whole community.

I think we've exhausted everybody's reflections, comments, and questions.

Um wonderful.

Thank you all.

I really appreciate how much time effort uh went into this from city staff, my colleagues.

This is a really good discussion.

I think we've landed in a place that is about as good as it gets given the circumstances, and I'm excited for the work ahead.

Tony, let's vote.

Motion passes unanimously.

Wonderful.

Thank you all.

All right.

Awesome.

Thank you all.

We have another component of the budget that we need to talk about, which is item 3.4, approval of the 2026-2027 operating capital budgets for the city of San Jose and schedule of fees and charges.

And uh I don't believe there's a staff presentation, but we do have, I believe, at least one memo from colleagues.

So why don't we go?

Let's start with public comment and then we'll come back to the council.

Tony.

Sean Collee.

Ray.

Come on down.

Oh, um, address comments.

Sorry, I I'm this is new on having to read the announcement.

Um, as a reminder, speakers must comply with the city's code of conduct for public meetings.

Please direct comments to the body, limit remarks to agenda item to observe the time limit conduct that materially disrupts the meeting or interferes with others' ability to participate, may result in muting or removal as authorized by law.

Go ahead.

Good afternoon, Mayor and Council.

Thank you for your time.

I'm gonna try to make this quick.

Uh, I'm here representing Casino Matrix and would like to ask you for your support of the memorandum for Casey Campos Ortiz, Dwan, and Candelas memo.

Last year we asked and coordinated with, and we were asked, and we coordinated with the administration.

And so this year we did the resulting memo with Candelas, uh Cohen, uh pardon me, Candelas and Casey and the rest of the authors.

And the memo was written with help from Lee Wilcox, with review from Jim Shannon, and worked with a number of other uh council members to make this come together.

So it was a joint approach because we didn't want a repeat of what happened last year.

And that was really what pushed us to have a more uh inclusive approach with this.

The memo asks that the San Jose Police Department and the card rooms and the administration sit together and continue discussions that started last year on how to modify Title 16 and the Division of Gaming.

I'm sorry, that's your time.

And I have no further speakers back to council.

Okay, thank you, Tony.

Um we did move to one minute public comment for all items with uh the addition of Zoom the other day.

Um, just because I think that may not have been clear to our speaker, but we've been doing one minute consistently for the last couple of meetings since we brought Zoom back.

It is on the agenda with the it's posted on the agenda.

Okay.

Thank you, Tony.

Um, okay.

Let me turn to council member Casey to kick things off.

Thank you, Mayor.

Uh, just for some context, this isn't a choice in terms of the memo between supporting law enforcement or uh business.

Um our card rooms they operate within one of the most heavily regulated industries in California, and they're subject to oversight from the California Gaming Control Commission, the California Department of Justice's Bureau of Gambling Gambling Control and numerous state laws and regulations governing operations and operations, licensing, compliance, and enforcement.

Given that extensive state oversight, it's reasonable to ask and just ask whether Title 16 continues to provide unique local value or whether certain functions are duplicative and whether the role currently assigned to SJPD remains the appropriate one.

This memo does not presume to answer the question whatsoever.

We're just asking um city staff, SJPD, and the card room operators to come together and evaluate whether the current framework and I whether the current framework can identify the most appropriate path forward.

Sorry, that was a little confusing.

Whether the current framework is appropriate and whether it isn't a more appropriate path moving forward.

With that, I move my motion.

My memo, sorry.

Thanks.

Council Mr.

Councilmember Ortiz.

Thank you, Councilmember Casey for the memo and allowing me to partner with it.

Let's have a quick question for the chief.

If you have a moment, Chief.

Thank you so much.

First off, thank you.

Thank you, Chief, for everything that you do and everything our officers do for the city of San Jose keeping us safe.

I think there's no question that public safety remains a priority for this council.

Um yet uh I do have a quick question.

Um I wanted to ask, in regards to the division of gaming control and the work that they perform on a regular basis, um, I guess how would you describe that in your own words that as being vital to the police department?

That would be the first comment.

So the there's two different regulatory functions that the police department performs.

One is for the card rooms, the other is for the cannabis dispensaries in the city of San Jose, and they ensure that the municipal code regulations of the govern each of those are followed.

Okay.

Follow-up question.

How would how would you say the work of the division serves the public interest to prevent law and uh uh prevent unlawful activity?

So criminal activity would still be investigated by police officers, but what the police officers aren't capable of doing, they lack the specialized knowledge and training, is enforcement of the administrative regulations contained in Title 16.

So that is the sole province of the regulators in that gaming division.

Okay, I guess one more quote uh follow-up question, then just so that I have this uh understanding.

Does that mean that the staff within the division they're not police officers per se, they're more professional staff?

Primarily professional staff.

There is one police officer assigned to the division.

Okay, that that's good to know.

Uh thank you.

I just I think it's an important conversation to have, and that's why I signed on to the memo.

Thank you so much.

Thank you, councilmember.

Thanks, council members.

Uh councilmember Mulcahy.

Thank you, Mayor.

