Rules and Open Government Committee Meeting Summary – June 10, 2026
Rules and Open Government Committee Meeting – June 10, 2026
The Rules and Open Government Committee met on June 10, 2026, at 2:00 p.m. to review upcoming council agendas, approve consent items, and discuss two action items: the development of data center standards and a memo opposing a state ballot measure that would restrict local revenue-raising authority. The committee heard public testimony on multiple items and voted unanimously on all agenda items.
Consent Calendar
- Final review of the June 16 council agenda: Consent items spanned pages 5–21, with items 3.3 (budget actions) and 3.4 (appropriation ordinance) heard separately. Additional items included labor contracts (SJ PDA, ABMEI, ALP), compensation changes for Unit 99 and unrepresented employees, business improvement district public hearings (Alum Rock, Downtown, Japan Town, The Alameda), a grant agreement for multiple interim housing sites, and one land use consent item. No public comment. Motion carried 5-0.
- Review of the June 23 council agenda (last meeting of the fiscal year): Consent items on pages 5–12. Discussion items included a ranked-choice voting ballot measure, large-format advertising signs at SJC, Willow Keys Corridor improvements, a long-term power purchase agreement with Shell Energy, an amendment to the City of Milpitas animal care services agreement, grant agreements for homelessness projects, and three land use consent items. No public comment. Motion carried 5-0.
- Committee consent calendar: Seven items, including committee work plans. One public speaker (Jordan Moldale, District 3) requested that the semi-annual Vision Zero report be spaced evenly (every six months) and suggested creating a council focus area within Transportation and Environment (TNE) for Vision Zero and the environment, citing the link between transportation and cost of living. Motion carried 5-0.
Public Comments & Testimony
- Jordan Moldale (District 3) : Commented on committee work plans (Vision Zero report timing, council focus area). Also spoke on the data center standards item, supporting a letter from the Sierra Club and other groups, and questioned whether data center tax revenue compares favorably with alternative industrial uses. Called for an Environmental Impact Report (EIR).
- Dasha Leeds (Sierra Club Loma Prieta Chapter) : Urged the city to pause in-progress data center proposals to allow time for the standards to be developed with robust community engagement, rather than creating standards in a vacuum that could lead to streamlining without adequate protections.
- Marcus (Alviso) : Expressed concern about undocumented water and energy usage by data centers, supporting the proposed standards and asking for proper studies before projects proceed. Noted community concerns about lack of disclosure.
- Public comment on ballot measure opposition: A speaker supported the committee's opposition but urged more proactive steps, such as authorizing the city attorney to engage in lawsuits or sign amicus briefs, and supporting ACA 13 (a related state measure).
- Alina (Open Forum) : Requested a public study session on cumulative public health impacts of data centers on air quality, water, noise, and heat. Noted that the recently ground-broken Microsoft data center will have 224 natural gas generators in a district already exceeding EPA air quality standards, and cited over 2,200 signatures on a petition (ILoveSanJose.org) for such a study.
Discussion Items
- Data Center Standards Memo (Action Item 1) : The committee considered a staff analysis and direction to formalize data center standards. Deputy City Manager Manuel Pineda answered questions about the timeline (standards expected back to council by December 2026), environmental analysis per project (water use, generators, electricity), cumulative impacts, and outreach. Councilmember Kamei emphasized uniform standards for prevailing wage, skilled labor, and robust community outreach (multiple languages, not just mailers). Councilmember Duan asked about water system types (closed-loop, open-loop, recycled water) and ensuring public access to information. Staff confirmed they are creating a dedicated website page for large-load customers. The committee voted 5-0 to approve the memo, directing staff to proceed with standards development and enhanced outreach.
- Opposition to State Ballot Measure (Action Item 2) : Councilmember Cohen explained the measure would make it very difficult for cities to raise local revenue and would invalidate previously passed measures, including Measure E (a significant budget hit). The committee voted 5-0 to adopt an official opposition position and to join the coalition led by the League of California Cities. A public commenter suggested also authorizing legal action, but the motion passed as presented.
Key Outcomes
- Consent calendar approvals: All three consent items (June 16 agenda, June 23 agenda, committee consent) passed unanimously (5-0 each).
- Data center standards: Motion carried 5-0. Staff will develop formal standards with public engagement and return to council by December 2026. A centralized webpage for large-load customer projects will be created.
- Ballot measure opposition: Motion carried 5-0. The city will officially oppose the measure and collaborate with the League of California Cities.
- No further action: The committee did not schedule a public study session on data center health impacts as requested by Alina during open forum; the meeting adjourned at 2:26 p.m.
Meeting Transcript
Okay, it's two o'clock, and we're going to call our um meeting of the rules and open government committee to order. Let's start with roll call, please. Candela. Here, one fully. Pierre Cohen. We have a quorum. Thank you. The first item of business is to do our final review of the council agenda for Tuesday, June 16th, with a 9 30 morning closed session, 1 30 open session, and canceled evening session. And so we start with consent on page 5. And I'm not going to count it out this time because I remember last time it was a lot of pages. So we're going to make our way through these pages to page 21. Whoa. And we have an item, the final approval of the various budget actions will be heard before consent. That's item 3.3. And in addition, also 3.4, the appropriation ordinance will be heard before consent. Then we have several contracts with our labor groups, SJ uh PDA, ABMEI, ALP, and also the compensation and benefits changes for Unit 99 and unrepresented employees. Section 8, we have some business improvement district public hearings. Alumrock, downtown, Japan Town, the Alameda. Also a grant agreement for multiple interim housing sites. And if I remember correctly, yes, there's one item on land use consent, which would be heard immediately after regular consent. Do we have any public comment? No public comment. Okay, back to the committee. All right. We have motion and a second, so let's vote. Oh, my mind got turned off. Sorry. My motion carries five zero. I'm waiting for a vote, and it was my vote we were waiting for. All right. Now we're moving on to the review of the agenda for our last council meeting of the fiscal year on Tuesday, June 23rd. And consent starts on page five. Continues on pages six, seven, eight, nine, ten, eleven, and twelve. In section three, we have a discussion of potential ballot measure for ranked choice voting for council vacancies. Section five, an award for large format advertising signs at SJC, and Willow Keys Corridor Improvement Project. Item six, a long-term power purchase agreement with Shell Energy and the San Jose Clean Energy Integrated Resource Plan. Section seven, an amendment to the agreement between the City of Milpitas and San Jose for animal care services. Section eight grant agreements for multiple homelessness projects. And three items on land use consent to be heard immediately after regular consent. Is there any public comment? No public comment. Okay, motion and a second. I don't see any hands, so let's vote on that one. All right, that motion carries 5-0. And we are now on to our consent calendar. And today we have seven items on consent, including many of our committee work plans. Do we have any public comment? Yes, we do have one speaker, but before I call the name, as a reminder, speakers must comply with the city's code of conduct for public meetings. Please direct comments to the body, limit remarks of the agenda item and observe the time limit. Conduct that materially disrupts the meeting or interferes with others' ability to participate may result in meeting or removal as authorized by law.
openpublica.com