►
From YouTube: SEP 20, 2021 | Charter Review Commission
Description
City of San José, California
Charter Review Commission of September 20, 2021
This public meeting will be conducted via Zoom Webinar. For information on public participation via Zoom, please refer to the linked meeting agenda below.
Agenda https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=892709&GUID=A1A6B591-C2F4-4F56-8FBB-E1A5241B9660
A
A
A
B
B
A
C
C
Meaning
of
the
san
jose
charter
review
commission
to
order
and
I'm
gonna-
ask
the
clerk
to
take
the
role.
Please.
F
A
G
C
Thank
you.
Let's
move
our
agenda
to
the
consent
calendar
which
tonight
is
just
to
receive
and
file
the
letters
from
the
public.
Does
anybody
in
the
public
wish
to
address
the
commission
on
the
consent.
H
Hi,
thank
you,
blair,
beakman
here
an
interesting
meeting
last
week.
I
hope
we're
moving
forward
with
the
letter
from
jennifer
mcguire
last
week
and
in
a
way
that
is
negotiative
towards
the
future
ideas
of
how
the
city
charter
commission
can
can
talk
about
reimagine
ideas.
Still
it
can
be
very
relevant.
It
was
mentioned
at
the
task
force
reimagined
task
force
last
week.
H
The
ideas
about
there
are
certain
mechanics
involved
that
if
the
task
force
works
on
a
city
charter
oversight
process,
the
I
mean
if
the
task
force
works
on
a
on
a
on
a
police
oversight
process.
It's
up
to
the
city
charter
to
create
the
mechanics
of
how
that
can
appear
in
a
city
charter
which
it
will
just
it'll
be
mandatory
to
do
that.
On
top
of
that,
you
know,
is
it's
my
hopes
that
you
know
what
I
mentioned
last
week.
H
I
don't
quite
know
everything
at
play,
but
there
can
still
be
broad
considerations
of
how
to
talk
about
reimagine,
equity,
open
democracy,
green
sustainability
and
actually
indigenous
issues
of
people
loney
people
from
this
area,
how
all
those
issues
can
fit
into
the
future
of
the
charter
process
and
how
that
appears
in
the
future
of
the
charter
process.
I
think
those
are
very
valid
questions
for
all
of
us
still
that
shouldn't
be
denied
or
rejected,
we
just
have
to
figure
out
some
new
ways
to
do
that.
H
I
suppose-
and
that's
that's
why
we're
in
a
negotiated
process
with
with
the
city
manager
and
others
at
this
time,
and
I'm
assuming
that's
what
you're
going
through.
I
think,
by
the
end
of
this
month
into
early
october,
we
can
figure
out
some
good
answers.
This
is
my
summary
and
feelings
of
the
situation.
Good
luck!
What
you're
doing
at
this
time
and
thank
you.
I
Thank
you
so
much
so.
Basically
I
wrote
you
a
letter
saying
that
I
wasn't
happy
about
the
the
fact
that
we
didn't
address
climate,
the
climate
crisis,
even
though
it
was
on
the
agenda
and.
I
Of
I
guess
you
know
discussing
right
now:
your
consent
calendar,
you
know
in
terms
of
the
way
the
meeting
went
last
week
is
that
we
get
a
letter
from
our
city
manager
and
you
know,
even
though
she
is
the
city
manager,
she's,
still
a
citizen,
because
what
it
is
about
our
charter
review,
commission
or
our
commissions
in
general,
as
we
all
learned
from
that
wonderful
presentation,
you
had
about
the
the
history
of
our
commissions
that
those
are
the
people's
voice.
I
That's
what
it
is
about
is
you
know
this
is
us
having
a
chance
to
create
the
policies
that
we
need
as
a
community
and
that's
true
democracy.
So
this
is,
you
know.
So,
basically,
you
know
having
the
city
manager
write
a
letter
and
then
the
whole
meeting
go
towards
that,
especially
after
we
were
addressing
the
issue
of
climate
crisis
and
which
needs
to
be.
You
know
when
you
have
a
crisis,
that's
all
you're
supposed
to
talk
about,
and
so
basically
we
need
to
be
talking
about
that
and
we
need
to
be
addressing
it.
I
I
So
you
know
basically
you
know
that
that
that's
just
what
I'm
I'm
talking
about
is
you
know,
so
I'm
saying
hey,
that's
what
you
did
with
you
know
the
letter
from
the
city
manager.
You
made
it
part
of
the
agenda.
Well
then,
I
want
my
my
issue
as
you
know,
as
being
something
that
comes
to
our
city
or
you
know
into
the
into
the
agenda
to
to
say
we
need
to
address
this
because.
B
I
A
C
Commissioner,
bruce
and
commissioner
motley
thank
you.
Clerk
will
take
the
role
or
take
the
vote.
K
L
A
F
G
L
F
C
Thank
you
this
evening.
I
want
to,
for
members
of
the
public
be
clear
about
our
agenda
this
evening.
We
are
now
going
to
be
receiving
the
recommendations
from
the
governing
structure
subcommittee.
There
are
four.
I
understand
that
there
are
four
recommendations
that
the
subcommittee
is
making
to
the
commission.
C
The
process
that
we
will
be
using
tonight
is
that
the
there
will
be
a
commissioner
presenting
the
actual
recommendation
to
the
commission
in
public
that
takes
about
eight
minutes
or
less.
I
hope,
and
then
there
will
be
time
for
public
comment
on
that
item
and
then
it'll
come
back
to
the
commission
for
their
discussion.
C
We
will
do
that
process
four
times
so
we'll
have
the
first
issue
we'll
go
through
the
commissioner's
description,
public
hearing,
public
comment
and
then
commissioner's
discussion
and
then
we'll
take
up
the
second
recommendation.
So
we're
going
to
go
this
through
this
four
times
this
evening
and
we're
going
to
start
with
commissioner
miski
as
the
first
recommendation
tonight.
D
We
can
see
the
downloaded
version
of
the
agenda
for
the
day.
M
Same
same
thing,
you're
sharing
before
the
agenda.
K
M
F
F
F
F
So
what
this
item
is
is
future
charter
review
commissions
as
we
I
think
we
all
know
the
last
time
there
was
a
charter
review
commission
was
35
years
ago,
and
that
was
when
the
city
council
had
asked
for
it,
and
you
know
the
the
charter
review
commissions
that
have
occurred
in
the
past
have
always
been
required
or
directed
by
the
city
council
itself,
and
they
had
always
been
advisory
to
the
city
council,
and
so
we
we
looked
at
whether
there
is
something
that
we
should
add,
maybe
to
the
to
the
charter
itself
to
require
periodic
reviews
of
the
of
the
of
the
charter.
F
So
what
we
looked
at,
we
found
that
there
were
two
cities
in
the
country
that
actually
has
something
like
that
in
their
charter:
columbus,
ohio
and
portland
oregon.
One
is
an
advisory
to
the
to
the
council.
The
other
one
is
actually
has
a
clause
in
there
that,
if
some
sort
of
super
majority
of
commissioners
votes
to
add
something
to
the
you
know
a
charter,
then
that
would
go
directly
to
the
ballot
without
going
through
the
city
council.
F
So
so
we
kicked
around
those
two
ideas
in
terms
of
a
future
commission
for
for
future
commissions,
and
it
was
pretty
robust
discussion
that
we
had
kind
of
very
interesting
as
we
got
into
the
issues
we.
F
What
we
did
not
have
consensus
on
this,
but
we
did
have
what
you
see
and
presented
in
today's
agenda
is
really
what
the
majority
feels
they
would
like
to
propose
on
the
issue.
So
what
we're
looking
at
really
is
that
we
would
have
a
something
in
the
charter
that
requires
the
charter
to
be
reviewed
by
a
commission
every
10
years,
and
we
we
made
it
two
years.
F
We
would
start
it
in
the
year
2028,
and
that
would
be
two
years
before
the
census
is
taken,
so
be
a
two-year
term
with
the
ability
to
lengthen
it,
if
approved
by
the
council,
and
then
that
would
give
enough
time
to
deal
with
some
of
the
issues.
F
So
I
think
most
people
felt
that
that
was
the
case,
not
all
some
people,
some
some
of
the
commissioners
felt
that
you
really
want
to
reserve
it
for
some
of
the
big
issues
and
have
council
dictate
you
know
what
when
and
occurs,
and
what
we
want
to
look
at.
F
So
the
other
issue
is
that
we
had
a
very
interesting
discussion
on
whether
the
there
should
be
any
authority
to
the
commission
to
place
something
directly
on
the
ballot.
F
If
you
all
recall
in
our
strategy
in
our
one
of
our
strategy
sessions
there,
the
city
of
detroit
actually
has
that
in
their
their
ability
with
their
commission,
and
so
the
majority
did
not
feel
comfortable
in
having
unelected
folks
send
something
directly
to
the
ballot,
and
so
what
we
determined
that,
if
there
was
you
know
what
our
language
indicates
is
that
if
there's
a
super
majority
and
we're
calling
it,
I
believe,
17
members
of
our
23
member
commission.
If
they
would
approve
something
it
would
go.
F
F
F
So,
in
terms
of
who
benefits,
you
know,
we
feel,
like
the
the
entire
san
jose
community
benefits
from
the
proposal,
since
it
does
establish
this
mechanism
that
the
charter
is
going
to
be
reviewed
on
a
periodic
basis
in
terms
of
the
arguments
against
it.
There's
a
lot
of
discussion
is
that
if
we
do
this,
it
really
becomes.
It
almost
starts
to
look
like
the
initiative
process.
F
You
know
california,
and
some
some
people
focus
a
bit
out
of
control
at
the
moment
that
initiative
process
and
that
it
allows
for
somebody
with
a
political
agenda
or
the
ability
to
be
misused
in
a
way
that
may
not
be
healthy
for
it.
That
really
should
be
reserved
just
for
larger
issues
that
really
affect
how
the
governance
structure
of
the
of
the
city.
F
F
So
again
we
had
a
robust
discussion.
That
kind
of
generally
goes
over
this
proposal.
We
did
also
add
include
language
in
there
that
if
we
that
the
city
would
provide
the
necessary
resources
that
the
commission
deems
it
needs
to
complete
its
work
and
as
long
as
those
are
reasonable
that
the
city
would
provide
those.
And
so
that's
that's
pretty
much
the
proposal
in
a
nutshell,
and
I
will
invite
any
subcommittee
members
to
either
fill
in
something
I
may
have
missed
or
correct
me.
If
I
misspoke.
C
Seeing
none
I'm
going
to
move
to
then
public
comment
on
these
recommendations.
The
clerk
will
call
the
first
speaker
beekman.
H
Hi,
thank
you
blair,
beekman,
here
to
first
clarify
I
in
my
previous
public
comment.
I
was
trying
to
respond
to
the
letters
from
the
public
from
pancho
rivera
for
this
item,
a
very
much
of
a
thank
you
that
you
know
this
was
a
very
interesting
report.
I
felt
and
very
well
balanced.
It
had,
I
guess,
kind
of
a
a
california
way
of
looking
thing
of
looking
at
things
compared
to
say
portland
or
columbus,
ohio,
and
thank
you
for
that.
H
I
found
it
to
be
well
balanced
and
and
towards
a
progressive
idea
that,
I
suppose
is,
is
kind
of
the
ideals
of
california
and
how
we
address
our
issues.
So
thank
you
for
that.
You
know
for
myself.
I
am
not
so
great
at
talking
and
and
understanding
the
depth,
the
concepts
of
direct
democracy
versus
the
democracy
of
of
of
social
action.
I
guess
it's
called.
H
I
can't
even
think
of
his
proper
term,
my
educational
skills
and
and
and
speaking
the
language
of
where
people
are
at
in
the
subject
matter
is
really
lagging
and
far
behind.
I
think
from
this
you
know
I'm
what
I'm
considering
that
there
is
a
very
possible
future
of
a
participatory
democracy
that
does
try
to
address
the
future
of
representational
democracy.
H
That's
how
I
think,
I'm
viewing
it,
I'm
not
going
to
use
the
term
direct
democracy,
because
there
is
problems
and
questions
with
the
proposition
process
and
the
and
the
recall
process
of
governor
voting
in
california.
That
needs
to
be
re-examined.
It
seems
thank
you
for
for
creating
the
idea
of
of
creating
a
charter
review,
say
every
10
years.
H
A
L
Thank
you
so
briefly,
I
I
think
I
agree
with
the
majority
of
the
subcommittee
that
non-elected
should
not
be
putting
something
on
the
ballot
with
some
kind
of
supervision
by
elected,
and
I
do
appreciate
the
suggestion
about
the
accounts
of
super
majority
over
ruling
or
whatever,
but
but
at
the
end
of
the
day
you
know
we
we
have
to
be
realistic
and
are
we
moving
forward
here
or
are
we
just
extensively
into,
I
believe
is
referred
to
as
a
sausage
making
process?
Thank
you.
F
J
Evening,
commissioners,
thank
you,
commissioner,
frank
matzke.
I
really
enjoy
that
presentation
and
I
appreciate
your
thoughtful
proposal.
I
agree
that
our
charter
needs
to
be
updated
much
more
regularly
than
every
35
years
and
in
the
same
way
you
know
that
our
terms
and
conditions
are
constantly
updated
from
apps
to
software
to
our
services.
You
know
to
keep
up
with
current
times.
J
I
feel
that
you
know
our
constitutional
document
should
be
the
same,
so
that
can
always
be
much
more
resilient
and
responsive
to
what's
happening
currently,
and,
I
would
say,
to
add
some
more
specificity
as
much
as
we
provide.
You
know
robust
civic
education
around
the
process
of
our
you
know,
city
budget,
and
it's
you
know,
months,
long
of
education
and
community
outreach.
I
think
that
we
can
apply
that
to
our
charter
process
within
this
10-year
span,
and
you
know
so.
J
You
have
civic
education
and
then
you
have
the
recruitment
process,
and
then
you
have
the
commissioners
who
work
for
it
should
be
a
two
to
four
year
term,
like
other
commissions
and
so
that
by
the
end
of
the
10
years,
you
kind
of
have
this
streamlined
process
of
community
engagement
and
education
and
recruitment
to
participate
in
the
commission,
and
then
it's
ready
to
go
and
ready
to
start
working
and
submit
their
proposals
or
studies
or
responses
and
as
you've
also
experienced
in
this
process.
It's
a
lot
of
work.
J
In
the
last
seven
months,
I've
been
adding
up
the
hours
and
you
have
met
over
nearly
70
hours
and
that's
not
including
the
time
you
take
to
research
and
study
in
the
subcommittee
meetings,
and
so
I
think
expanding
this
timeline
to
allow
more
meaningful
participation,
both
in
the
commission
and
within
the
community,
will
only
yield
a
more
better
solutions,
and
you
know
some
collective
collaboration
within
the
community
and
all
the
district
members
and
yeah.
So
thank
you
for
this
presentation.
J
I
really
love
it
and
I
think
that
the
commissioner
should
approve
and
move
this
proposal
forward.
Thank
you.
I
Thank
you
well,
my
only
comment
about
that
is
in
regards
to
you
know,
saying
that
the
politicians
that
are
in
place
will
decide
what
is
going
to
be
reviewed
in
regards
to
our
review
of
our
charter.
I
don't
think
is,
is
going
to
work,
because
we
see
that
the
issues
of
the
politicians
are
too
connected
with
the
ones
that
fund
their
campaigns,
the
businesses,
the
corporations
so
to
put
all
that
power
that
they
will
be
the
ones
to
determine.
N
I
If
we
look
at
our
charter,
I
think
has
to
be
looked
at
differently
and
that
what
what
the
charter
is
looking
at
now
is
trying
to
create
both
equity
and
our
climate
crisis,
to
have
those
two
lenses
as
our
lens
in
terms
of
going
forward
in
what
we
do,
and
so
with
the
climate
crisis
being
the
most
important
thing,
because
you
know
all
the
colors
and
all
the
different
you
know
orientations.