Um, so uh we all have this sort of big cloud hanging over us with respect to um you know taxes generated by our two card rooms under attack by the state of California's attorney general.

Um I just submitted a um an op-ed piece and essentially talked about the fact that we have this local oversight, and you know, if this attack is coming from the AG's office, it must have something to do with you know concerns for public safety, although that has not been sort of discussed um by the AG.

I'm curious in the work that we're doing to defend ourselves and our clubs and our tax revenue.

Maybe I can ask the city attorney if you know what I'm concerned about is the narrative of locally here, sort of lowering the barrier, lowering the oversight, and what that might say in the cases that we're making around what we're doing locally to protect the public interest around you know what the AG is sort of accusing or suggesting around this issue.

Sure, Councilmember Mukhee.

As a matter of fact, I had a meeting with the AG's office um uh maybe about six, eight weeks ago to try to explain to them our very comprehensive regulatory scheme that we have in Title 16 are our not only our gaming division, but then the police enforcement as well to explain to them that San Jose has a robust structure to actually regulate our car rooms, and so it was not necessary for the AG to impose any additional regulations on the city.

There's um other car rooms in other cities in the state that don't have such robust regulations that we do, and so uh it was very important to us to make that pitch to the AG.

Uh, I know that that's under litigation now, that they're challenging the regulation implementation, but um our ordinance uh is intended to be concurrent with the state regulations.

It's very much like ABC uh regulations.

Um we have a lot of regulations that we also enforce.

Um ABC won't typically come in and do those, we do them and then we build a case and then get ABC involved.

The same thing with the state gaming division, so uh if that answers your question.

Yeah, I get you know, and I just want to acknowledge I appreciate council member Casey's introduction of this that this is really continuing the dialogue.

Um I think that certainly started long before you and I were elected to this body, but we did have some work on this last year.

And so my concern is uh not continuing the conversation, but by continuing the conversation, suggesting the narrative that we're gonna continue to diminish our oversight and what that says to um the arguments that you're making with the AG and the arguments that you know that we need to continue to make to defend our position um here locally.

So I you know, I guess the question would go back.

Does it give you pause at all, city attorney um if we were to move this forward today, even the hint of the fact that we're continuing to have this dialogue around potentially lowering standards here, does that give you pause?

Well, we our our best argument to try to prevent these regulations were to show how robust our regulations are.

And so reducing those regulations somehow takes the bit of a wind out of our argument.

Um, so I would I would as a city attorney are making that position known to the AGS, I would be a little bit concerned with whether or not that was continue to be true.

I mean, I think it's also fair to say as um the card club operators will suggest that you know, compared to their peers across the state, you know, we do have more onerous regulation locally than other cities do, but that in my view isn't the reason to lower the standards, but just as a kind of a point in fact.

And so we're all kind of in this together, meaning the card clubs and the cities statewide in defense of this, but I just wanted to make that point that I am aware of that.

And our ordinance contains a specific reason for it, and that's really to um preserve the public confidence and the ability to make sure that these card rooms operate in a manner that doesn't you know create any issues for the community itself.

Thank you.

Thanks, Councilmember.

I appreciate your question and the and the very first point of what other risks might be created.

Councilmember Casey, let you respond or ask follow up questions.

Yeah, just some clarity.

So it's my understanding that no other city has this type of ordinance, and there are all the other card rooms across the state are governed by state regulations.

So I'm just confused in terms of litigation between our card rooms and the AG, how our extra layer of regulations factors in.

We're the biggest city in California that actually has card rooms.

Most of the other card rooms are in smaller cities, and so they don't have regulatory procedures, certainly nothing as comprehensive as ours.

So that was a very good argument to try to explain to the AG that they didn't need to impose additional regulations because we already do that in a very comprehensive manner.

They didn't need to step in and put additional burdens on the card rooms as a result, because uh we were you know very good about keeping track of our own card rooms and and they were working with us, and so why impose additional regulations on them?

Um uh it would they were in the AG's regulations were sketch scheduled to be implemented, I think at the end of uh April or beginning of May, and so then there's litigation bought by the card rooms to prevent those.

Okay, I'm still confused.

So the AG's plan is statewide.

Yes, so how does San Jose having its own regulation impact the AG's decision on whether or not statewide he's gonna follow through with this plan?

It was an argument to make that we should be carved out from the regulations they wanted to impose statewide because it was unnecessary to add additional regulations in San Jose.

Okay.

So LA County doesn't have card rooms.

You're saying the smaller cities in LA County have card rooms.

Um there are smaller card rooms throughout the state.

I know there's some in LA just because I grew up there.

Um LA County, um, smaller cities, Bell is one, I think.

You know, there's a lot of smaller or in their county itself, not in incorporated cities.

And so your position is by in any way attacking or removing Title 16, you're confident it's gonna somehow impact our card rooms' stance against the AG.

It wouldn't um that's a separate litigation.

So in preparation for the budget, our IDR um staff got very involved in trying to uh align itself with the card rooms request that the regulations not be issued.

And so um I was I was able to meet with the AG staff to present that to them.

In addition to the other uh activity that was going on by IGR staff, I was able to meet with the attorney general as well with their staff and advise them as to you know uh it was we have a comprehensive structure in place.

It's unnecessary to impose additional regulations on the card rooms, and in an effort to try to get them not to do it.

Right.

So I guess I'm not sure how much that effort is going to be effective and the idea that San Jose would be carved out based on us having a redundant policy.

I mean, what are the prospects or how do you it it it's had do you have any precedent for that?

For example, cannabis or any other of these types of industries where an entire municipality was carved out of a state level.

This is very unique, and there were other um arguments proposed because obviously the potential significant hit to the city budget.

I just find it odd.

I don't I don't again, I don't I don't know that San Jose would be carved out of a state level mandate by the district attorney.

Okay, thank you.

If anyone from IGR or the administration wants to weigh in on that, I think we'd welcome the additional insight, but let me in the meantime go to council member Ortiz.

I'm good, thank you so much.

Um Chief, maybe I maybe I can ask you just a follow-up question or two before we vote.

Um look, I uh, you know, admittedly can't say today with what I know what the right answer is, which maybe does call for further analysis.

That being said, I I do find it a little bit frustrating at a time when we were trying really hard to focus, and we have such limited bandwidth, and we're making cuts and we're struggling to work with our staff to advance a lot of important policy work that we're revisiting a discussion that was pretty time-intensive just a year ago.

And my understanding is, and I'll have to go back and check all my notes, but we spent quite a bit of time studying, discussing, debating, ultimately reduced fees by I believe about 20%, it was a 20% reduction.

I have not yet seen or heard a uh analysis of what the impacts of that were positive negative, the trade-offs there.

But Chief, could you share a little more about um, and you know, apologies for putting it on the spot, but um you know what in Title 16 feels most valuable and or kind of how it's in the public interest to have this capacity or what the or if you prefer what the impacts would be of not having the fee.

I understand the proposals that we do more study and come back.

So it's a little unfair to ask you that, but if you want to just share a little more as we decide whether or not it's worth asking staff to go off and do additional analysis at this time, sure.

So to your first point, we have been in ongoing discussions with the card rooms and in fact did exactly what you said just last year.

We reduced the fees by over 400,000.

We cut two analyst positions from the division of gaming, we removed six regulations that the card rooms had explained to us, were the most troublesome, redundant, and burdensome for their ability to do business.

So we felt like we had a framework in place and that we had made some pretty significant changes to Title 16 and reduction in the fee schedule for the gaming division.

So we were a little surprised that there was another request to do the same.

Um, you know, I think while there may be redundancies in state regulation, I think the question then becomes is there bandwidth at the state level to enforce the regulations that they have?

And I think um the ABC uh analogy that you brought up uh city attorney is is a good one in that you know, we find often in the city of San Jose when we have a problematic liquor store or restaurant or bar or nightclub that is violating ABC regulations, it's challenging to get them out here to do enforcement just because they don't have a lot of regulators.

They don't have a lot of agents uh to do those things.

And so that's the value that we see in local regulation here in San Jose.

And that's not to denigrate the card rooms or the manner in which they're operated, but it's to say that we believe the local regulatory scheme is part of what in hand ensures that.

Yeah.

Okay.

And then Chief, I don't know if this would, and again, we didn't agendize this as a specific item to go deep now, and obviously the council could decide to rehash all of the discussions we had last year and spend valuable staff time on this um later in the year.

But um, do you say a little more about what is at stake or what some of the risks would be to not having this, like more concretely, the kinds of things we might be concerned about?

If the question is, what if there was no Title 16, what if there was no division of gaming, then we would be 100% reliant on the state to enforce any regulations related to the operation of those card rooms.

And my concern is that the state's bandwidth to do so, given how many card rooms there are throughout the state of California.

The state's not exactly flush with cash any more than any other government entity is.

I don't know that they'd be adding regulators to pick up the slack here in our city.

And so do I don't have a crystal ball, you know.

If we got rid of it, would everything be terrible?

I don't know.

Would it be wonderful?

I don't know.

I just think it would be I think have confidence to say that I don't think they would be visiting our card rooms very frequently to enforce those regulations.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you, Chief.

Appreciate those answers.

Let me go to council member.

Uh actually, we've not heard from Council Mr Cohen, and then we'll come back to Ortiz.

Do you want to go to Okay?

Cohen passes.

We'll go to Ortiz first.

Thank I just want to, you know, reiterate uh for the council that today we're not voting on any sort of disbandment of the division.

We're not talking about defunding any staff of the division.

All we're asking for in this memo is to defer the conversation and create space for the division and the card rooms to meet and discuss a pathway forward.

And so I think it's it's a little um, you know, putting the cart before the horse to even talk about like how this may impact our relationship with the AG or any sort of existing dynamics that go um with regulation because we're not even at that at point yet.

Um we're not this isn't a vote that will impact any sort of city staff uh or um any sort of uh uh you know oversight uh conditions with the state government and and so I I just want to reiterate that that all we're asking for in this memo uh is to allow for a is to direct a conversation to be to be had.