I
G
I
Talking
about
our
species-
and
you
know
our
our
civilization
going
forward,
and
so
this
is
the
most
critical
thing
that
we're
facing,
and
so
we
need
to
have
that
lens,
at
least
that
lens
and
we
can.
I
Equity
lens,
as
well
because
of
you,
know,
pre-existing
preferences
that
we
haven't
been
taking
care
of,
and
we
need
to
take
care
of
the
people
that
we
need
to
look
at
it
through
those
lenses
of
to
decide
what
needs
to
be
in
our
charter
so
that
we
have.
We
have
a
charter.
We
have
a
city,
and
these
are
the
issues
that
we're
facing.
I
So
you
know
not
to
leave
it
in
the
hands
of
the
politicians
that
have
that
are
greased
by
the
corporations
and
the
businesses
and
we're
seeing
it
now
in
terms
of
covet
that
they're
not
protecting
they're,
not
doing
their
job,
which
is
protecting
us
from
harm.
So
we
must
look
at
it
in
terms
of
our
climate.
C
Thank
you,
commissioners,
questions
thoughts,
comments,
feedback
to
the
subcommittee
on
the
recommendations.
O
Well,
thank
you
for
the
proposal
and
to
the
committee
for
its
work.
So
my
question
is
around
basically
having
a
charter
amendment
approved
and
then
brought
before
the
voters
this
proposal.
Does
it
envision
any
kind
of
vetting
process
to
ensure
that
whatever
proposals
come
from
the
charter
review
commission?
Assuming
that
it
meets
some?
You
know
the
threshold
to
be
to
bypass
the
council
directly
to
the
voters.
O
Does
it
envision
having
some
kind
of
process
or
protocol
to
ensure
that
whatever
gets
proposed
to
the
voters,
you
know
complies
with
the
law
in
any
other
sense,
you
know,
for
example,
let's
say
somebody
says:
hey
san
jose
should
secede
from
the
state
of
california
and
that
passes
the
charter
review
commission.
Is
there
some
secondary
procedure
or
protocol
that
would
you
know,
vet
whatever
gets
brought
out
from
the
charter
review
commission
and
brought
before
the
voters.
F
We
didn't
really
discuss
that,
but
I
think
that's
a
good
point
and
I
think
we
probably
would
all
agree
that
it
probably
should
be
reviewed
by
the
attorney's
office
and
whatnot
for
that
very
question
and
making
sure
that
it's
acceptable
and
legal
before
we
move
forward.
But
we
can
look
into
that
and
make
sure
there's
language
to
that
effect.
D
I
just
wonder
right
now.
Obviously,
city
council
has
access
to
the
services
of
the
city
attorney.
Sorry,
I'm
off
camera
again,
because
otherwise
my
computer
is
just
freezing
really
bad
internet
lately.
Is
there
anything
right
now
to
stop
the
city
council
from
putting
something
illegal
on
the
ballot?
Obviously,
I'm
not
in
favor
of
that.
I'm
just
curious
sort
of
what
already
exists
for
those
purposes.
P
There
are
processes
under
the
law
that
allows
the
city
attorney's
office
as
well
as
citizens,
to
challenge
the
actions
of
a
city
council
if
they
put
something
on
the
ballot
that
would
be
either
unconstitutional
or
illegal.
That
can
remove
it
from
the
ballot.
F
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
frank
for
your
your
presentation.
I
do
have
reservations
about
the
putting
things
on
the
ballot.
F
I
believe
that
if
a
citizen
or
a
resident
or
a
group
of
residents,
wanted
to
bypass
the
city
council
and
put
an
initiative
or
a
measure
on
the
ballot,
they
have
to
collect
35
000
signatures
and,
if
I'm
understanding
this
proposal
correctly,
17
political
appointees
could
take
something
and
have
it
put
on
the
ballot.
I
do
understand
that
a
super
majority
in
the
council
could
could
stop
that,
but
that
still
seems
to
give
a
tremendous
amount
of
power
to
17
political
appointees.
That's
just
my
only
comment.
Q
I
actually
agree
with
commissioner
gilman.
I
I
have
grave
reservations
about
giving
an
appointed
group
the
power
to
put
something
directly
on
the
ballot
when
it's
not
that
easy
for
other
folks
and
we
elect
the
council
and
they
can
do
it,
but
but
we're
not
elected
and-
and
I
I
do
not
support
this,
even
though
I
thought
it
was
worth
bringing
forward.
I
don't
support
the
idea.
G
Okay,
I
would
support
this
and
the
reason
I
would
support
it
is
because,
yes,
we
do
have
elected
representatives,
but
once
we
have
them
there
they're
very
few
elected
representatives
that
represent
a
million
people
and
once
they're
there
they're,
they
have
very
specific
ideas,
and
so
it
ends
up
becoming
mult
many
years
of
an
echo
chamber
where
everything
they
believe
is
reflected
in
policies
and
that
just
goes
on
until
they're
no
longer
in
office.
So
to
the
proposal.
You
guys
came
up
with
sort
of
gets
around
that
echo
chamber.
G
D
Yeah,
just
building
on
something
that
commissioner
gilman
raised
to
get
a
charter
amendment
on
the
ballot
is
actually
a
higher
threshold
than
to
get
a
an
ordinance
on
the
ballot.
It's
it's
roughly
double,
if
I'm
remembering
correctly,
so
I'm
just
putting
that
out
as
a
point
of
fact,
and
I'm
I'm
also
conflicted
and
probably
more
supportive
of
this
idea
than
barbara,
but
also
like.
Well,
let's
bring
it
to
the
full
commission
to
see
what
people
say,
but
you
know
I.
D
I
think
you
could
argue
that
the
threshold
of
70
000
signatures
is
possible
for
very
few
stakeholders
within
the
city,
if
any
certainly
more
possible
for
those
with
huge
pocket
books,
and
so
I
think
there
is
a
question.
D
This
might
not
be
the
way
to
address
it,
but
I
just
do
want
to
put
it
into
the
into
the
mix
that
that
the
threshold
for
charter
change
currently
outside
of
the
city
council
is,
is
nearly
impossible.
C
P
Yeah,
so
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
to
get
a
charter
amendment
on
the
ballot
is
15,
whereas
to
get
an
ordinance
initiative
measure
on
the
ballot
is
5
of
the
registered
voters
for
the
secretary
of
state's
office.
N
Thank
you.
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
in
general,
I'm
supportive
of
any
efforts
that
increase
civic
participation,
whether
it's
on
this
existing
commission
or
future
charter
commission
or
any
of
the
other
existing
commissions
that
we
have
in
the
city
of
san
jose.
N
So
I
would
be
supportive
of
this
regarding
the
future
commission
becoming
overly
politicized.
I
would
not
be
that
concerned
any
more
than
any.
Existing
commission
is
politicized,
whether
it's
the
planning,
commission
or
another,
because
that
will
unfortunately
probably
happen
with
any
commission,
but
in
general,
like
I
said,
I
would
be
supportive
of
any
efforts
to
get.
O
So
earlier
it
was
just
a
question,
but
as
I'm
thinking
about
it
more,
I
kind
of
have
more
concerns,
and
I'm
actually
equating
this
to
the
process
that
many
have
taken
to
amend
the
california
constitution.
You
know
one
of
the
concerns
or
one
of
the
issues
that
came
up
for.
O
So
I'm
I'm
intrigued
by
the
idea,
but
I'm
also
concerned
that
if
we
open
up
this
pathway
to
amend
the
charter-
and
it
becomes
so
open
that
you
can
kind
of
put
anything-
you
want
into
the
charter
because
the
because
the
charter
view
view
commission
wants
it,
and
then
you
know
a
very,
very
well
financed
entity
can
just
put
together
a
very
strong
campaign
to
support
it.
O
We
start
moving
into
this
realm,
where
we
start
seeing
issues
like
ballot
box,
budgeting
right,
and
so
I'm
a
little
I'm
a
little
bit
wary
on
this
proposal.
I
mean
having
a
standing
charter
review
commission
fully
support
that
idea,
but
having
it
giving
it
the
ability
to
move
an
idea
forward
directly
to
the
voters
around
the
council,
just
kind
of
screens
back
to
that
issue
that
we've
been
dealing
with
in
the
state
of
california
for
quite
a
while.
P
Yes,
I
just
I
wanted
to
just
raise
just
a
couple
of
comments.
One
thing
to
be
considered
one
thing
to
consider
is
that
a
body
like
this
with
the
authority
to
make
government
decisions
like
putting
something
on
the
ballot
may
not
be
considered
a
advisory
under
the
law,
meaning
the
members
of
said
commission
would
need
to
file,
what's
referred
to
as
a
form
700
and
disclose
their
financial
conflicts
of
interest,
as
well
as
refrain
from
participating
in
decisions
that
would
benefit
those
financial
interests.
P
Second,
there
are
certain
measures
that
can't
be
placed
on
a
primary
ballot.
I've
I
explained
that
the
last
meeting
that
employment
matters
can't
be
placed
on
a
june
primary
ballot
and
then
also
one
thing
to
specify,
and
this
this
is
an
issue
that
comes
up
common,
is
when
you
intended
to
specify
eight
council
members.
Did
you
mean
eight
council
members,
or
did
you
intend
to
refer
to
two-thirds
council
members
just
something
to
clarify
if
it's
eight,
that's
fine?
P
That
just
means
that
if
there's
a
vacancy,
you
still
require
eight.
If
it's,
if
there's
a
vacancy
for
example,
then
that
that
number
goes
down.
R
Yes,
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
comment
that
we're
going
to
be
able
to
see
what
it's
like
for
a
commission,
try
to
review
commission
to
present
ideas
to
the
city
council
to
be
put
on
the
ballot
and
we'll
be
able
to
firsthand
see
what
the
process
looks
like
how
ideas
from
a
charter
review
commission
are
addressed
by
the
city
council
as
we
move
with
our
recommendations.
So
it's
just
a
comment
that
I'm
looking
forward
to
seeing
how
that
works
out.
F
Yeah
just
to
answer
mr
vandy's
question,
I
was
looking
at
a
75
super
majority
and
when,
with
such
low
numbers,
you
don't
really
hit
exactly
75,
so
I
think
both
both
where
the
numbers
came
from
were
just
below
75,
not
quite
there,
but
they
were
more
than
two-thirds,
but
that's
yeah.
I
was,
I
thought,
it'd
be
easier,
just
to
have
a
number
versus
a
percentage.
C
C
Being
none
I'm
going
to
move
on
to
our
next
item,
which
is
commissioner
marshman
going
to
make
our
next
presentation
again
for
members
of
the
public
we'll
go
through
the
commissioner's
recommendations
from
the
subcommittee
public
testimony
and
then
we'll
hear
from
the
commissioners
asking
questions
or
their
discussion.
Commissioner
marshman,
you
have
eight
minutes.
Q
Q
I
let
me
go
through
this
fairly
quickly,
because
what
we
are
proposing
here
and-
and
this
is
adding
council
districts
to
make
smaller
districts
and
possibly
better
represent
communities
and
and
individuals
in
the
city,
frank
brought
this
up
when
he
was
with
the
other
committee
brought
it
over,
because
it
seemed
like
a
government
structure
issue
and-
and
I
agreed
what
we
are
actually
recommending,
though,
is
not
putting
it
on
the
ballot.
Q
Now
we
think
I
I
personally
think
it's
something
that
the
city
needs
to
seriously
look
at,
but
unfortunately,
redistricting
is
underway
for
the
next
10
years
and
well
underway,
and
a
lot
of
money
has
been
spent
on
research
and
and
a
commission
like
us,
been
working
for
a
long
time
and
there's
no
way.
This
change
could
be
passed
in
time
to
avoid
huge
cost
costs
in
in
time
and
money,
and
you
know
probably
fairly
wrenching
to
try
to
do
it
with
without
much
notice.
Q
Even
if
people
like
the
idea,
which
I
I
suspect
they
will
so
we
think
that
we
would
like
to
do
some
sort
of
advisory
memo,
asking
that
if
there
is
a
regular
commission
approved
which
which
we
do,
I
think
all
recommend
that
it
take
up
this
matter
and
take
it
up
in
a
in
a
time
that
gives
plenty
of
time
for
research
and
and
does
not
and
is
in
in
plenty
of
time
for
the
2030
census.
Redistricting.
Q
One
of
the
reasons
I
I
became
more
convinced
of
it
is
some
folks
involved
in
the
redistricting
commission
feel
that
this
this
is
going
to
be
a
difficult.
Q
One
is
a
difficult
one,
because
development
in
the
city
has
been
very
uneven
in
the
last
10
years,
a
lot
in
berryessa,
because
the
barth
station
things
like
that
there
are
concerns
that
barry
berryessa
is
no
longer
going
to
be
able
to
stay
together
as
a
community,
and
I
think
the
people
who
are
involved
in
that
probably
would
be
good
folks
to
be
able
to
talk
about
it.
After
after
it's
over.
Q
We
are
suggesting
that
the
review
examine
whether
dividing
the
city
into
maybe
maybe
12
districts.
I
I
think
we
all
feel.
I
know
I
feel
it's
important
to
go
slowly
with
something
like
this,
because
if
you
dramatically
increase
the
number
of
council
members,
then
you
dramatically
change
the
whole
dynamic
of
city
government,
which
isn't
often
a
really
good
idea,
but
you'd
want
to
know
could
could
this
really
help
better
better
group
like
communities?
Q
I
think
you'd
want
to
have
a
sense
of
whether
there's
public
support
out
there
before
you
go
to
a
lot
of
work
of
of
putting
it
together,
because
this
this
is
a
case
where,
if
you
know
we
might
decide
it's
the
best
thing
for
people,
but
if
people
don't
want
it,
I
hate
to
hate
to
let
it
get
to
the
ballot
and
have
that
be
the
huge
fight
there.
I'd
like
to
have
a
sense
ahead
of
time,
as
there
certainly
was
with
going
to
districts
in
the
first
place,
folks
knew
ahead
of
time.
Q
This
is
what
community
groups
wanted.
People
wanted.
It
I'd
like
to
know
that
there
are
most
of
the
large
cities
and
six
of
six
of
the
ten
largest
cities
in
the
country
have
eleven
or
fewer
council
members.
There
are
not
a
lot
out
there
with
with
many,
and
I
don't
know
if
any
have
have
increased
the
numbers
recently.
Q
So
I
would
like
there's
that's
something
that
needs
done
in
research.
Look
at
something
like
seattle.
They
are
unusual.
They
have
25
council
members,
even
though
they're
a
much
smaller
city
than
than
we
are.
It's
got
to
be
a
very
different
kind
of
government,
and
you
know
somebody
somebody
needs
to
look
at
that.
We
just
didn't
do
it
because
we
didn't
see
the
point
in.
Q
We
don't
think
it
would
be
responsible
to
put
it
on
this
ballot
and
they
could
also
look
at
whether
whether
there
are
other
ways
to
improve
representation
and
equity
and
representation
and
in
providing
services
without
adding
council
members.
I
mean
some
some
council
members
now
do
this
really
well
and
reach
out
to
their
people,
know
what
their
people
think
and
and
build
support
for
ideas
or
find
out.
Q
You
know
they
they
respond
to
their
community,
some
less
so
and
and
it's
it's,
I
don't
know
that
there's
any
way
to
to
deal
with
staffing
and
so
on.
That
might
might
help
that
that
become
something
in
that's
effective,
equally
effective
in
other
communities.
Q
So
I'm
going
to
stop
now
for
questions,
since
we
are
just
making
this
an
advisory
measure
for
the
next
charter
review
and
and
not
or
if
the
council
rejects
that,
and
I
think
the
council
should
take
it
up
and
consider
putting
it
on
the
ballot
for
next
time.
Thank.
C
You,
commissioner,
marshman
we'll
go
to
the
public.
The
first
speaker
could
be
called.
I
Oh
good
well,
thank
you.
Barbara
marshman
appreciate
your
insights
and
to
research
into
different
governments,
and
I
was
excited
to
hear
that
seattle
had
25
council
members.
I
think
that's
great
because
of
my
experience
with
our
city
council
members
has
been
terrible.
They
don't
represent
me
all
of
them
from
ken
yeager
to
anyway,
pierre.
N
C
O
R
I
More
representation-
and
I
really
appreciated
what
commissioner
seagal
was
saying
too-
that.
I
A
you
know,
echo
chamber
of
values,
and
I
see
that
in
terms
of
our
general
plan
and
that
our
general
plan
is
all
about
jobs
and
that's
why
we're
having
a
housing
crisis
and-
and
yet
even
if
you
want
to
change
the
general
plan,
you
can't
because
it's
all
you
know
you
can
spend
the
30
000
to
propose
a
general
plan
change.
I
The
only
thing
that's
going
to
get
accepted
is
the
general
plan
as
it
is,
and
so
it's
a
it
is
an
echo
chamber
and
that
that's
a
problem
and
and
then
in
terms
of
all
the
issues
I've
had
in
my
community.
You
know
without
any
support
with
the
pollution
and
noise
issues
that
we've
been
facing,
and
we
always
came
up
with
that.
We
need
more
local
representation,
even
even
with
this
hotel
that
has
planned.
I
Davis
didn't
know,
didn't
share
it
and
you
know
so.
You
know
when
we
say.
Oh
there's,
a
lot
of
good
outreach
yeah
that
man
does
a
good
job,
but
do
all
of
them
do
a
good
job.
No,
and
so
you
know
that
so
we
do
need
more
representation,
and
I
definitely
should
support
putting
more
representation
on
our
council,
and
I
guess
that,
hopefully
I
you
know
that
should
be
done
sooner
than
later.
I
don't
think
we
have
to
wait.
I
thought,
hopefully,
maybe
this
this
chamber.
H
Hi,
thank
you
for
this
item.
I
guess
to
quickly
comment.
Thank
you
for
the
words
of
tessa
on
the
previous
item
and
others
that
I
was
able
to
see
more
clearly
that
it's
the
ideas
of
the
the
the
to
have
the
city
charter
review
every
10
years
before
a
census
and
perhaps
actually
before
a
census,
and
perhaps
every
20
years
instead
of
every
10
years.
Maybe
that
can
be
a
solution
to
very
good
points
made
in
the
previous
item.
H
Sorry
to
take
so
long
to
say
that
for
this
item,
just
a
thank
you,
you
know
I've
been
learning
how
to
really
classify
you
know
the
ideas
of
reimagine
equity
and
open
democracy
that
we're
doing
the
city
charter
process
and
how
that
can
work.
These
are
ideas
of
equity
for
myself,
and
so
thank
you.
It's
it's.
It's
a
learning
process
to
understand
how
this
this
sort
of
process
can
develop
and
good
luck
in
how
we
can
move
forward
with
it,
and
you
want
to
go
slowly
with
it.
H
I
guess
I
I
don't
quite
know
what
else
to
say
about
this
with
this
item
at
this
time,
but
I
I
am
better
understanding
what
it's
trying
to
offer
and
do,
and
I'm
I'm
more
and
more
interested
in
in
ideas
of
what
it
can
do
in
the
future.
So
good
luck
and
how
this
can
be
a
a
work
in
progress
and
thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
commissioners
want
to
discuss
this
item.
Thoughts,
comments,
questions
feedback
for
the
subcommittee.
N
I
wanted
to
bring
up
a
couple
of
things
one
commissioner
marshman
talked
about
the
about
cities
that
were
going
through
it
or
lack
of
lack
of
cities
going
through
through
such
a
procedure,
but
we
take
a
look
at
denver
denver
which
is
going
through
through
this
right
now
and
they
are
increasing
their
representation
on
the
city
council.
N
And
if
you,
if
you
take
a
look
at
the
numbers
from
what
they
were
originally
back
in
the
1970s
to
60,
some
thousand
to
over
a
hundred
thousand
constituents
that
each
council
member
represents
and
and
and
you
can
see
that
the
the
workload
is
considerable.
This
is
from
somebody.
N
Who's
worked
at
city
hall
and
been
answering
phone
calls
throughout
the
day,
and
it's
just
overwhelming,
and
so
it's
so
our
constituents
are
not
being
represented
as
they
should
be,
because
there's
just
too
many
issues,
and
just
too
many
constituents
that
each
council
member
is
responsible
for
and
that's
why.
Cities
like
denver
are
going
in
the
direction
of
increasing
the
their
representation
on
the
city
council.
N
So
I
think
we
we
need
to
take
a
look
at
denver
in
terms
of
what
they're
doing
and
and
take
a
look
how
we
can
use
that
as
an
example
for
our
city
to
move
forward
and
increase
the
representation
that
we
have
in
city
hall.
N
I
I
think
it's
I
I
just
see
it
as
a
win-win
situation
and
we
can
take
a
look
at
different
ways
of
increasing
our
increasing
the
numbers
of
city
council
districts,
but
I
think
I
I
know
that
it
may
be
17
might
be,
maybe
maybe
a
little
stretch,
but
I
think
somewhere
in
there
we
have
to
take
a
little
look
at
a
number,
a
number
that
we,
you
know
feel
somewhat
comfortable
with
and
and
move
forward,
and
I
think
this
is
an
opportunity
we
have.
That
comes
comes
around
every.
N
You
know
what
20
years
when's
the
last
time
a
commission
like
this
met
with
what
20
30
years
ago.
So
it's
it's
it.
We
have
the
opportunity
before
us
and
I
think
we
need
to
take
advantage
of
that
opportunity
and
move
forward.
N
Take
a
look
at
a
number
that
we
felt
comfortable
with,
but
move
forward
with
increasing
the
the
number
of
city
council
members
that
we
have
at
this
time,
we're
doing
it
for
our
for
our
constituents.
You
know
who
are
lacking
very
much
lacking
in
representation
at
city
hall
at
this
time.
Thank
you.
C
A
Thank
you
and
thank
you,
commissioner
sanchez
for
mentioning
that
that
lack
of
representation
that
we
currently
have-
and
oh
commissioner
marshall
marchman,
if
you
haven't.
A
A
A
Currently,
don't
want
to
increase
council
members,
because
I
would
like
to
learn
more
from
their
point
of
view
right
on.
J
That
represents
us
and
now
represents
hundreds
thousands
of
people.
A
J
N
Yes,
I
I
see
this
this
proposal
of
adding
additional
council
districts
as
increasing
not
just
obviously
the
representation,
but
really
the
participation
of
our
community
and
it.
It
just
goes
to
speak
to
what
my
fellow
commissioners
just
said.
N
Right
now,
which
is
they
feel
that
there
are
some
communities,
some
neighborhoods
that
are
not
being
represented,
and
for
them
they
don't
have
a
an
ally,
a
friend
on
the
city
council,
and
so
this
proposal
really
is
about
them
and
having
their
voices
heard,
having
them
at
the
at
the
table
as
well.
I
don't
think
that
costs
should
not
prevent
us
from
doing
the
right
thing.
I
believe
this
is
the
right
thing.
N
The
timing
may
not
be
right
right
now
because
of
the
current
redistricting
commission,
but
I
would
like
to
see
this
proposal
in
the
very
near
future,
and
I
would
be
supportive
of
that
as
well.
F
Just
something
to
consider,
as
we
talk
later
on
about
mayoral
powers,
vis-a-vis,
the
council
and
the
city
manager,
I
believe
that
if
the
city
of
san
jose
were
to
move
to
a
strong
mayor
type
of
structure,
that
the
mayor
then
becomes
an
executive
and
no
longer
a
voting
member
of
the
city
council,
and
if
that
that
were
to
come
to
fruition,
that
might
be
a
scenario
where
at
least
one
additional
seat
could
be
created.
So
there's
some.
I
just
wanted
to
draw
attention
to
the
potential
similarities
and
overlap
between
those
two
ideas.
Thank
you.
C
R
I'm
sorry
I
was
I.
I
was
just
saying
that
I'm
very
interested
in
hearing
what
commissioner
marshman
is
going
to
say,
but
I
will
go
ahead
and
comment.
R
You
know
I
really
want
to
acknowledge
and
appreciate
the
the
many
positive
comments
that
have
come
out
from
commissioners,
as
well
as
the
public
regarding
adding
new
members,
and
I
agree
with
what
people
are
saying
in
terms
of
this-
will
really
increase
the
participation
and
one
thing
that,
as
we
were
looking
at
is
on
you
know
on
the
committee,
the
subcommittee,
I
I
went
from
thinking
you
know,
the
status
quo
seems
to
work
to
realizing
that
if
we
were
to
increase
the
number
of
seas,
that,
as
commissioner
sanchez
is,
is
mentioning
that
we
would
have
a
better
inclusive
representation
of
the
committee
of
the
community,
and
I
even
go
as
far
as
thinking
that
what
if
we
had
this,
you
know
an
expanded
city
council
would
we
be?
R
Would
we
now
have
the
high
level
of
disparities
in
our
city?
If
we
had
more
voices
and-
and
we
were
including
more
people,
so
I
think
I'm
not
sure
the
process
that's
going
to
be
followed
in
terms
of
our
recommendation,
but
I
would
definitely
like
to
see
our
subcommittee
continue
discussing
this
item
in
the
feedback
and
to
see
if
there
isn't
a
way
that
we
were
concerned
with
the
redistricting
processing
and
process.
R
That's
going
on
right
now
and
recognizing
that
to
make
the
change
right
now
or
even
propose
to
make
it
now
what
would
be
problematic,
however,
we
should
think
about
really
figuring
out.
Well,
how
soon
could
the
city
council
put
this
on
the
ballot
and
and
make
a
change
in
time
for
for
the
next
census?
You
know
just
making
sure
and
if
well
that's
that's
the
main
thing.
You
know
really
strengthening
our
proposal
to
the
city
council.
E
No,
it's
not
really.
It's
not
really
a
question,
but
I'll
make
my
comment
initially,
I
was
opposed
to
barbara's
initial
thought
of
you
know
increasing
by
no
more
than
two,
because
I
just
don't
think
that
increasing
the
city
council
is
is
appropriate
at
this
time.
I
think
it's
a
false
narrative
to
suggest
that
by
increasing
the
number
of
council
members,
you
get
better
representation
out
of
the
council
members,
that's
that's
just
a
false
narrative.
E
I
represented
85
000
people
and
my
my
staff,
and
I
did
it
very
well
and
I
had
a
very
diverse
community
and
and
so
it
it.
You
know,
I've
said
this
before
it
comes
down
to
leadership.
E
You
can,
you
can
have
75
council
members,
you
know
for
a
population
of
a
million,
and
if
the
council
member
doesn't
want
to
work,
then
the
constituency
is
not
going
to
be
represented
and
I
think
that's
that's
more
the
problem
than
how
many
council
members
there
are,
and
so
having
said
that,
I
I
I
think
that
barbara's
memo
is
sort
of
strikes
the
right
tone
in
that.
E
Let
let
the
let
the
next
commission
or
the
council
take
a
look
at
what
the
redistricting
committee
does
with
redistricting
in
the
city
and
how
are
those
boundaries
drawn?
Are
they
splitting
communities
of
color?
Are
they
splitting
certain
ethnicities
are,
you
know,
are,
is
the
emerging
of
of
communities
that
were
split
before
I
think
doing
it
before
the
redistricting
commission?
Does
their
work
and
sets
up
the
new
boundaries
for
the
for
the
city?
E
Is
is
problematic,
and
so
I
think
barbara's
way
of
looking
at
it
of
you
know,
wait
to
see
what
res
redistricting
does
and
then
have
the
commission
in
the
future.
Look
at
the
issue
of
do
we
really
need
more
council
members
and-
and
I
think
that
question
needs
to
be
answered
by
either
council
or
the
redistricting
committee-
is
it
about
more
representation
or
better
representation?
E
Those
are
two
different
things
and
I
think
that
it's
about
better
representation
and
that
may
come
out
of
how
the
redistricting
is
works
out.
Maybe
you're
going
to
get
better
candidates
who
represent
the
the
constituency
where
they,
where
they
they
live
and
and
perhaps
that's
going
to
make
for
better
candidates
in
some
of
these
council
districts.
E
Q
Yes,
I
first
of
all
I
have
not
talked
to
communities
of
interest
that
opposed
this.
This
has
not
been
out
really
in
in
the
public
as
an
active
proposal.
As
far
as
I
know,
and
while
it's
true
I'm
not
a
disadvantaged.
Q
In
a
disadvantaged
cloud
classification,
I
certainly
know
what
it's
like
to
not
not
be
represented
by
a
particular
council
member
won't
go
into
that,
but
I
you
know
I've
often
not
agreed
with
with
things
that
were
happening
and
some
of
them
I
wrote
about
some
of
them.
I
didn't
so,
but
we
don't
know-
and
my
point
in
raising
you
know
find
out.
I
think
we
need
to
do
the
outreach
and
see
if
people
think
that
it
is
absolutely
true
that
more
districts
may
not
improve
representation.
Q
They
could
just
make
they
might
improve
representation
in
that
in
that
they
would
focus
on
narrower
cross-sections
of
of
the
community,
but
that
can
have
its
downside
it
can.
It
can
also
lead
to
more
of
what
we
would
think
of
as
a
nimby
attitude
of
you
know,
I'm
protecting
my
district.
This
is
a
small
district,
I'm
very
end
and
we're
not
going
to
compromise
and
to
get
anything
done
in
in
a
city
or
a
nation.
You
really
need
the
ability
to
compromise
and
turns
about
getting
too
large
too
quickly.
Q
Is
that
that
might
be
the
tendency
to
be
insular
could
be,
could
be
greater
and
that's
both
for
disadvantaged
communities,
communities
of
interest
and
for
others.
I
think,
oh
and
there's
plenty
of
time,
there's
plenty
of
time
to
to
do
this
study
and
get
it
to
the
ballot
before
the
2030
census.
There's
plenty
of
time
to
do
that.
O
Thank
you.
This
is
actually
more
of
a
procedural
question.
I
think
this
may
be
more
appropriately
directed
towards
mark
vanni.
Can
we
approve
a
recommendation
that
can
we
approve
a
memo
that
actually
does
not
propose
any
kind
of
change
to
the
to
the
charter
and
is
rather
just
more
of
a
hey?
This
is
something
the
city
should
look
at.
A
Yeah,
I
just
really
want
to
underscore
what
commissioner
lizat
said.
I
think
this
is
really
an
issue.
Better
representation
is
something
many
of
us
feel
we
want
within
our
districts
at
different
times
for
different
reasons,
and
it's
not
really
a
matter
of
the
size
of
the
district.
It
is
again
whether
the
council
member
wants
to
work
or
not,
so
this
really
goes
to
the
ballot
box
and
who
your
council
members
are
that
are
who
your
candidates
are
for
counts
for
your
district
council.
A
So
I
would.
I
would
also
say
that
this
is
something
that
is
something
that
is
should
be
dealt
with
within
the
council
offices
and
maybe
increase
it
by
two,
because
there
are
some
areas
that
are
extremely
large
and
the
berryessa
area
was
one
that
was
mentioned
is
a
changing
district,
with
business
going
in
and
with
residential
there
as
well
and
trying
to
be
something
that
may
need
to
be
a
different
dis,
two
different
districts,
but
certainly
not
a
big
overhaul
of
many
many
districts.
A
N
Yeah
just
one
final
thing,
I
think
maybe
we
had
to
take
a
survey
of
the
staff
for
each
of
the
council
members
and
ask
the
staff
themselves
what
we
deal
with,
because
we
also
staff
about
the
the
the
hundreds
and
hundreds
of
calls
that
they
field
and
and
the
issues
that
they're
trying
to
resolve
on
behalf
of
their
council
person.
N
I
think
you
will
start
getting
an
idea
there
in
terms
of
the
tremendous
workload
that
they're
under
and
again
because
of
the
because
of
the
the
size
of
the
district
and
how
they've
grown
so
much
over
the
last
several
decades
and-
and
so
I
think
that
might
that
might
be
one
way
to
to
move
forward
with
this.