Um I wanted uh ask a quick question if uh Sean had a moment to come down if that's if that's okay.

Thank you, Sean.

Appreciate that, and I know that you know, uh, as mentioned previously, there there has been a long time discussions in regards to this division, its purpose, if it if it's needed.

Um I just wanted to allow you the opportunity to provide your perspective of your interaction with the division, really the goal for for how you see this memo playing out.

Sure.

Thank you, council member.

Uh thank you, Mayor.

Uh as we have taken a number of council members on tour of the casinos, I will reiterate the same thing that I have said then.

The division of gaming by statute in Title 16 is not criminal in nature, cannot prosecute, cannot bring criminal charges.

That is a police function whenever there has been a problem in the casinos, whenever there's been any criminality, it has been the card rooms themselves that have self-reported under state law.

State law requires self-reporting.

Title 16 is just another layer of that that reinforces that, but it is state law that is really the precedent is the state that pulls the license.

The division has in the 12 years that Rob Lindo has been at the at the at the casino, uh, find them for having the wrong color blue chips, the wrong color blue chips, and the wrong weight.

Ultimately, that was overturned because the casino doesn't manufacture the chips, the manufacturer does, and the fact that they used a different color of blue, which was the same blue, it just happened to turn out differently once the ceramic chips were actually baked, was what the fine was about, and then it was rescinded.

Another instance of the division moving forward with a fine against the casino or trying to move against an enforcement action, was that the felt was the wrong type of felt.

The felt was approved by the state, and then it was also approved by the division.

It's just that the new folks that came into the division thought that the felt should have been something different.

They wanted to ban the game based on the felt.

That banning of a game would have lost hundreds of thousands, if not millions of dollars to the city in just banning the game.

Ultimately, that was overturned by the division itself.

There's been this conflation that somehow the division does some police investigative work, it doesn't do police activity.

If it does, it has to refund the fees.

When you cross that line of doing police activity with fee schedule, fee money, that's an illegal tax.

Police activity has to be funded by the general fund.

To that point, Measure H came up and the casinos gave 10 million dollars and continue to give 10 million dollars a year since Measure H passed to the city.

To somehow feel like the city is is injured, or that the division is somehow uh a drag or is somehow gonna make the city less safe is ridiculous.

The division cannot do any criminal prosecution by nature.

It just can't, and it hasn't.

It absolutely hasn't.

The other thing is when the folks from the division come to work at the casino, they get trained by the casino.

The very people that are regulating the casino are actually educated by the casino on how to regulate themselves.

They're my term, I believe, glorified code officers.

It's given this fancy name that it's a division.

I've made the the analysis and and the analogy to to Lee Wilcox that a coffee machine in the police department doesn't make special coffee, it's just a coffee machine.

The fact that it's located in the division, that this division is located there at the police department, doesn't give it special power.

It could be in the auditor's office, where it probably belongs.

It could be in the city manager's office, it could be at code enforcement, where it likely belongs.

There's no special power.

The chief came up here and said that its power is regulatory only in nature.

I've heard council members say that casinos also are uh inherently dangerous.

Prostitution, uh uh loan sharking, uh other sort of means uh or bad behavior.

That has nothing to do with the division.

Again, the division is regulatory in nature.

They'll tell you if your chips are the wrong color, they'll tell you if the felt is the wrong type that you can't play on, they'll tell you if your tables are too high or too low, all things that the state does already.

If there is loan sharking, police department has to be brought in.

If there is any sort of other criminal behavior, the police department must be called.

State law dictates it.

Any fines or me, any criminal activity that has happened with the casinos themselves, the last time it happened with casino matrix was caught by the state.

Richard Tang and the Division of Gaming did not catch it.

It was caught by the state.

And it because there was an inconsistency between the application in Los Angeles, from what I understand, and the application here in San Jose.

There was no way the division of gaming would have ever known what's happening in Los Angeles.

So to say or imply that somehow the division is doing some amazing, overreaching regulatory umbrella type work, is false.

They have a very small, very narrow vision.

They do what's prescribed within Title 16, which is a lot of it is just a redundancy of what is state law, and it's the police department that does the heavy lifting.

The people that are actually doing the work at there to solve crimes are the police department.

When there was a theft that was self-reported by Casino Matrix from the from the banking, uh what we call banking, but the third party proposition player, that was an investigation that was done by Casino Matrix.

It was then called, and Brian Shaw was called directly.

The division was not called.

The division is called ancillary, because you have to let them know what's going on, but that was an investigation that was directly given to Brian Schaub, the assistant chief in the time, and the financial crimes unit then did it.

When in a press release, the division was tried to take credit for that, it was removed.

Because by statute they can't take credit for criminal solving any criminal activity.

It's regulatory in nature.

So the confluence of kind of bringing this together that's some sort of police function or something like this, is just false.

It just goes back to the color of chips, felt and regulatory things that are there.

The changes that we made in Title 16, what the division was enforcing, happy hour.

Happy hour.