This
topic
is
to
ask
the
people
who
are
right
in
the
middle
of
things.
N
Ask
them
what
kind
of
workload
that
they're
under
trying
to
resolve
all
the
issues,
all
the
problems
that
that
come
up
on
a
daily
daily
basis,
and
it's
considerable
and
just
just
one
issue.
Let's
say
the
homeless
issue
takes
a
lot
of
time,
just
that
one
issue
itself
and
that
doesn't
include
all
the
the
other.
N
Numerous
issues
that
are
out
there
that
that
confront
our
our
city
council
people
every
day,
but
I
think
I
think
we
definitely
get
some
good
feedback
from
from
the
staff
themselves
in
terms
of
the
workload
that
they're
under,
because
they
just
can't
finish
that
that's
that's
the
bottom
line,
meaning
they
really
don't
can't
represent
all
over
100
000
people
in
that
particular
district.
That's
why
the
proposal
you
know
I
favor
is
that
we
we
do
increase
our
city
council
all
right.
Thank
you.
Thank.
K
Thanks,
I
I
agree
with
some
of
what's
been
said
here.
I
I
do.
K
I
do
recognize
that
you
know
representation
very
much
hinges
on
you
know:
who's
in
office
and
leadership
and
and
those
kinds
of
things
you
could
certainly
have
someone
who
gets
elected,
who
checks
out,
and
they
probably
won't
be
in
office
for
very
long
because
they'll
get
voted
out,
but
at
the
same
time
I
think
that
either
consciously
or
or
unconsciously,
that
you
know
elected
officials
ask
themselves
you
know
who
votes
who
votes
for
me
and
or
who
turns
out
to
vote,
and
I
think
that,
even
within
within
large
districts
as
they're
currently
designed,
you
could
have
inequities
in
participation
even
within
a
district.
K
K
So
I
think
that
you
know
one
of
the
things
that
I'm
least
I'm
hearing
is
that
there's
still
a
lot
of
people
who
feel
unrepresented
in
this
system
that
potentially
increasing
the
size
of
districts
will
create
a
structural
incentive
for
for
for
our
city
council
members
to
think
more
carefully
about
who's
in
there
who's
in
their
district
who
votes
for
them?
Who
votes
regularly?
K
I
think
it
could
address
some
of
the
inequities
at
the
same
time,
there
is
a
real
concern
about,
I
think,
narrow
self-interest,
particularly
things
like
housing,
which
disproportionately
affects
communities
of
color
and
getting
access
to
affordable
housing
and
blocking
development
where
it's
badly
needed.
So
there's
a
lot
of
things
to
think
about
here,
but
I
just
get
a
sense
that
many
members
of
the
community
may
not
have
super
strong
opinions
on
this,
because
it's
kind
of
a
technical
issue.
K
Q
I
I
just
had
to
note
that
the
idea
of
overworked
staff
getting
way
too
many
phone
calls
they
can't
deal
with.
This
would
be
an
example
of
a
way
to
look
at
improving.
Q
Equity,
equal
access
and
responsiveness,
more
more
staff
and
and
maybe
higher
salaries
for
more
specialized
or
competent
staff.
I'm
not
saying
I,
I
believe
two
more
districts
would
be
a
good
thing
for
us
to
do,
but
but
there
are
other
ways
to
improve
service
and
improve
outreach
and
there's
a
wide
disparity
now
in
the
council
districts.
Some
do
it
well
and
some
don't
and
they're
all
the
same
size
and
they're
all
big.
N
Yes,
I
just
wanted
to
kind
of
echo
some
of
the
comments
from
commissioner
sanchez,
because,
even
though
there
are
10
city
council
districts,
not
all
10
districts
are
equal.
Some
are
obviously
in
need
of
more
services,
more
resources,
and
while
you
may
have
one,
for
example,
one
council
district
with
say
10
neighborhood
associations
in
another
district,
you
might
have
30
neighborhood
associations,
which
is
great
for
neighborhood
participation,
but
the
reason
they
are
most
likely
participating
is
because
they
have
more
issues
and
more
concerns
within
their
neighborhoods.
N
And
so
that's
the
reason
why,
having
increased
city
council,
both
council
members
and
council
staff
would
help
to
help
with
you
know
resolving
some
of
those
issues
that
are
not
being
met
right
now
in
the
community.
So
not
all
council
districts
are
the
same.
Some
are
just
quite
more
busy
than
than
others
and
that's
the
reason
why.
I
would
think
that
adding
the
size
to
the
city
council
would
help
in
that
way.
O
Yeah,
thank
you.
So
the
way
I'm
understanding
what's
being
proposed
is
that
it's
not
it's
not
a
firm,
a
firm
decision
on
saying,
hey,
let's
expand
by
two
seats.
What
it's
saying
is:
let's
put
the
time
into
it,
to
determine
how
much
of
an
expansion
we
need
and
have
a
proposal
ready
before
the
2030
census
is
that
is
that
right?
Okay,
thank
you,
and
what
I'm
hearing
from
you
know
from
from
those
who
want
to
see
more
immediate
changes.
O
Let's
just
pick,
we
got
to
pick
something
kind
of
number
and
move
towards
expansion
now,
so
I
just
want
to
make
sure
that
I'm
understanding
and
hearing
the
different
arguments
correctly
here,
but
one
one
point
thing
that
I
bring
up
that
was
just
related
to
berryessa,
because
I've
heard
it
kind
of
brought
it
up
twice.
I
mean
you
know.
If
we
look
in
the
barriers,
district
or
district
four
more
broadly
right,
we
can,
I
mean,
there's
a
clear
difference.
You
can
see
a
clear
difference
between
two
different
areas
of
the
district.
O
The
eastern
side
of
the
district
is
but
definitely
much
more
populated
right.
The
heart
of
berryessa
is
berryessa,
but
when
we
start
looking
at
alviso
in
north
san
jose,
the
nature
of
those
neighborhoods
starts
changing
pretty
dramatically
and
also
too
a
lot
of
the
changes
that
have
coming
are
going
to
happen
in
the
coming
years
are
well
may
center
around
the
north
first
corridor
can
center
around
around
the
berryessa
bart
station.
O
You
know
these
changes
are
going
to
come
and
I
definitely
think
we
have
to
put
some
intentional
thought
into
what
redistricting
look
like
and
it
may
impact
us
to
four.
But
but
to
be
honest
with
you,
I
mean
at
some
point
too.
I
can
say
that
the
current
map-
I
don't
know
if
the
current
map
allows
for
these
different
neighborhoods
to
have
their
voices
heard.
The
same
way
I
mean
I'm
sure
many
folks
know.
O
Alviso
has
constantly
felt
that
it
has
been
left
out
of
the
conversation
for
a
lot
of
things
that
happen
in
the
city.
I'm
just
sharing
some
perspective,
I'm
still
processing
on
which
proposal,
which
approaches
the
better
way
to
go,
but
it
sounds
like
so
far
there's
a
distant
consensus
on
looking
at
the
quality
of
representation
on
the
city.
S
All
right
good
evening,
everyone,
because
I
wanted
to
wait
and
hear
a
little
perspective
on
this
and
want
to
provide
mine.
You
know
the
time
for
justice,
equality
and
inclusion
has
always
been
put
back.
When
I
heard
commissioner
tran
talk
about
2030,
that's
basically,
nine
years
from
now,
our
existing
redistricting
committee
for
the
city
of
san
jose
will
have
a
decision
and
we'll
have
the
districts
redrawn
before
the
beginning
of
this
new
year
or
early
in
the
new
year,
so
that
people
will
know
what
districts
that
they're
running
in
for
the
2022
elections.
S
I
I
I
would
really
encourage
us
to
move
this
along
now.
It's
it's
quite
it's
pretty
obvious
that
smaller
districts
will
be
written
around
the
neighborhoods
of
interest
and
therefore
you
will
get
a
more
diverse
city
council.
I
heard
a
lot
of
folks
talk
about.
You
know
how
many
folks
they've
represented
how
many
folks
that
the
existing
council
members
represent
I've
heard
folks,
say:
they'll
vote
people
out
if
they're
not
representing
and
that's
the
case.
You
have
certain
council
members
and
we
all
know
this-
that
work
harder
than
others.
S
S
So
I'm
not
going
to
give
folks
a
pass
and
say:
let's
give
people
help,
because
they
need
extra
help
for
the
for,
because
of
the
growing
communities.
What
I'm
talking
about
is
equality
and
and
fair
representation
on
the
council
from
all
different
communities.
So
if
we
get,
if
we
get
smaller
districts,
you'll
have
better
representation
of
what's
in
those
smaller
districts,
because
it
will
look
like
who
they
believe
should
be
representing
them.
That's
where
I
stand.
R
So
I'm
searching
for
a
or
a
timeline.
R
Thank
you,
commissioner,
calendar
for
for
your
urgency
and
and
your
comments,
and
I
agree
that
that
we
need
to
move
forward
and-
and
there
should
not
be
a
delay
in
doing
this,
and
I
suppose,
commissioner
calendar
you
were
thinking
that
the
current
redistricting
commission
continues,
as
is
with
their
work,
to
do
to
draw
the
lines
for
the
10
districts
that
currently
exist
and
then,
at
the
same
time
we
move
forward
with
a
recommendation
for
adding
more
city
council
districts.
Put
that
on
the
ballot.
R
When
and
if
that
passes,
then
those
lines
are
redrawn.
Then-
and
I
don't
see
you,
I
don't
know,
if
you're,
if
that's
what
you
meant,
but.
R
Okay,
so
then
thank
you
and-
and
I
think
that
that
that
makes
I
you
know-
that
is
what
I
agree
with
as
well,
and
it
makes
perfect
sense.
You
know
when
this
first
came
forward.
R
I
believe
it
was
commissioner
posadas
that
first
introduced
the
concept
where
we
have
we've
actually
doubled
in
size,
since
our
lines
were
drawn-
and
I
couldn't
even
imagine
going
from
10
to
20
to
make
up
that
that
that
change,
but
I
think
there
it
seems
to
be
common
belief
that
we
need
to
do
more.
R
We
need
to
have
more
seats
and
and
better
representation,
and
I
was
also
going
to
suggest
that
this
working
in
this
area
would
be
a
the
perfect
place
for
the
office
of
let's
see,
I'm
trying
to
get
their
the
correct
name,
the
the
office
of
of
equity
and
inclusion,
to
be
involved,
because
we
really
have
to
figure
out
what
is
the
right
number?
What
is
the,
what
is
the
right
number
is
is
actually
what
we
need
more
than
anything.
R
I
know
that
I
cannot
imagine
having
20
city
council
seats
and-
and
I
don't
I'm
not
saying
we
would
go
there,
but
we
we
do
have
to
do
the
research
to
really
see
what
is
it
that
we're
trying
to
accomplish
in
our
city-
and
I
I
mean
I-
I
lament
constantly
what
has
happened
in
our
city
and
the
inequity
in
and
pretty
soon.
R
You
know
when,
when
we
we
all
received
some
of
us
received
the
2021
silicon
valley
index
that
shows
the
disparities
and
how
bad
they
are
we'll
be
seeing
more
information
along
those
lines
soon,
and
so
we
know
that
that
this
area
needs
to
be
addressed,
and
this
is
a
good
way
to
do
it.
And
you
know
the
final
thing
you
know
we
were
talking
about
berryessa
and
I
I
live
in
district
8
and
I'm
sure
all
our
arlo
districts
have
gone.
A
lot
have
undergone
a
lot
of
change.
R
I
I
don't
believe
that
we'll
get
to
have
20
seats,
but
we
have
to
find
the
right
number
in
order
to
achieve
the
inclusion
and
equity
that
that
should
be
our
goal.
R
I
also
want
to
add
that
it
would
be
good
to
hear-
and
I
don't
know
if
any
of
us
have
been
following,
but
it
would
be
good
to
hear
what
the
what
the
redistricting
committee
is
is
looking
at
how
they're
facing
the
challenge
of
creating
lines,
redrawing
the
lines
and
promoting
the
inclusion
and
the
democratic
opportunities
for
our
city
within
the
10
districts
that
we
have.
R
Q
I'm
fine
with
with
going
with
something
sooner
there's
just
a
lot
of
cost
involved
and
you
would
have
to
get
districts
drawn.
The
districts
that
are
being
drawn
now
would
have
to
be
in
place,
I
believe
for
the
20
for
for
next
year's
elections
and
then,
if,
if
there's
a
decision
to
do
something
faster
than
2030,
you
could
do
that.
Q
Q
I
I
would
like
to
talk
to
some
folks
and
obviously
denver
has
concluded
that
it
will
be.
I
would
like
to
understand
how
some
of
the
larger
council
places
work.
So
I
would
just
because
it's
a
major
change
and
it
would
change
that,
whether
it's
two
or
four
or
whatever
council
members,
any
little
bit,
is
going
to
change
the
dynamic
tremendously
in
city
hall
and-
and
I
think
we
need
time
to
look
at
that
and
not
just
toss
out
a
number
and
say
we're
going
to
do
this
by
the
2024
election.
C
You,
commissioner,
vice
chair
johnson.
J
Thank
you.
I
also
want
to
echo
the
concerns
of
commissioner
marshman
and
fuentes.
I
think
this
is
something
that
we
need
more
time
and
resources,
so
we
can
fully
research
this
and
do
our
due
diligence.
It's
a
huge
issue
and
we
were
given
this
maybe
a
month
ago,
and
so
we
haven't
been
able
to
focus
the
time
that
we
needed
to
to
really
fully
vet.
This
idea
out,
I
know
for
our
subcommittees.
K
Just
a
question
for
attorney
vanni:
it
is
possible
if
I'm
not
mistaken,
to
do
sort
of
a
mid,
mid-decade
redistricting
right,
there's
nothing
in
the
law
against
that
santa
clara
did
that.
P
A
Thank
you.
I
would
like
to
echo
commissioner
johnson.
I
think
this
issue
is
really
big
and
we
are
giving
very
limited
time.
We
need
more
time.
We
also
need
to
talk
to
the
redistricting
commission
to
understand
where
they
are
and
we
are
proposing
a
charter
amendment
that
could
possibly
change
the
mayor
council
structures.
A
S
Yeah,
I
just
wanted
to
point
out
that
the
largest
mid-year
redistricting
that
I'm
aware
of
was
with
the
santa
clara
valley
water
district
in
2009.
I
was
sitting.
I
was
part
of
the
process
when
joe
cotto's
bill
ab466
ordered
the
redistricting
of
the
entire
santa
clara
valley,
water
district.
We
had
five
districts
and
we
had
to
do
seven
and
then
had
to
actually
do
redistricting
two
years
subsequent
to
that
in
order
to
make
way
for
the
decennial
census
for
redistricting.
So,
yes,
it's
possible.
Yes,
it
can
be
done.
S
What's
the
right
number,
I
don't
know,
but
I'm
going
to
argue
that
10
districts
isn't
right
and
that,
even
if
we
add
on
by
two
that
may
be
right,
it
can
definitely
be
done,
but
the
redistricting.
That's
that's
going
on
existing
that
won't
be
affected
by
any
decision
that
we
make,
because
it
will
already
be
done.
The
red
the
districts
will
already
be
written.
S
What
I'm
saying
is
to
redistrict
the
entire
city
to
add
on
x
amount
of
seats,
but
I
think
it'd
be
I'd,
love
to
kick
it
back
to
the
committee
and
if
the
committee
want
me
to
talk
about
my
experience
with
ab466
or
our
folks
that
were
involved,
I'd
be
happy
to
and
talk
about
how
we
definitely
got
it
done.
There
is
a
path.
C
Thank
you,
commissioner,
calendar,
and
I
would
advise
the
subcommittee
you
just
gotta
volunteer,
so
you
may
want
to
take
up
commissioner
calendar
on
his
offer
most
generous,
seeing
none
no
other
hands,
I'm
going
to
move
us
to
our
next
item.
Thank
you
for
that
lively
discussion.
I'm
going
to
move
us
to
our
next
recommendation
from
this
subcommittee
and
I
believe
it's
vice
right
share
johnson
is
going
to
be
presenting
our
next
item.
J
Yes,
thank
you,
I'm
going
to
be
sharing
my
stream.
Hopefully
I
don't
run
into
too
many
technical
issues
doing
that.
J
Okay,
so
I
have
a
topic
of
looking
into
whether
we
should
expand
mayoral
powers
and
after
careful
consideration
and
evaluation
and
research,
I
think
it's
it's
best
that
we
stay
with
the
council
manager
format,
and
I
have
this
graph
here
that
was
provided
for
us
by
the
city
of
what
our
current
responsibility
for
for
for
our
council
and
our
manager,
and
our
mayor
is-
and
I
think
you
know
we
talk
a
lot
about
equity
and
inclusion
and
representation,
and
I
just
don't
see
how
expanding
the
mayoral
powers
is
going
to
really
help
us
with
that.
J
We've
talked
about
how
there
is
a
huge
income
gap.
There's
a
there's,
a
social
capital
gap.
We've
had
historically
disenfranchised
residents
who
feel
like
they
don't
have
a
voice
at
the
table.
J
So
changing
to
a
mayor,
council
form
of
governance
will
siphon
the
ready,
pre-existing
democratic
power
of
the
council
to
one
person,
the
mayor,
which
will
decrease
overall,
equitable
representation,
accountability
and
inclusion,
which
will
conflict
with
our
council
directive,
five,
which
was
to
look
into
measures
to
increase
representation,
diversity
and
equity.
J
In
terms
of
my
proposed
amendments,
I
do
want
to
increase
representation,
and
I
think
one
way
for
us
to
do
that
is
to
expand
the
nomination
powers
of
the
entire
council
so
that
they
can
put
forth
nominees
for
the
city
manager
position.
I
think,
from
this
seven
months
that
we've
gone
through
this
whole
process.
J
We've
learned
how
important
the
city
manager
role
is,
so
it
makes
sense
that
more
voices
should
be
at
the
table
when
we're
hiring
for
such
an
important
role
for
our
city
and
my
the
reasons
why
I
think
this
should
be.
J
It
would
be
allowing
the
entire
council
to
submit
if
they
chose
to
or
to
back
another
council
members
nomination
will
foster
collaboration
and
ensure
equitable
representation
by
allowing
council
members
to
submit
and
applicants
that
align
with
their
constituents
values,
and
this
will
help
us
fulfill
our
fifth
council
directive,
which
is
consider
additional
measures
and
potential
charter
amendments
as
needed
that
will
improve
accountability,
representation,
inclusion
at
city
hall.
C
I
Thank
you
yes.
Well,
I
I
think
the
issue
you
know,
I
guess
we're.
J
I
I
Line
in
regards
to
the
political
agendas
that
were
part
of
this
charter
review
commission,
but
like
I've
been
saying,
is
that
we
haven't
given
enough
time
to
the
people's
agenda,
so
that-
and
I
did
write
a
letter
about
that-
and
I
hope
that
gets
addressed
so
that
we
really
put
time
on
the
critical
issues
that
address
the
people's
accountability
and
safety
and
issues
like
that.
But
in
specific.
I
So
I
want
there
to
be
more
time
put
onto
those
agendas
and
I
keep
seeing
that
that's
not
happening
and
now
we're
making
decisions
about
the
political
stuff
and
coming
towards
the
end
of
this
commission.
So
that's
a
concern
of
mine
and
it
hasn't
been
addressed.
So
please
work
on
that.
But
in
addition,
the
issue
that's
at
hand
here
about
the
strong.
C
I
I
am
very
against
the
strong
mayor
I,
and
so
you
know
we
see
where
it
came
from.
You
know
when
mayor
le
cardo
wanted
that
strong
mayor
control
was
when
he
wanted
to
send
the
workers
back
into
the
workforce
under
the
kovid,
our
kovid,
you
know
pandemic
and
he
didn't
play
google
stock,
and
so
when
he,
you
know.
E
I
Was
where
it
came
from,
he
wanted
that
you
know
people
all
the
all
the
council,
all
the
construction
trades
wanted
that
one
you
know
neck
to
choke,
and
that
would
be
a
mayor
where
they
could
have
control
and
you
know,
and
there
and
therefore-
and
I
you
know
ironically
well
literally,
what
happened
is
that
our
our
building
code
enforcement
and
you
know
construction,
whatever
the
head,
rosalind
ue,
had
to
fight
back
the
mayor
saying
no,
I
want
to
protect
the
people
in
terms
of
you
know
our
our
public
health,
and
so
these
are
the
kind
of
things
that
destroy.
A
L
Thank
you.
So
let
me
start
by
saying
that
I
strongly
agree
with
every
single
one
of
commissioner
johnson's
words,
but
what
I
want
you
to
consider
is
what
was
behind
putting
this
proposal
on
the
table
in
the
first
place,
and
I
will
put
it
to
you.
There
is
a
very
strong
possibility
that
our
mayor
became
frustrated
with
a
bunch
of
council
members
who
are
essentially
retiring
on
the
job
as
soon
as
they
get
elected,
which
is
the
conversation
that
you
just
had
under
the
previous
item.
Thank
you.
A
H
Hi
blair
beekman
here
this
is
a
really
could
be
a
real
big
one,
to
be
considering
first
to
thank
you
for
the
previous
item
and
just
all
the
efforts
that
I'm
hearing
about
the
concepts
of
what
can
be
our
future
of
good
participatory
democracy.
It's
really
nice
to
hear.
Thank
you
for
this
issue.
You
know
there
we
we've
had
to
be
dealing
with
with
with
the
flood
issues
and
coveted
issues
each
at
the
beginnings
of
those
processes.
H
We
were
very
disorganized
and
confused
how
the
structure
of
government
should
work,
and
you
know
for
as
much
as
the
person
on
this
item
has
described.
We
we
cannot
do
these
practices.
There
are
other
forms
that
we
have,
that.
That
is
basically
what
what
I
felt
was
the
beginning
of
this
charter
process
was
about
and
it
was
described
in
the
beginning.
H
How
can
the
mayor
have
strong
mayor
power
to
offer
some
sort
of
procedural
purpose
to
counsel
and
city
manager
decision
making
that
needed
to
be
better
defined,
and
it's
and
it's
just
small,
simple
procedural
matters
and
matters
of
brown
act
and
matters
of
how
to
practice.
You
know
good
government
counsel
at
the
time
of
say
an
emergency,
but
that's
the
stuff.
I
want
to
be
able
to
work
on.
We
have
upcoming
earthquake
issues
to
address
that.
H
H
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you,
commissioner
johnson,
for
that
proposal.
I
agree
that
we
should
not
move
to
the
strong
mayor
system.
J
Who
should
have
the
ultimate
power
to
speak
and
tell
or
make
decisions
it
should
be
collectively.
How
are
we
responding
to
this
emergency
and
collectively?
How
are
we
taking
care
of
our
community,
and
I
also
agree
that
expanding
the
nomination
powers
to
the
city
manager
would
be
much
better
and
provide
more
quality
candidates.
J
That
are
more
representative,
and
you
know
it
is
a
very
important
decision
to
hire
is
a
very
important
position
to
hire
for
and
the
more
robust
conversation
and
candidates
that
we
can
have
and
nominations
regardless
if
they
all
each
nominate
or
support
each
other,
it's
better
than
just
having
one
nomination
coming
from
only
one
filter
which
is
the
mayor,
and
so
I
agree
with
both
of
these
recommendations
and
again
I'm
just
echoing
that
I
think
for
emergency
powers
that
we
need
to
have
better
emergency
procedures
and
preparedness,
rather
than
just
handing
over
the
reins
to
one
person
to
decide
a
person
that
doesn't
have
emergency
training
or
you
know,
disaster
training,
and
so
that
would
be
something
else
to
consider
about
that.
B
Yes,
thank
you
for
sue
honestly,
I
don't
care
what
any
of
you
guys
do,
because
oh
it's
almost
like
predetermined,
give
an
example
of
what
I
mean
by
that
and
I
paint
it
is
because
I
can
I
I
I
respect
his
logic
and
I
respect
some
of
the
things
that
he's
brought
to
the
council.
But
this
charter
commission
was
founded
on
len
depp
electing
himself
now.
B
Secondly,
is
strong
mayor:
why
did
it
have
to
be
qualified?
Why
did
we
have
to
stay
mayor
where
you
has
to
be
checked
because
it
implies
a
perspective
of,
but
it
it
it's?
It's
almost
like
tainted
from
the
start,
because
you're
suggesting
something
this
is
called
within
the
context
of
a
courtroom.
I
got
a
lot
of
experience.
I
got
38
years
in
the
system.
Is
that
that's
called
a
leading
question,
you're
already
leading
the
person
to
believe
something
that
very
subjective.
B
B
C
Thank
you
items
for
discussion,
feedback
questions,
commissioner
gilman.
F
Thank
you,
commissioner
johnson,
for
your
presentation,
and
I
agree
overall
with
with
the
recommendations
that
you've
presented.
I
did
have
a
question,
though,
on
the
expanding
the
nomination
process
to
allow
council
members
to
make
nominations,
and
I
guess
the
question
is:
when
dave
sykes
announced
his
resignation,
his
retirement,
I
sort
of
envisioned
this
nationwide
search
for
a
top-flight
city
manager
and
the
council
chose
to
go
with
with
jennifer
mcguire,
which
that's
fine,
she's,
probably
very
qualified.
F
I
I
don't
know
much
about
her,
but
I
I
just
wonder,
would
it
would
the
typical
council
member
really
have
a
pool
of
candidates
from
which
they
could
make
the
nominations
from
it's
not
like
we're
we're
nominating
people
within
districts
or
necessarily
within
the
city?
And
did
you
guys
talk
about
that
when
you
formulated
that
aspect
of
the
recommendation.
J
Yes,
so
no,
unfortunately,
we
didn't
look
at
that
or
I
didn't
look
at
that
in
terms
of
nomination.
But
I
think
that
is
a
really
good
point
and
I
would
want
to
research
that
further
and
look
into
it.
E
All
right,
my
second
question
is
goes
to
mr
gilman's
question
and
your
recommendation
that
the
city
council
also.
J
Yes,
I'm
sorry,
can
you
lana?
Can
you
please
repeat
that
I
was
trying
to
open
up
the
presentation?
Oh
that's.
E
All
right,
that's
right!
So
what
you're
suggesting
is
that
right?
Now
it's
just
the
mayor
who
sort
of
controls
the
search
for
the
for
the
manager.
If
there's
a
replacement
and
you're,
suggesting
that
the
council
have
the
ability
to
be
part
of
that
in
in
nominating
people
to
be
interviewed
for
that
position
as
well,
so
they
have
some
input.
Okay,
so
I
just
want
to
share
with
everybody
at
the
water
district.
E
We
did
that.
Normally
it's
just
we
let
a
search
committee
when
we're
looking
for
a
chief
executive
officer
or
hire,
and
this
this
time
we
had
board
members
also
put
in
names
and
and
suggestions.
You
know
just
not
leave
it
to
the
surge
committee
and
it
actually
worked
out
better.
I
think,
because
each
board
member
had
somebody
that
they
had
worked
with
and
wanted
to
interview
and,
as
you
all
know,
mr
calendar
won
the
day,
but
the
the
ability
for
for
the
board
members
to
participate.
E
I
think
made
it
a
lot
more
inclusive
in
the
sense
of
we
were
able
to
bring
in
our
knowledge
to
the
process,
and
so
I
I
agree
with
your
recommendation:
to
have
the
council
be
involved
in
being
able
to
nominate
people
to
be
interviewed
for
city
manager
and
not
just
leaving
it
to
the
to
the
mayor
or
some
search
committee.
So
I
I
agree
with
you.
O
Thank
you
just
a
clarifying
question
because
of
looking
ahead
towards
commissioner
lizotte's
memo
with
the
statements
made
by
vice
chair
johnson.
Is
this
memo
intended
to
be
exclusive
of
commissioner
lazad's
proposal
to
expand
mayoral
emergency
powers?
Yes,
thank
you.
D
I'm
so
I
I
did
just
want
to
clarify,
and
maybe
I
misunderstood,
I
I
think
we
intend
to
bring
forward
both
both
memos
right
that
that
could
approve
both
commission
vice
chair,
johnson's
memo
and
commissioner
lizotte's
memo,
and
that
commissioner
vice
chair,
johnson's
memo
would
not
supersede.
Commissioner,
that's.
C
D
C
Just
well
we're
going
to
hear
that
next,
commissioner
lund,
yep.
T
T
I
can
hear
me:
I
wrote
a
memo
previously,
so
I'm
publicly
on
record
about
supporting
strengthening
the
mayor's
role,
so
I'm
a
minority
on
the
committee
on
this.
So
I'll.
Just
reiterate,
you
know
my
my
view
that
I
I
don't
agree
with
the
the
contrasting
narrative
that
empowering
more
of
a
mayoral
role
would
take
away
from
the
city
council's
role.
I
think
it's
different.
T
It's
a
it's
a
contrast
between
diminishing
the
city,
manager's
role
and
taking
those
authorities
and
and
those
powers
and
putting
it
onto
a
single
individual
who
was
elected
city-wide
and
I
may
be
the
minority
on
this
commission
or
I
certainly
was
on
the
subcommittee.
But
but
that's
still
my
belief.
T
I
do
think
that,
as
we
have
our
mayor
envision
now
and
with
you
know,
listening
to
this
commission
and
the
tendency
to
be
more
collective
in
decision
making,
it
doesn't
make
sense
to
me
to
have
the
mayor,
who
I
think,
at
least
in
my
vision.
It
does
not
have
a
role
for
him
or
herself.
That
is
something
that
they
can
achieve
within
their
own
staff
and
and
effort.
Even
you
know
the
mayor.
T
As
I
see
it
gets
to
hold
the
gavel
in
meetings
gets
to
do
the
state
of
the
union
or
sorry
the
state
of
the
city
address
and
gets
to
write
the
draft
of
the
city
budget
that
the
council
votes
up
or
down,
but
in
any
one
of
those
instances
you
know
the
mayor,
I've
seen
the
mayor
say
we're
going
to
put
a
five-minute
limit
on
council
member
comments,
because
we
have
a
lot
of
public
speakers
and
a
lengthy
agenda
and
council
members
can
say.
T
I
want
to
put
that
to
a
vote
and
I
don't
want
a
time
limit
and
that
has
been
pushed
back
on
and
we've
had.
The
mayor
lose
those
kind
of
votes.
So
even
procedurally
he
this
current
mayor,
but
a
future
mayor
does
not
really
control
the
council
in
any
meaningful
way
because
he
or
she
does
not
really
have
that
authority
enshrined
in
in
our
city
charter.
T
So
I'm
just
thinking
that
there
needs
to
be
a
lane
for
the
mayor
to
do
something
because
he
or
she
is
elected
city-wide
and
short
of
that
they're,
just
a
councilmember
at
large
and
what
is
the
who?
What
is
the
big
deal
about
city-wide
elections
and
all
the
money
that
goes
into
it?
T
We
could
just
as
well
go
back
to
the
systems
where
other
cities
do
it,
where
the
mayor
rotates
every
other
year
or
every
year,
because
it
is
basically
running
the
meeting
and
getting
to
cut
the
ribbon
and
getting
the
press
to
come
to
them
first
before
for
for
other
issues,
so
I
do
think
as
a
big
city,
our
mayor
should
have
some
lane,
whatever
authority,
that
is
specific
to
that
role
separate
and
apart
from
the
city
council,
it
doesn't
necessarily
have
to
be
a
full-on
quote-unquote
strong
mayor,
but
I
think
there
needs
to
be
a
role
each
out,
and
I
hear
this
commission
talking
about
you-
know
more
representation
and
more
city
council
seats
and
and
that's
something
that
I
would
support.