The division was enforcing happy hour at the casino matrix.

If council members think that that is something that is going to uh upset the cart in San Jose and change the dynamic of public safety, then by all means.

I mean, keep the division.

Happy hour is a scary thing.

I mean, I'm sorry, I had a very long answer answer to your question, but I just wanted to give you the totality of what's happening with the division and with the casino.

No, thank you, Sean.

It's important for us to hear both from you know the casino and the police department, and I think obviously there's a divide here, and my I believe a solution is getting you guys in the same room.

So I still support that.

And to your point, communication is all we're asking for.

Let's keep an ongoing communication.

Last year, buried in a memo was a one and done clause, and we we got rid of that.

The council said no, we should continue to have ongoing conversation.

That's all we're asking for.

We may come back in the fall and say, you know what?

Let's take a pause.

We've decided along with the police chief, who we've been working with since the with since the casinos have been opened.

Maybe we wait a bit.

Maybe we see how everything worked out.

We are at time, we accidentally reset the council members' clock there.

We can ask additional questions though if others have them.

Um thanks, Councilman, we can come back to you.

Let's um let's hear from.

Yeah, I do actually I have a quick question, but just the point of information.

So the there was a discussion of ongoing conversations.

Have there been no conversations?

Is city staff speaking with the card rooms, or are we not?

What is the do we need direction in order to continue the conversation?

We don't need direction to continue the conversation, but Chief, can you come down and address that question?

Maybe sit a little closer, tell the time's over.

So just two kind of point of information questions and I'll turn to Councilor Cohen.

Do we need direction to continue the conversation or is the conversation being continued?

And second, are the regs only about the color of chips and the felt on the tables, or are there things in the regs we think might be more substantial?

Okay, so I'm joined by Karil Yermanoff, who is the division manager of the gaming division.

He can speak to the conversations that he's had with Rob Lindo.

I can say that I've spoken to their representative, the gentleman that just spoke uh as recently as within the last well, by phone within the last few days and in person within the last few weeks.

Carill, if you'd like to speak.

Thank you, Chief.

Uh good afternoon, Carol Yermanov Division of Gaming Control.

Um last week I spoke to uh Mr.

Lindo, he's a vice president of Casino Matrix.

Um a couple of months ago, they submitted a list of regulations that they would like us to discuss with them that they call duplicative regulations.

Those are the regulations that somehow overlap with the state regulations.

Um, when I offered Mr.

Lindo to sit down and go line by line over those regulations, he said that would not be the most productive use of time at this time because currently they're trying to work with their author with their representative who is working with the council and they're trying to get all those regulations amended all together.

But um if that initiative doesn't work, we can always go back and continue the discussion and you know filter them line by line and see what regulations add value to our regulatory programs and whatnot.

Okay, I understood that to be part of the direction.

I'm seeing my colleagues who authored the memo nod their heads.

So the direction would be to have the conversation that's currently on pause.

I'm sorry, said say it again, Mayor, please.

The direction would be to pick up the conversation that it sounds like you offered to have.

That sounds good for us.

Okay, great.

Um, we can continue the conversation, I think, with or without direction today.

And then, Chief, just on the regs, can you just educate us or whoever can on um you know, you hear about the color of the chips and felt, which I would agree is not a great use of the city's time to be governing, probably, but are there other things in the regulations, or is it just about the color of chips?

What's at stake here?

You know, I I have to defer this is sure this is some pretty arcane stuff.

Thank you, Chief.

Um let me briefly explain the difference, the main difference between the state and city regulations.

The state gaming law provides the minimum uniform requirements for card drums to operate statewide.

At the same time, the state gambling law emphasizes that public confidence in the integrity of gaming operations can only be achieved through strict regulatory controls of persons, places, activities, and practices.

And it appears that they're not able to regulate persons, places, activities, and practices.

What the city of San Jose did back in 1998, we invested in this regulatory program by hiring a consultant from Nevada who created this regulatory program and explained how we can regulate persons' places, activities and practices in the city.

In my personal professional opinion, the reason why other cities don't regulate persons' places, activities and practices is because they don't have institutional knowledge of gaming, how to do that.

Gaming is very specific industry, it requires institutional knowledge to regulate persons' places, activities, and practices.

Okay, Mayor, let me just add one thing.

So when it when we when the council voted last year to eliminate six regulations, those were things that the card rooms brought to us, like I mentioned, as being the most significantly either unnecessary or burdensome to them in terms of their ability to conduct business.

So we felt like we have made some pretty substantive changes.

Um the only change that I've personally heard was a fee reduction at this point.

Um, and it's challenging for us to be offered, you know, sort of an amount of money and then asked, okay, what can you do for that amount of money?

What how much regulation can you give us for you know X amount of dollars per year?

And I think that's some of our um some of our concern here is that I don't I don't know where this ends until it ends with, you know, zero, which is I think the goal, and you know, we again we believe there's some value.

I there's those are some pretty um interesting uh and probably maybe um not our best use of our regulatory authority, but that's not all that we regulate.

Those were great examples uh provided.