T
That
tendency,
though,
is
as
we
lift
up
other
voices
that
are
being
heard.
We
are
in
a
way
dialing
down
and
kind
of.
This
is
not
the
right
word,
but
but,
as
we
uplift
other
other
groups,
we
are
kind
of
dividing
and
withdrawing
into
more
specialized
opinions,
viewpoints
needs
and
there
needs
to
be
a
countervailing
force
that
unites
us
as
a
city.
So
is
our
political
unit.
T
The
district
level
is
our
is
our
political
unit,
the
city
level,
as
we
have
17
20
25
city
council
seats,
you're,
going
to
have
neighborhoods
really
put
at
the
forefront
the
things
that
are
important
to
them
within
a
two
mile
radius
of
where
they
live,
and
you
need
another
countervailing
force,
someone's
who's,
city-wide
elected,
who
sits
and
says.
As
a
city,
we
can't
do
that.
We
need
to
do
something,
that's
better
for
for
the
city
as
a
whole
and
that's
in
my
mind
what
a
city-wide
elected
official
would
do.
T
But
you
know
council
members,
I've
seen
people
say
they're
mini
mayors
or
whatever
council
members
need
to
get
reelected.
They
need
to
do
the
work
in
their
community,
but
sometimes
the
desires
of
a
particular
district
are
countervailing
to
the
larger
needs
of
the
city
as
a
whole.
We've
seen
this
with
housing,
we've
seen
other
things
and
so
there's
a
tension.
There,
council
members
are
beholden
to
very
electorate,
and
this
the
mayor
is
beholden
to
the
city
as
a
whole.
C
Thank
you,
councilman
yep
can
counselor
miller
percival.
Commissioner.
K
Yeah
thanks
and
thanks
to
commissioner
johnson
and
the
rest
of
the
subcommittee
for
this
proposal.
I
know
it's.
It's
been
a
lot
of
work.
I
was
just
curious.
K
Maybe
you
could
tell
the
the
the
whole
commission
a
little
bit
more
about
your
thought
process
and
things
that
you
studied
in
just
in
brief,
I'm
wondering
specifically
if
your
discussions
included
some
of
the
other
proposals
that
were
either
have
moved
on
or
continuing
to
talk
about,
one
specifically
moving
the
timing
of
the
mayoral
election,
which
would
you
know
dramatically
expand
sort
of
the
breadth
of
participation
and
and
in
mayoral
elections,
and
given
that
we
do
expect
to
see
an
increase
in
racial
ethic
diversity
in
the
in
the
in
the
electorate,
whether
that
had
any
part
of
your
discussion
in
in
your
decision
in
this
particular
proposal,
the
other
one
too,
I'm
thinking
about
is
policing
where
there's
a
lot
of
evidence
that
suggests
that
the
mayor
that
they
have
more
power
to
hire
fire
a
police
chief
or
those
mayors
are
actually
more
likely
to
be
responsive
to
community
concerns
about
police
misuse
of
force.
K
K
You
know
some
more
power
in
certain
areas
and
it
looks
like
the
next
proposal
is
sort
of
in
that
in
in
that
context,
in
that
in
that
line,
so
I
guess
I
would
just
throw
it
back
to
to
the
subcommittee
to
educate
us
in
the
sense
of
whether
you
thought
about
these
other
sort
of
proposals
and
how
they
influence
your
thinking
on
this.
J
J
I
think
for
me,
though
it
was
also
listening
to
you,
know,
presentations
from
past
mayor,
like
ron
gonzalez
and
then
having
more
of
a
discussion
in
our
subcommittee
about
what
mayor
reed
was
able
to
pass,
and
it
was
all
through
collaboration,
and
so
that's
that's
why
it's
like.
Well,
we
need
more
of
that.
Not
less
of
that
right,
and
it's
also
thinking
about
why
this
issue
came
to
the
table
in
the
first
place.
J
You
know
like
I,
I
don't
remember
any
previous
mayors
wanting
more
power,
so
that
goes
back
to
why
this
issue
was
brought
to
us
in
the
first
place
and
then
in
terms
of
in
terms
of
policing.
We
did
kind
of
talk
about
it,
but
we
talked
more
broadly
about
department
chairs
and
how
they
should
be
hired.
D
Commissioner
percival,
it
would
be
great
if
you
are
able
to
pass
along
the
research
you
referenced
regarding
mayors,
who
have
hiring
and
firing
power
with
being
more
responsive
around.
I
believe
you
said
it
was
complaints
of
abuse
of
force
by
police.
I'd
be
curious,
whether
that
research
sort
of
separated
out
other
aspects
of
the
strong
mayor's
power.
D
Like
I
don't
know
if
there
are
cities
where
they
they're
a
hybrid
and
that's
the
only
sort
of
piece
of
strong
layer
that
the
mayor
has,
I
mean,
I
think
I
guess
I
just
underscore.
What
vice
chair
johnson
was
saying
is
that
overall
we
felt
that
the
presenters
that
we
had
as
a
commission
had
made
a
pretty
strong
case
that
there's
there's
a
lot,
that's
possible,
given
the
current
powers
of
the
mayor
and
the
mayor
working
effectively
with
the
city,
council
and
staff.
K
Yeah
great,
thank
you.
I
mean
yes,
I'm
happy
to
share
some
of
the
stuff
that
that
that
I
have
with
with
the
subcommittee
or
whoever
else
would
like
to
see
it
yeah.
I
guess
I
was
just
gonna.
You
know
encourage
us
and
I
I
don't
have
strong
positions
on
this
on
this
particular
issue.
I'm
just
trying
to
get
us,
you
know
thinking.
You
know
I
think
forward
and
what
the
city
might
look
like.
K
I
know
a
lot
of
people's
positions,
at
least
from
public
comment
seemed
to
be
tied
on
this
on
the
strong
mayor
seemed
to
be
tied
to
their
opinions,
about
lecardo
to
some
extent,
which
is
natural,
and
you
know
I
totally
understand
that,
but
I'm
just,
I
guess
just
encouraging
us
to
think
about.
You
know
what
what
would
the
mayor
look
like
you
know
in
the
future
if
we
also
made
some
other
changes.
So
thanks.
F
Yeah,
you
know,
I've
definitely
observed
a
big
disconnect
between
what
members
of
the
public
think
the
mayor
can
do
with
what
the
mayor
really
can
do.
So
I
am
sympathetic
to
the
whole
idea
of
examining
the
mayoral
powers.
One
of
the
things
that
I've
learned
over
the
past
couple
of
years
is
that
a
lot
of
the
power
actually
resides
in
the
rules
committee.
They
act
as
the
gatekeeper
for
what
items
go
before
the
council
and
what's
on
the
agenda,
I
believe
there
are
four
members
of
the
council
that
are
appointed
to
the
rules
committee.
F
C
G
G
There
was
a
whole
bunch
of
reading
that
they
were
doing
as
part
of
their
recommendations
on
what
we're
doing,
and
so
I
just
wanted
everyone
to
know
that
I
did
that
reading
and
that
reading
was
against
giving
more
powers
to
the
mayor
and
and
so
just
wanted
to
remind
everybody
of
those
that
earlier
time
when
the
league
of
women
voters
asked
us
to
do
those
readings.
Q
First
of
all,
the
league,
as
far
as
I
know,
ended
up
making
making
their
position
more
flexible.
In
the
end,
I
was
a
little
surprised.
I'm
I'm
a
member,
and
I
should
be
up
on
this,
but
I'm
not
entirely,
but
I
think
they're,
because
so
many
large
cities
move
in
this
direction.
I
believe
they
wanted
to
leave
themselves
flexibility,
but
but
not
in
this,
not
in
this
case
and
and
I
would
not
want
to
see.
Q
First
of
all,
I
apologize-
I
had
a
I've
had
a
bad
summer
with
death
in
the
family
and
a
lot
of
complications
around
that,
and
so
I
missed
a
couple
of
our
committee
meetings,
including
the
one
in
which
we
discussed
the
committee
discussed
christina's
memo,
which
I
in
general,
I
totally
support.
You
really
framed
it
all.
Well,
I
I
still
wish
there
were
a
little
more
of
a
consensus
to
give
the
mayor
more
ability
to
one.
Q
One
thing
is
hiring
fire
the
police
chief,
because
I
do
think
it
has
become
so
clear
with
the
demonstrations
weekly
at
sam
la
carter's
house
for
months
after
after
the
george
floyd
demonstrations
and
people
clearly
felt.
The
mayor
was
the
person
who
who
was
at
fault
here
and
and-
and
I
think,
a
police
chief
does.
Q
Q
I
think,
generally,
we
need
to
stay
roughly
where
we
are,
but
I
I
would
support
putting
the
police
chief
under
the
mayor
with
the
concurrence
of
the
city
council.
Just
like
san
diego
does.
It
is
different.
It
is
a
different
dynamic,
but
the
the
city
council
down
there
does
have
the
last
say
on.
If
the
mayor
wants
to
hire
someone
or
fire
someone,
the
council
can
veto
either.
C
T
Yeah
just
to
address
commissioner
gilman's
point,
the
mayor
does
have
the
authority
to
appoint
committee
assignments
to
all
council
members,
but
I
believe
there
was
a
memo
from
a
council
member
trying
to
make
that
more
of
a
consensus
process
where
council
members
get
to
select
their
favorite
committees
and
I'm
not
sure
where
that
went.
But
as
far
as
last
year,
the
mayor
does
do
that.
P
C
Seeing
none
I'm
going
to
go
to
our
fourth
and
final
presentation
tonight
on
the
recommendation
from
the
subcommittee
and
I'm
going
to
ask
that
to
be
presented
by
commissioners.
E
E
E
So,
under
section,
8.8,
200
of
the
municipal
invest
the
city
manager
as
director
of
the
office
of
emergency
services,
with
the
power
to
declare
an
emergency
and
marshal
all
of
the
city
assets
subject
to
later
ratification
of
the
city
council
in
february
of
2017
with
regard
to
the
flooding
and
in
may
of
2020.
With
regard
to
the
protest,
declarations
of
emergency
were
declared
by
the
city
manager.
In
both
instances,
there
were
alleged
failures
of
leadership
before
and
during
the
emergencies,
with
no
elected
leader
directly
responsible
for
deployment
of
city
resources.
E
My
proposal
calls
for
its
charter
change
to
give
the
mayor
the
ability
to
issue
an
emergency
declaration
and
to
have
all
of
the
powers
currently
vested
in
the
non-elected
senior
manager.
The
mayor
is
accountable
to
the
public
and,
as
such,
should
be
accountable
to
them
in
times
of
the
disaster
and
emergencies.
E
Last
week
during
our
subcommittee,
there
were
some
issues
and
questions
raised,
and
so
I
want
to
continue
on
hoping
to
address
those
issues.
So,
as
I
said,
what
I'm
suggesting
is
adding
additional
power
to
the
city
charter
under
city
charter,
section
of
500
that
sits
for
502
that
sets
forth
all
of
the
powers
of
the
mayor,
so
I'm
suggesting
that
we
add
502.1
or
l
rather
to
give
the
mayor
the
power
to
declare
an
emergency
is
set
forth.
E
E
The
municipal
code
sets
forth
the
powers
of
the
manager
to
protect
the
health
and
welfare
of
people
and
property
and
they're
pretty
broad
and
basically
general
in
in
nature.
This
this
declaration
doesn't
go
on
forever.
In
fact,
the
manager
must
seek
ratification
of
their
declaration
within
five
within
seven
days
from
the
city
council,
or
else
it
expires,
and
if
it's
ratified
it
can
be
extended
for
another
30
days
by
the
council
and
multiple
times
it
can
be
extended
by
the
city
council
for
30
days.
E
Is
he
you
know
taking
a
walk
on
the
wild
side
by
him
or
herself,
so
the
mayor
doesn't
act
in
a
vacuum
right
now
the
municipal
coach
spells
out
an
emergency
services
council,
of
which
the
mayor,
the
city
manager
and
the
appropriate
emergency
services
personnel
need
to
recommend
to
council
emergency
and
multi
mutual
aid
plans
and
agreements,
and
they
meet,
as
called
by
the
chair
of
that
emergency
council,
and
that's
just
a
standing
committee.
E
There
is
also
the
office
of
emergency
services
and
the
city
manager
serves
as
director
of
the
emergency
services
during
most
times,
and
it
is
there
the
duty
of
the
city
manager
currently
to
proclaim
emergencies,
but
the
office
of
emergency
services
just
doesn't
deal
with
declarations
of
emergencies.
There's
all
sorts
of
things
that
the
emergency
services
does
that
don't
require
declaration.
E
E
My
memo,
however,
moves
this
power
over
to
the
mayor,
who
must
have
a
declaration
ratified
by
the
council
within
72
hours
or
as
soon
as
practical,
and
that
that
language
is
in
there
because
you
know
if
it's.
If
it's
a
major
catastrophe,
the
mayor
declares
the
emergency
and
you
know
it
may
take
you
know:
72
74
75
hours
to
get
a
to
get
a
majority
of
the
council
together,
and
so
you
want
to
have
that
leeway.
E
A
E
The
mayor
would
have
all
of
the
assets
of
the
city
all
of
the
departments,
the
d.o.t
emergency
services
at
his
ready,
and
he
would
also
have
all
of
the
personnel
in
the
emergency
services
unit
and
department
to
rely
on
to
help
in
whether
or
not
emergencies
should
be
declared
in
san
francisco
and
los
angeles.
The
mayor's
office
actually
has
a
small
unit
that
advises
the
mayor
with
regard
to
whether
or
not
to
make
that
declaration,
but
they
work
in
concert
with
the
emergency
services
manager
in
in
in
each
of
those
cities.
E
E
New
york
city
is
72
yet
two
hours
and
it
expires
after
five
days
unless
it's
ratified
in
los
angeles.
It's
seven
days
like
it
is
currently
with
the
city
manager
here
san
francisco,
it's
as
soon
as
possible.
Seattle,
it's
48
hours,
so
those
were
the
big
cities.
I
also
looked
at
some
smaller
cities,
toppenish
washington,
it's
72
hours
and
in
laurel
maryland
it's
48
hours.
When
I
last
met
with
the
the
committee
we
sort
of
decided
72
hours
was
probably
appropriate,
based
on
new
york
and
some
of
the
other
cities.
E
So
that's
my
recommendation
to
again
move
the
ability
to
declare
an
emergency
to
the
mayor.
As
I
said,
people
look
to
the
mayor
for
accountability
and,
as
we
saw
with
the
protests
and
also
with
the
flooding,
that's
who
people
were
looking
for
for
lead
for
for
responsibility
and
accountability,
and
if,
if
people
are
going
to
look
there,
the
mayor
should
have
the
ability
to
make
that
declaration
and
deal
with
the
consequences
politically.
L
Good
evening,
this
proposal.
N
Is
very
serious:
let's
look
at
the
details
who
decides
whether
there's
a
sufficient
emergency
that
the
mayor
should
have
this
power?
The
mayor,
the
mayor,
is
not
required
to
consult
with
anybody.
What
standard
does
the
mayor
have
to
apply?
He
has
to
he
or
she
has
to
say
in
writing
that
they
want
the
power?
That's
it.
If
there's
a
garbage
can
burning
somewhere
the
city.
Can
the
mayor
can
say
it's
a
state
of
emergency
and
we
have
to
have
the
police
aggressively
break
up
demonstrations?
N
N
How
long
does
the
power
last
72
hours
or
as
practicable,
who
decides
what's
practical,
the
measure
doesn't
say:
does
the
mayor
decide?
Does
the
council
decide
life
and
death
decisions
are
being
made?
The
lawsuits
are
piling
up
and
nobody
knows
who
can
answer
the
question
how
long
this
mayoral
power
lasts.
N
N
Why
do
we
need
to
give
the
mayor
the
authority
to
fire
the
housing
director
because
there's
a
flood
in
district
3.?
What
we
need
is,
if
you're
going
to
move
in
this
direction,
and
increasingly
I
don't
think
you
should-
is
narrowly
defining
the
scope
of
the
mayor's
power
and
the
nature
of
the
emergency.
Thank
you.
C
I
Okay,
good,
the
clock
should
start
when
I
start
anyway.
Basically.
I
Well,
I
agree
with
robert
brownstein
and
also
you
know
what
I
when
we
saw
in
regards
to
what
happened
an
example
with
cohen
and
our
mayor
and
how
he
wanted
to
push
everybody
back
into
the
workplace
to
make
money
for
the
city
and
the
thing
is
and
we're
seeing
it
even
until
today
he
got
all.
I
spoke
to
the
people
who
worked
in
building.
They
had
to
be
back
the
inspector
people,
all
those
the
staff
and
everything
had
to
be
back
very
early.
They
only
had
two
months
to
work
at
home.
I
He
wanted
everybody
back
in
city
hall
and
we're
seeing
it
now,
and
the
issue
is
when
you
have
a
politician
who
is
vulnerable
to
the
the
to
get
these
campaigns
that
he
has
to
do.
We
see
it
over
and
over
the
svo
supporting
our
politicians-
and
this
is
what
this
is.
This
is
how
it's
gone:
it's
chamber
of
commerce
and
we're
seeing
the
corruption
that
is
happening,
and
so
the
political
part
appointee,
whereas
the
the
the
the
city.
J
I
Doesn't
have
those
risks,
he
has
a
job,
he
or
she
has
a
job
and
they
have
employment.
They
don't
have
to
keep
every
four
months
every
four
years
to
get
that
job
back,
and
so
that's
where
the
corruption
comes
in
and
they
they're
servicing
the
the
businesses
and
the
corporations
they're,
not
servicing
the
people,
and
so
when
we
say
that
we
give
them
more.
Power
is
wrong
and
because
they
are
not
making
their
decisions
based
on
you
know,
protecting
us
from
harm.
They
haven't
done
that.
That's
why
we
have
the
pollution.
I
B
A
L
L
H
Hi
boy
beekman
here
thanks
for
this
item,
thanks
for
the
words
of
robert
brownstein,
it
was
really
needed.
It
reminds
me
of
my
place
kind
of
in
how
to
talk
about
these
issues.
I
hope
I
can
just
offer
some
good
background
in
in
the
work
you're
doing,
and
I
don't
ever
want
to
hurt
anybody's
feelings
and
working
on
these
things.
You
know
I
I
just
I
I
just
have
the
feeling
you
know
the
ideas
of
the
strong
mayor
in
terms
of
development.
H
We
are
really
ending
that
concept
and
we're
talking
this
whole
time
about
ideas
of
community
and
I
think
we're
developing,
really
interesting
ideas.
Now
it's
from
this
that
we
are
seriously
talking
about
the
strong
mayor
in
terms
of
emergency
services
in
our
future.
These
are
important.
Subject
matters.
This
is
the
subtlety
that
we're
gonna
have
to
really
the
back
and
forth.
That's
hopefully
gonna
that
that
will
take
place.
H
H
There
were
serious
problems
in
the
beginning,
just
procedurally,
how
to
function
as
a
city
government
that
they
had
serious
problems
and
questions
about
that
really
need
answers,
and
I
feel
the
sunshine
and
ordnance
ideas
and
the
ideas
of
technology,
accountability
and
its
guidelines
and
its
legal
precedence
set
an
incredibly
important
standard.
H
It's
our
good
practices
that
do
it.
That
has
to
be
the
starting
point
in
how
we're
going
to
have
to
have
a
long
debate
on
these
on
this
future.
Subject
matter,
thank
you.
R
J
Thank
you,
commissioner,
zazot
for
that
presentation
and
I'm
sorry
to
hear
that
you've
had
such
a
rough
year,
and
I
thank
you
for
your
dedication
to
this
commission.
I,
however,
do
respectfully
disagree.
I
think
that
what
we
need
here
in
the
same
that
it
was
brought
up
recently,
that
we
need
more
time
to
study
why
we
need
more
districts.
I
think
we
should
study
why
it
took
the
city
manager
so
long
to
declare
an
emergency
and
what
exactly
happened
during
that
time.
I
think
there
could
be
a
lot
more
information
in
that
process.
J
I
do
also
echo
bob
brownstein's
concerns
because
the
lack
of
specificity
in
these
powers
and
who
defines
them
and
how
they
are
defined-
and
you
know,
accountability
measures.
Why
does
the
mayor
need
all
of
this
power
and
why
isn't
it
more
about
a
specific
response
to
the
problem
that
is
happening
at
hand,
and
I
will
leave
it
at
that.
Thank
you.
B
Yeah,
first
of
all,
thank
you
for
the
check.
Tony
second
of
all,
white
supremacy
is
alive
and
well
in
this
city,
and
I
sincerely
mean
that
that
I
want
to
thank
the
speaker
for
reminding
me
of
that,
reminding
me
that
the
work
of
social
justice,
the
work
of
challenging
the
prevailing
wisdom
of
the
privileged
class
in
this
city,
that
derived
their
privilege
by
the
decapitations
of
native
americans
in
starting
in
july,
14,
1846
and
the
planting
of
the
american
flag
by
thomas
fallon.
B
B
Yes,
secondly,
is
that
the
concentration
of
powers
within
the
mayor
and
the
police
powers
that
she
was
describing
is
exactly
what
the
framers
of
the
united
of
the
united
states
constitution
and
the
declaration
of
independence
had
advocated
directly
against
and
what
tatoo
kenya
said.
No,
it
was
benjamin
franklin
that
those
that
want
security
at
the
expense
of
liberty
are
not
worthy
of
the
latter
and
do
not
deserve
the
former
end
quote.
B
This
is
a
critical
principle
that
I
think
needs
to
guide.
This
conversation,
because
what
she
provided,
the
city
was
a
rationalization
for
shooting
a
man
in
the
testicles
for
breaking
that
man's
knees.
For,
for
that
that
teen
that's
standing
there
with
the
gun
and
antagonizing
them,
is
she
providing
a
rationalization
for
their
behavior?
B
A
A
Of
the
mayor,
wanting
to
give
him
give
himself
more
power
in
his
seat
is
ridiculous.
A
Policies
that
he's
been
pursuing
behind
the
black
lives
matter
movement,
since
it
kicked
off
here
in
the
city
and
to
say,
there's
a
correlation
between
the
two,
because
we
don't
protest
at
city
council
members
homes,
but
we
do
protest
that
his
home
means
that
we
want
him
to
have
more
power.
It's
ridiculous!
So
if
you're
going
to
do
this
and
use
your
own,
but
don't
bring
us
into
your
thank
you.
I
yield
the
rest
of
my
time
back
to
the
commission.
A
C
You,
commissioners,
I'm
gonna,
go
to
christopher.
E
Look,
I
have
no
stake
in
this,
absolutely
none.
We
were
charged
with
with
finding
ways
to
change
the
charter
for
more
accountability,
and
that's
was
the
purpose
of
this
making
the
mayor
accountable.
If
an
emergency
is
declared
by
a
non-elected
official
everybody
went,
you
know
everybody
was
looking
to
to
to
blame
someone
for
the
floods.
E
Do
I
I
heard
that
people
were
really
upset
about
the
ins
installation
of
a
curfew,
all
of
that
was
done
by
the
city
manager,
and
where
did
the
public
go
when
it's
done
by
the
city
manager?
If
it's
done
by
the
mayor,
then
you
have
a
place
to
go.
You
can
recall
them,
you
cannot
vote
them
in
again.
You
have
a
way
to
deal
with
your
dissatisfaction
with
regard
to
something
that
happens
under
the
emergency
declaration.
E
Number
two,
the
mr
brownstein,
you
know
went
off
on
what
powers
does
he
have
well?
My
memo
clearly
says
that
he
has
the
powers
that
are
enumerated
in
section
8.0
8.250.
E
Those
are
the
powers
that
the
city
manager
has
and
those
powers
are
specifically
the
powers
during
a
local
emergency
or
a
state
of
emergency,
and
only
with
regard
to
that,
not
with
regard
to
a
fire
over
here
and
you
tear
down
person's
property
in
another
district.
It
only
has
to
do
with
the
emergency,
so
we're
not
expanding
any
powers
beyond
what
the
city
manager
currently
has
now
a
non-elected
person.
E
E
You
don't
like
as
soon
as
practical
fine
72
hours
48
hours,
I
really
don't
care.
The
committee
said:
let's
go
with
72
hours.
If
that's
what
new
york
had
and
if
it
doesn't,
if
it
isn't
brought
to
the
council
within
that
time
or
if
it
isn't
ratified
by
the
council,
then
it
becomes
null
and
void.
So
there's
no
great
power
grab
by
the
mayor.
Under
these
circumstances,
so
you
know-
I
just
wanted
to
set
the
record
straight
about
why
I
brought
this
forward.
E
What
it's
intended
to
do,
which
is
to
make
an
elected
official
liable
and
accountable
for
when
an
emergency
is
declared,
so
that
the
people
know
who
to
blame
or
thank,
and
I
think
it
should
be
an
elected
official.
But
again
I
have
no
skin
in
the
game.
I
was
going
under
the
the
theory
that
we
were
supposed
to
be
looking
for.
More
accountability
at
a
government
and
accountability
doesn't
come
from
a
civil
servant.
It
comes
from
an
elected
official,
so
any
questions
by
my
colleagues,
I'm
I'm
happy
to
answer.
S
Yeah
I
was
going
to
speak
to
this.
This
is
interesting
dynamic.
You
know
I
I
served
with
director
lazad,
throwing
one
sweat,
and
so
it's
it's
kind
of
hard
to
separate.
S
So
I
I
definitely
don't
blame
the
presentation
and
I
can
see
it
through
so
many
different
advantages,
as
I'm
sure
that
she
can
see
it
through
so
many
different
advantages
of
her
that's
sitting
on
the
board
of
the
santa
clara
valley,
water
district.
The
one
thing
I
worry
about
is
giving
the
mayor
political
power
when
it
comes
to
calling
an
emergency.
The
hardest
thing
for
any
public
servant
or
public
official
or
a
non-elected
official
to
do
is
to
call
for
the
evacuation
of
the
community.
S
Every
single
public
servant,
including
myself
at
least
the
the
public
administrators,
has
to
go
through.
What's
called
nims
and
sims
training,
the
nims
training
is
the
national
incident
management
system
and
the
sentence
is
the
standardized
emergency
management
system
and
this
is
nationwide
and
basically
what
it
attempts
to
do
is
really
keep
the
elected
officials
out
of
having
to
make
that
call,
because
it
comes
a
political
decision.
If
you-
and
I
extend
exactly
what
director
lozada
is
saying,
it
doesn't
matter
who
makes
the
call
it's.
S
The
mayor
is
the
in
the
instance
of
the
flooding
it's
our
board
of
directors.
We
had
our
eoc
open,
but
you
know
they
don't
blame
the
ceo
of
santa
clara
valley,
water
district.
They
don't
blame
the
the
lack
of
emergency
management
at
the
city
of
san
jose
they
go
to
the
mayor.
This
is
the
mayor,
didn't
make
the
call
and
the
mayor
was
not
responsible
for
making
that
call,
but
he's
the
face
of
the
city.
So
I
understand
what
we're
saying,
but,
but
what
I
would
say
is
from
where
I
sit
is.
S
S
It
cannot
be
politicized
the
ones
that
are
trained,
the
ones
that
are
known
the
ones
that
basically,
yes,
their
job,
is
on
the
line
if
they
make
the
wrong
call
and
their
job
should
be
on
the
line
if
they
make
the
wrong
call,
but
I
don't
want
to
politicize
it.
So
I
I
I
don't
envy
director
liza
having
to
give
this
presentation.
I
know
exactly
where
she
sits.
I've
seen
her
on
both
sides
of
having
to
present
here
and
I've
and
I've
served
with
her
on
valley.
S
I
I
heard
somebody
that
brought
up
the
situation
and
saying
well,
let's
look
and
see
why
san
jose
didn't
make
this
there's
been
so
many
audits
that
have
looked
at
this
and
what
I
would
say
is
I
would
like
for
us
to
do
the
right
thing.
I
do
not
want
to
give
that
power
to
the
mayor.
S
I
do
not
want
to
have
people
on
one
side
of
the
aisle
or
another
coming
at
protesters
that
look
like
me
and
calling
it
an
emergency
situation
when
it's
not
and
it's
people
just
trying
to
raise
up
their
voice.
Did
the
public
administrator
do
the
right
thing
in
the
black
lives
matter?
I
don't
think
they
did
locally,
but
here's
the
thing.
It
should
not
be
a
political
decision
where
people
are
sending
in
responses
to
their
elected
official
and
saying
you
should
do
x
or
you
shouldn't
do
x.
S
I
understand
how
difficult
it
is,
but
I
would
definitely
encourage
us
to
follow
the
national
standard
and,
if
all
the
standard,
that
everyone's
there,
I
don't
envy
the
other
entities
that
have
the
power
to
deal
with.
I
don't
know
how
they
got
there,
but
I
don't
believe
that
they
should
have
that
power.
All
of
you
that
have
served
in
public
administration
roles,
I'm
looking
at
frank
mackey,
specifically,
you
know
exactly
what
I'm
talking
about.
You
know
exactly
what,
when
these
situations
happen?
No,
it's
not.
This
is
not
an
elected
decision.
S
This
is
a
decision
for
the
health
and
safety
of
the
community.
You
shouldn't
have
to
think.
If
I
do
this,
am
I
going
to
get
recall
if
I
do
this,
am
I
going
to
have
constituents
angry
at
me?
What
you're
making
is
the
right
decision
from
the
seat
that
you
sit
in
and
the
oath
that
you
took
to
make
sure
you're
making
that
right
decision.
So
that's
where
I
am.
I
cannot
support
a
proposal
that
would
give
more
power
to
the
mayor
in
emergency
situations
directly.
S
G
Thank
you.
I
just
had
a
couple
of
questions,
so
I
don't
know
if,
if
linda
wants
to
answer
them
after
each
one
or
should
I
just
state
them
all
or
let's.
G
Okay,
so
the
first
is:
is
there
an
expiration
date,
so
there's
like
72
hours
or
what?
What
would
trigger
the
expiration
of
the
emergency
powers
and
what?
If
the
emergency
like
covet,
goes
on
for
two
years
or
three
years?
Is
that
something
that
you,
you
guys
have
thought
of.
E
It
appears
in
the
in
the
powers
of
the
manager
that
it
goes
on
for
30
days
unless
it's
rescinded
by
the
council,
and
it
can
also
be
extended
much
like
the
emergency
powers
under
the
flood.
The
flooding
was
extended
multiple
times,
because
there
was
a
continuing
emergency
and
then
it
can
be.
It
can
be
voided
or
stopped
on
a
on
a
simple
majority
vote
in
the
council.
G
G
E
The
powers
are
tailored
to
the
emergency
under
under
this,
their
power
is
listed
only
in
the
instance
of
an
emergency
they're
separate
from
whatever
powers
the
mayor
may
have,
and
then
these
powers
are
listed
in
the
municipal
code,
the
powers
that
the
city
manager
has
to
marshal
all
of
the
assets
that
he
needs
to.
You
know
to
close
roads
to
do
whatever
is
necessary
for
the
health
and
safety
and
welfare
of
the
community
and
property.
So
I
didn't
want
to.
E
I
didn't
want
to
make
up
things
when
it's
already
in
here,
and
it's
probably
the
powers
that
are
in
here
are
probably
what
is
in
under
the
the
the
things
that
that
that
mr
calendar
was
talking
about.
There's
there's
systems
in
place
that
that
say
what
what
the
possible
powers
might
be
might
be
needed.
G
G
E
So,
let's
go
back
to
the
flood
at
the
time
of
the
flood,
there
was
no
emergency
action
plan
with
between
the
city
and
and
the
water
district
there
now
is,
and
what
that
does.