But um if if there's problems in execution, that's different than the problems in the regulatory scheme, I would say.

Got it.

Okay.

Thank you both.

Let me turn to colleagues to continue the conversation.

Appreciate it.

Don't go too far, Council McCone.

Go ahead.

Yeah, I'm I'm I kind of want to weigh in, but I'm not sure how to weigh in at this point.

And maybe that's leads to the point of the memo, and that's the only thing I'll say is I'm not getting entirely satisfactory answers from either party in this conversation.

I'm not necessarily sure from the representatives of the card rooms whether this is a play simply about the fees, or if there really is a question about the need for the regulations.

On the flip side, I'm not getting a satisfactory answer from PD about what it is that we're adding value and having this function and that and and being able to have that conversation could be valuable.

I'm frustrated, on the other hand, because we had a fairly extensive conversation on this a year ago, and thought we had landed on a place which meant we could put this to rest for at least some period of time.

So, my preference obviously was that we would have that period of time before we would revisit.

I do know, however, that as long as we don't do whatever the next step is or have a conversation that is satisfactory, this will not, this will be an annual conversation we will have.

That's my suspicion.

So, so I mean, you know, saying I don't want to do this now, and then just having the conversation come up year after year after year is also unsatisfying, I think, to everyone here.

So that that kind of leads me to say if there's I'm not completely clear that there's an outcome from the conversation that would happen due to this memo that would actually satisfy everybody, and we might still be having this conversation.

That's what worries me.

But if there's value in if there could be some value achieved by at least maybe having a more detailed enumeration of what it is that we think we're adding as a value through our service that we provide in the police department, our oversight function, and on the flip side, have an enumerated um understanding of what the how this is affecting our card rooms, then we might be able to have one last strong good conversation on it.

Um, and then the other thing I just that that occurs to me in this conversation is the card rooms are valuable and important business in our city.

I mean, we talk a lot about not burdening small businesses, about not burdening various types of businesses.

You know, as an example, I just had a meeting last month with a group of uh massage therapists who are very concerned about the processes that they have for getting the permits to run their businesses in a legitimate way in our city, and some are moving out and going into the neighboring cities because we are too burdensome in San Jose and our regulatory scheme here.

And I haven't yet, you know, we haven't yet necessarily had that public conversation as a council or as a city on that, but it's just an example of when you hear from businesses about this is making it hard on us, we want to try to do something to improve it.

At the same time as the state is under pressure from other gaming interests to decimate our gaming industry, we want to make sure that we are doing everything we can to make it easy for them to survive in our city as well.

So that that's there's all those things running through my head that makes me think there's value in one more robust and hopefully complete discussion on this topic so we can move forward.

So I'm leaning in that direction, but I just wanted to raise those points.

Thanks for articulating that.

Yeah, I appreciate the conflict there.

Um let me go to Councilmore Tordios.

Thank you, Mayor.

I think part of what I struggle with here is just uh the fact that, as was said, there has been so much discussion about this topic in previous years, as recently as last year, when some of the regulations were reduced, the fees were cut, and then to have this kind of raised again so quickly.

But the other thing kind of came from one of the answers from the uh gaming division, that it sounds like there were discussions about kind of specific line item regulations that were problematic, and leadership at Casino Matrix has essentially communicated that they don't want to have a discussion on the line by line items because they want to let this council-driven process play out.

Is that correct?

I'm sorry, could you repeat your question, please?

That uh leadership at Casino Matrix, when you offered to kind of go through line by line about some of the regulations that they flagged, but they didn't want to have those conversations because they instead wanted to move this through council.

Is that essentially what you were saying?

Did they want to wait for the outcome of the council before having discussion?

Um, we can continue the dialogue with casino matrix.

We know that there's a list of regulations they would like to revisit.

We can definitely do the work and then come back to the council and present those recommendations.

Yeah, I think my preference would be just that those conversations continue.

It's not clear to me that any guidance or direction on this is necessary today in order for those conversations to continue.

I think it makes sense for this to be an ongoing discussion, but it's unclear to me why we need to be weighing in at this point, especially given how recently the most recent action from this council was.

Okay, thanks, Councilmember.

Thank you.

So I want to know what is the goal here.

You know, because you don't need a council memo or anything to go talk to people, correct?

We're constantly evaluating everything we do, constantly in conversation.

But I mean it sounds like the the conversation stopped not by you, but by the casino, because they wanted our input on this.

Is that correct?

A yes or no answer would be great.

Um it appeared that the conversation stopped because cardrooms wanted to try a different approach and work through the representative who would reach out directly to the council.

But meanwhile, we can continue working with the cardrooms to review those proposals and come back to the council with recommendations.

Okay.

So the only thing that I'm looking at here at the memo is maintaining city's commitment to strong public safety.

We all want that.

You don't need a memo for that.

Guess that guess what?

Um, number two, evaluate opportunities to reduce or restructure cartoon card room regulatory fees.

Now, it would probably be an action from the council to say up, down, sideways, whatever, right?

And the last one, include implementation timing, noticing requirements, and any related budget action.

Well, of course, that's going to affect our budget because if we reduce, we got to find the money somewhere else, or you know, move people around or what have you.

So to me, you know, I I think we did have extensive uh discussion last year.

Nothing should prevent you and the uh uh the businesses from be talking to each other, nothing, right?

Now, I think that we had extensive conversation.

Uh I think that um what my colleagues said earlier in terms of yes, we want to be able to be fair with our small businesses, we want to be able to reduce where we can.

We don't we don't want to be redundant, but at the same time, we need time to see how it's going.

And I think that right now it seems to me a little bit premature because you guys can talk to each other, you guys can figure out what is the issue with the different regulatory things.

So, you know, I think it's a little bit premature.

It may come back with recommendations on well, you know, this isn't this doesn't bring any value, that doesn't bring any value.

But you know, to me, I'd like to be able to uh have better information to to balance those things, because you can still talk to each other, correct?

And come up with what may be ways of reducing whatever it is that uh that we're doing that's duplicative.

Correct?

Yes, absolutely.

Thank you.

Thank you, Councilmember.

Um, are you good with your questions?

Okay, great.

Let me go back to Councilor O'Cohn.

Yeah, I um I do have one question first, but this is for administration.

Um, I mean, one of the things we're always concerned about is giving direction that we that generates extra work for administration, and we went through this last year, and I don't want to go through it again.

If it means giving us something else, is this something that would not burden administration to do, or is it something that I mean, is there what is the what is the impact if we were to move this memo forward and say go have this conversation?

I don't know if for Lee or for Jennifer.

That's probably a better question for Paul to answer because I think a lot of it would be under him.

I think if I'm hearing what Paul said, is that they cut fees last year and would prefer to better understand how that new service model actually impacts the regulations and the implementation or enforcement of Title 16, so that they have better data to inform further conversations.

And like you guys have pointed out, those conversations can always happen between the two card rooms and public safety.

Um if Paul has anything else to add on on how much effort this would take, um I would leave that to him.

I think although he went way way back up here.

You are you shouldn't have walked too far.

I should do that leads to a follow-up question for you.

I'm sorry, Chief.

Um I'll just ask this follow-up question.

You're your what you're saying is there should be time for see how this how this plays out and what impacts it has.

What is the right timeline for us to see that?

Because there is probably value in us once that timeline occurs and hearing that impact and making a further decision on what to how to move forward with the rate with the Title 16 regulations.

I don't know what the exact timeline would be.

I think we just made some pretty significant changes to the scheme, the fees, and wanted some time and thought we had some time to see how that played out before we made any further changes.

We spend a tremendous amount of time going back and forth trying to figure out how best to handle Title 16 and enforcement of Title 16, how much staff time it would be.

Uh I've spent more time on this than I would have expected, I'll say that.

Okay.

Um, I mean, I'm tempted to ask for a um an amendment to the motion with a different timeline or something and say come back, you know, with a report at a certain point at the end of maybe maybe next spring during the budget cycle, bring back a report on the impacts of the last um cuts in fees so that we can you know use that as part of informing next year's fee discussion as opposed to having a fall report back this fall, which is in the memo, something that's sort of that says let's have this conversation, but let's wait and have a be able to tell the impact of what the changes were before and inform next year's fee structure.

Um, I think that would be a very reasonable solution because normally on any given year we are evaluating all of our fees and bring them back to you annually as part of um our fees and charges report, and we can provide a manager's budget addendum to give you that analysis and any further adjustments that we might recommend.

So I'm gonna ask for a friendly amendment to the main motion.

Jimmy, that is absolutely true, and we can certainly do that.

I think the only other thing I want to put out there, if um a substantial reduction in the fees sort of goes over, um substantial change in the fees uh reflex through our uh cost allocation program, so a minor reduction can be accommodated during the proposed budget process, a more substantial uh reframing of the division or eliminating of the division, for example, would need to be thought about in advance of the budget process, because that would have general fund in impacts beyond just the collection of the fee.

That could still be part of an MBA for next year's budget process.

It is, but if council then wanted to take an action to do a significant few reduction, that would be a general fund impact.

We'd have to balance um later on now, as opposed to doing that as part of the March budget message setting.

Okay, so Jim, but what I'm suggesting is if they're having the ongoing conversations, we can bring we can bring the inform we can make in just like we do with any fees and charges, we can make fee adjustments through the proposed budget process, like we do with many things like we just did in this proposed budget proactively based on those discussions or not, depending on what where the evaluation is, and we can provide further information through a manager's budget addendum for the can't for the full city council's consideration.

And if the impact, if the impact of those fees changes means that we have to reduce some, you know, the way we the way we do this oversight, we might have to, you know, that would be a budget item as well, right, to reduce that service or that provision so I'm gonna ask for a friendly amendment to bring this back as part of the budget process next year and accepted all right who was the second one accepted okay accepted by the maker of the motion the second or uh vice mayor you look like you're wanting to weigh in I'm slightly confused on what the motion is right now uh council member cohen can you're just asking that it come back earlier next year as part of consideration of the budget process and it might be an MBA it might be you know whatever the appropriate administration method of doing that would be but it's rather than have it come back this fall like is in the middle would come back next spring as part of the budget process with analysis that could allow us to update the fees and charges understand okay for next year's budget process all right I appreciate that thank you for the clarification.

Thanks for the clarification Councilmember commitment more clarification.

So in the in the memo itself it talks it directs the city manager to do one two three um is that gonna cause any issue evaluate opportunities to reduce or restructure uh include implementation timing noticing requirements and any related budget action like what what workload is that going to create I think I mean since that's the motion that's the underlying motion I just want to know what I'm voting on.

Yeah during the fees and charges development we are always we are evaluating each and every fee that's why you get a thick book from us um every year every springtime because we're going through that exact same process so doing and not having a separate process for the card rooms and folding it into how we do our normal fees and charges we would recommend any adjustments and based on conversations that can be ongoing as the as the police department has said if there is an appropriate adjustment that the administration would recommend we'd bring that forward through that proposed budget process through the proposed budget and the fees and charges and with uh and we can certainly augment that with justification to any of our changes that we may or may not be proposing at that time but it'd be it'd be folded it'd be folded in so you'd have the full context of the decision making your decision making that you're um voting for in context of the entire budget at that time correct Jim so that would be done as part of the process part of the as part of next year's the 27 28 budget process which would be next so there's no there's no extra uh workload or anything like that correct there there would be a little bit of workload if we produced an extra MBA on that but if we're if as the chief has described if uh they're having ongoing conversations with the card rooms um which we should be doing with all of our businesses as needed uh shouldn't be really any much extra workload but there may be a fiscal impact that we will evaluate but and we'll make it uh an uh our our best recommendation if we should reduce regulations reduce the card room fees stay the same increase them whatever the outcome of that normal fees and charges evaluation um whatever the outcome of that come comes about we will make our recommendation at that time okay thank you okay thanks council member I don't see any other hands Tony let's vote motion passes unanimously all right thank you all thank you thanks to our city team uh we are on to open forum opportunity for members of the public to speak on any city business that was not on today's agenda.

Tony, do we have commenters?

Lillian and Sean come on down.

Yes, one minutes not enough time, but anyway, Lillian Koenig.

I am here at as a citizen today.

What I consider an accomplishment for affordable housing for seniors.

I hope that each one of you get it and read it.

Um, I just want to go over something very quickly.

On June 2nd, you had a recommendation of affordable housing and sustainable communities grant funding, which was like round nine for 14 million dollars.

Uh it's something that I recognize could be used to track progress and adjust course to support policy changes in regards to seniors and affordable housing and underwrite finance and provide funding for seniors and affordable housing with uh the intent not to displace any seniors.

Um I want to thank Miss uh Vice Mayor Foley for coming to all our senior commission meetings.

We did have an ad hoc committee on housing at that time, and thank you.

Next speaker, I just want to make it abundantly clear that commercial after commercial and campaign ad after campaign ad that said I reduced homelessness, unsheltered homes.

City business is not um campaigns are not city business.

If you have city business, feel free.

I I this is you said this is public forum.

This is public forum.

You can try and shut me down over and over and over for every time that I try and say that your campaign ads were a lie.

But the fact that unsheltered homelessness was lowered by 32%.

32% is not 30%.

It is not a third.

Journalism major suck at math, but we can figure out that 32% is 32% or 23%, not 30, not a third.

And anybody who puts out information saying 23% is a third, or 30% is a liar, and that would be you.

Back to council.

All right, yes.

Just to clarify, yeah.

Clarification on 3.4.

I don't believe we actually moved the item.

We approved the memo, but we did not approve the fees and did the memo not include acceptance of this.

No, so I will uh I will.

Memo writers, you need to be more careful.

All right.

I just assumed he had it in his memo.

Tony, can we reopen the item?

Yes.

And you're not first timers over there.

So we will.

So the motion was approved.

That was the memo.

Now just make a second motion.

I will move approval of item 3.4.

Great.

Okay.

Tony, let's vote.

Yes, let me get back to that item.

And I just got another card for open forum from Chris.

So Chris, come on down.

Need to give credit where credit is one vote.

Council member Kamei caught it.

3.4.

3.4 approved unanimously.

Great.

Okay, we're now going to continue with open forum.

I believe we have one final speaker.

Go ahead.

Hi.

I've never done this before.

Um I notice these signs at St.

James Park that say they want to cut down 93 heritage trees.

Those keep that park cool.

I support the Levett Pavilion.

My suggestion is tear down that that uh that that church that Peter has a half million dollars to and put the pavilion there.

I mean, you know, you can find them.

That old put the performance there.

Anyway, don't chop down ninety three trees.

It keeps it so cool.

You keep planting trees all over San Jose, which I love.

Um, yeah, you guys are doing a great job.

Don't cut down the only things that keep us cool.

Thank you.

Thank you.

All right.

Thanks, everybody.

Appreciate it.

Have a great evening.

We're adjourned.