Is
that
says
what
what
entity
does
what,
when
what
jurisdiction
you
know,
calls
the
emergency,
what
jurisdiction
calls
out
the
police?
What
jurisdiction
does
an
evacuation?
E
What
jurisdiction
you
know
cleans
up,
so
that's
an
emergency
action
plan
that
we
now
have
in
place
that
we
didn't
before,
and
so
with
regard
to
what
I
think
you
were
asking,
what
what
defines
an
emergency,
the
as
as
mr
calendar
was
talking,
there's
certain
protocols
about
what
you
know
what
needs
to
be
done
and
when
an
emergency
should
should
be
and
there's
training,
etc.
E
And,
in
fact,
in
my
memo
I
say
that
one
of
the
potential
downsides
of
doing
this
is
that
the
mayor,
and
or
as
in
the
case
of
los
angeles
in
san
francisco,
where
the
mayor
has
embedded
in
his
staff
people
who
take
all
of
that
training.
All
of
that
training
that
the
emergency
services
director
and
the
emergency
services
personnel
take
to
determine
when
an
emergency
needs
to
be
called
they,
the
mayor
or
a
designated
group
of
people
in
his
or
her
office,
would
take
that
training
as
well
they're,
not
acting
in
a
vacuum.
E
The
mayor
would
not
suddenly
wake
up
and
say:
oh
it's
raining
too
much.
I
think
I'll
declare
an
emergency.
The
mayor
would
be
consulting
with
his
emergency
services
director
with
his
police
officers
with
his
fire
department.
You
know
with
all
of
the
different
people.
This
is
just
who
makes
that
declaration
and
who's
going
to
be
accountable
to
the
people
for
that
declaration.
E
That's
that's
the
only
purpose
of
me
doing
this,
all
of
the
all
of
the
protocols
and
all
of
the
the
training
that
goes
into
it
and
all
of
the
assets
and
all
of
the
staff
that
that
do
this,
as
as
mr
calendar
was
talking,
would
be
available
to
consult.
With
the
mayor,
I
mean
when
the
emergency
was
called
for
the
flood.
I
talked
to
ray
reardon
at
the
city
of
san
jose,
the
city
manager.
E
The
three
people
he
had
in
his
office
were
the
fire
chief,
the
police,
chief
and
the
city
manager,
because
at
the
time
they
didn't
have
an
emergency
department
head,
and
so
they
got
together
and
they
said
yep.
We
need
to
declare
an
emergency
law,
so
I
envision
the
same
thing
doing
that
the
only
difference
is
an
elected
official
who's
accountable
to
the
public,
makes
that
decision
and
but
he's
not.
He
or
she
is
not
acting
in
a
vacuum.
E
To
do
that,
and
there
is
the
downside
of
the
political
decision,
I
mean,
there's
no,
there's
no
doubt
about
it.
It
could
be
a
political
decision
by
it
by
a
savvy,
a
very
savvy
city
manager
and
I've.
I've
seen
two
or
three
of
them.
In
my
time
when
I
was
on
the
city
council,
they
they
they
knew
the
politics
of
what
they
were
doing,
and
so
you
know
that's
a
that
is
a
danger.
I'm
not
I'm
not
disputing
that.
G
I
guess
just
lastly,
I'm
clear:
I'm
not
exactly
clear
on
why
this,
why
we
think
the
city
manager
can't
declare
the
emergency
and
keep
all
of
his
or
her
powers
and
manage
the
emergency?
Why
are
we
taking
that
power
away
and
giving
it
to
an
elected
official
who
doesn't
have
all
the
professional
training
that
the
city
manager
has?
Is
that
a
punishment
for
that
one
city
manager
who
didn't
declare
or
or
what?
What
I
don't
know.
E
I
I
brought
it
forward
as
an
accountability
issue
as
who's
going
to
be
accountable
to
the
public
if
things
go
good
or
things
go
bad,
an
elected
official
or
at
a
an
administrator-
and
you
know,
like
I
said,
the
mayor-
isn't
gonna
be
acting
in
a
vacuum
when
he
or
she
makes
this
decision.
E
He
or
she
will
still
have
all
of
these
people
around.
It's
just
a
matter
of
having
having
the
the
powers
to
declare
and
then
the
powers
to
to
make
decisions
with
regard
to
like
in.
In
regard
to
the
to
the
to
the
protest,
you
know
declaring
a
curfew
I
mean,
but
I
I
heard
from
a
lot
of
people
how
aggravated
they
were
that
a
curfew
had
been
called
when
there
was
no
in
their
mind.
There
was
no
need
for
a
curfew
at
all,
and
what
are
you
going
after?
E
That's
when
they
went
to
the
mayor's
office
at
the
home,
I'm
sure
so,
like
I
said,
I
have
no
skin
in
the
game.
You
know
with
regard
to
this
yeah
I
was
looking
at
it
from
an
accountability
standpoint
of
who
do.
Who,
who
does
the
public
go
to
and
if
an
emergency
goes
wrong
or
if
an
emergency
goes
right
and.
D
Thank
you.
You
know,
and-
and
I
want
to
say
from
the
perspective
of
the
subcommittee,
it's
helpful
to
have
these
these
questions
raised.
I
think
they're
consistent
with
some
of
the
questions
that
that
we
had
started
to
raise-
and
I
will
say
late
in
our
our
game
and
want
to
apologize
for
that,
because
I
raised
some
questions
late
due
to
my
own
absences
from
committee
meetings.
D
You
know-
and
I
think
it's
going
to
be
helpful
for
us
to
to
bring
this
back
to
really
dig
into
some
of
the
language
right,
because
you
know
there's
a
stated
intent
here
around
consultation
with
staff.
You
know,
and
and
do
we
have
that
adequately
reflected
in
the
language?
I
think
also,
you
know
there's
this
piece
about
referencing,
that
particular
section
of
the
city
code
and
my
reading
of
it
is
that
it
actually
gives
very
broad
power.
D
So
you
know,
I
think
a
committee
meeting
is
going
to
be
a
good
space
for
us
to
really
dig
in
and
get
clear
on
on.
What
does
the
language
say?
How
do
we
align
it
with
intent
to
then
ultimately
be
able
to
have
a
good
strong
debate?
Should
the
commission
choose
to
to
bring
this
forward,
or
I
guess
we'll
have
another
chance
in
a
couple
of
weeks
about
the
the
substance
of
it?
But
I
I
do
value.
Excuse
me
the
questions
that
the
public
and
commissioners
are
raising
about.
D
You
know
the
consultation
with
staff
the
how
broad
or
narrow
the
powers
are,
as
well
as
you
know,
sort
of
the
tension
around
the
rules
of
professionals
versus
the
roles
of
elected
officials.
F
Oh
yeah,
thank
you.
I
just
want
to
add.
When
we
discussed
this,
we
did
recognize
that
if
the
mayor
were
to
have
this
authority,
the
mayor
will
be
responsible
to
take
all
the
fema
training
and
to
understand
exactly
what
that
role
had,
because
they
will
be
directing
staff
and
that
they
would
have
to
understand
how
the
staff
works
in
terms
of
responding
to
an
emergency.
So
it
is
a
it's
a
significant
leap
forward
and
the
mayor
will
be
responsible
when
it
was.
F
R
Thank
you.
Let's
see,
I
think
this.
This
whole
proposal
is
bringing
up
a
lot
of
opportunities
for
discussing
emergencies
and
and
and
what
happens-
and
maybe,
commissioner
lazad
this
wasn't
your
intention
to
to
have
such
a
broad
or
broad
scope
in
in
looking
at
this
recommendation,
but
but
I
think
that
the
more
I've
thought
about
it.
R
I,
I
can
easily
see
the
the
flood
and
the
natural
disasters
and
I
believe
the
the
proposal
is
in
essence,
to
give
the
power
that
already
exists
for
the
city
manager
over
to
to
the
mayor.
So
it's
not
like
it's
new
powers,
its
existing
powers,
as
I
understand
it,
but
I
I
think
if,
if
it's
possible
that
our
subcommittee
should
look
into
the
well,
let
me
put
it
this
way.
R
I
think
we
need
to
look
into
how
we
handle
the
civil
unrest,
part
of
the
emergency
and-
and
I
think
personally,
I
think
I
would
like
us
to
to
really
look
what
happened
since
it's
been
brought
up
with
the
the
george
floyd
protest,
because
this
is
actually
a
very
difficult
point
in
our
history
of
what
all
happened
in
in.
R
In
that
event-
and
it's
it's
more
than
just
you
know
what
the
mayor
did
or
didn't
do
and
what
he
was
blamed
for,
and
things
like
that,
but
it's
also
the
response
to
people
who
were
exercising
their
freedom
of
speech
and
I'll.
Just
share
that
that
I
I
was
there
at
the
protest
on
on
sunday
and
the
way
I
saw
law
enforcement
lined
up
against
small
protesters.
R
The
way
I
was
part
of
a
group
that
marched
from
city
hall
all
the
way
to
san
fernando
street
and
backups
back
up,
I
believe
7th
street
and
meanwhile
the
police
officers
were
driving
by
with
their
sirens
on
and
we
weren't
doing.
I
mean
we
were
a
small
group,
I
mean
we
were
probably
three
people
wide
and
there's
probably
I
don't
know,
maybe
a
hundred
people
that
were
just
marching.
R
You
know
I
I
what
I'm
trying
to
say
is
that
as
we're
looking
at
transferring
the
power
over
to
the
mayor
or
even
as
we're
looking
at
the
the
powers
of
emergencies,
I
think
I
would
recommend
that
our
commission
take
this
seriously
and
also
look
at
how
how
the,
whether
it's
a
city
manager
or
the
or
the
mayor
who
has
the
power
to
declare
an
emergency
when
there
is
protesting,
how
that
is
done.
R
And
if,
if
we
could
look
at
that,
and
I
think
I
honestly
believe
that
the
people
that
are
sitting
here
around
the
table
would
have
very
good
insight
into
how
we
can
improve
it
and
do
it
in
a
better
way.
Because
I
mean
I
can
say
that
that
what
happened
in
that
protest,
I
mean
I
mean,
there's
two
sides
to
to
what
happened,
and
I
I
think
we
should.
R
I
really
believe
that
that
we
need
to
look
at
this,
and
I
think
we
have
to
be
very
careful
with
with
what
we
recommend,
because
even
just
the
topic
of
giving
power
to
the
mayor
around
these
types
of
events
and
again,
I'm
not
talking
about
the
natural
disasters.
I'm
talking
about
you
know
say,
civil
unrest
is,
is
a
is
something
that
that
has
a
lot
of
reaction
in
the
community.
O
Thank
you.
You
know
this
is
a
big
topic
and
definitely
one
of
the
major
issues
that
we're
trying
to
charge
with
looking
at
and
and
considering
that
we're
looking
at
this
in
a
very
narrow
scope
and
how
deeply
invested
people
are.
In
terms
of
this
conversation,
it's
actually
very
helpful
to
hear
different
perspectives.
O
So
right
now
the
way
I'm
hearing
this
is
that
we're
really
looking
at
accountability
to
I'm.
Looking
at
this
as
an
accountability
issue
versus
a
politicization
politicization
issue.
Right
I
mean
when
we're
talking
about
natural
disasters
when
we're
talking
about
that,
I
really
don't
think
the
risk
is
there
that
in
72
hours,
you're
going
to
have
a
mayor,
usurp
power
of
the
entire
government
and
then
just
sack
everybody
and
say
I'm
now
the
dictator
right
like
even
if
they
did
do,
that
it
lasts
all
of
72
hours.
O
That
said,
though,
you
know,
there
is
kind
of
a
marked
difference
here
when
we're
talking
about
natural
disasters
to
civil
unrest,
because
the
nature
of
the
emergency
in
moments
of
civil
unrest
is
inherently
political,
and
so
for
me,
I
think
that
is
kind
of
where
we
have.
We
have
to
file
a
little
more
balance
or
maybe
more
more
define
the
proposal
to
make
sure
that
only
specific
enumerated
powers
are
exercised.
O
You
know
during
the
protests
during
the
last
summer
right
the
one
thing
that
I
thought.
The
one
point
that
does
stand
out
for
me
is
is
that
you
know
if
people
are
going
after
the
mayor,
but
the
it
was
the
city
manager
who
made
that
decision,
then
we're
not
really,
then
there's
not
really
accountability
there,
because
the
wrong
person
is
in
a
sense
being
held
accountable
by
allowing
these
powers
to
shift
over
to
the
mayor
and
the
mayor.
O
Making
these
decisions,
then
that
person
can
be
held
accountable
right
voters,
don't
turn
out
and
get
rid
of
the
city
manager.
It
doesn't
work
that
way
right.
Voters
can
turn
out
and
get
rid
of
this
mayor.
At
some
point,
so
I
mean
in
that
sense
you
know
it
does
seem.
This
is
not
an
unreasonable
proposal.
I
think
this
actually
can
be
sound,
but
I
do
want
to
make
sure
that,
when
we're
talking
about
very
clearly
defined
powers
very
clearly
defined
ways
that
the
manager
can
that
their
mayor
can
utilize
these
powers.
G
I
think
that
it
gets
back
to
who
can
fire
the
city
manager,
and
my
understanding
is
that
the
council
can
vote
to
do
that.
Am
I
am
I
right
about
that,
mr
tran,
and
so
there
there
still
is
accountability
to
the
voting
public,
because
our
elected
representatives
can
get
rid
of
the
city
manager
if
the
city
manager
isn't
acting
appropriately
in
response
to
disasters.
G
But
I
would
make
a
friendly
amendment
to
limit
the
transfer
of
the
proposal
to
basically
the
transfer
of
power
of
emergencies
to
the
mayor
limit
that
to
natural
disasters
only,
and
I
think
that
I
would
consider
it
if,
if
with
that
friendly
amendment
just
limiting,
and
that
would
get
rid
of
all
of
the
problems
that
commissioner
calendar
brought
up,
that
the
black
lives
matter
representative
brought
up
the
civil
unrest
piece
of
it
that
commissioner
fuentes
brought
up.
G
D
Thank
you
yeah.
You
know
I
I
wanted
to
speak
before
sort
of
with
the
committee
hot
on
saying
hearing
some
of
what
the
commission
was
saying
and,
and
you
know
the
need
to
perhaps
align
intent
with
language.
D
I
do
want
to
say
overall
that,
although
I
think
it's
important
for
us
to
to
continue
in
a
process
to
really
hash
through
a
thoughtful
proposal
that
I
continue
to
have
serious
concerns
with
it
along
the
lines
of
what
commissioner
calendar
raised,
you
know,
I
appreciate
the
thought
to
limit
it
to
natural
disasters
only,
but
I
think
we
have
to
consider
we
have
to.
D
D
It
applies
to
mary
applies
to
city
manager
and
the
only
and
best
tool
that
we
have
to
deal
with
that
in
government
is
to
have
systems
of
checks
and
balances
in
place,
so
where
we
are
significantly
talking
about
shifting
power
to
the
mayor,
I
am
trying
to
consider
a
scenario
where
we
have
a
mayor
who
perhaps
has
been
in
office
for
a
week,
perhaps
has
never
been
in
elected
office
before
we
certainly
are
in
a
period
in
our
country's
history,
where
there's
a
lot
of
interest
in
electing
people
to
to
office
who
have
no
prior
experience
in
government,
and
how
is
a
mayor
with
this
kind
of
power
going
to
behave
in
that
case,
and
you
know
I.
D
I
appreciate
commissioners,
commissioner
tran's
point
about
kind
of
how
much
havoc
can
be
reached
in
72
hours,
but
I
think
in
the
case
of
an
emergency.
You
know
it
could
be
a
lot.
So
take
take
the
scenario
of
the
flood
right
where
the
those
early
hours
were
really
critical
and
what,
if
we
had
had,
in
that
case,
a
mayor
holding
this
power
who
who
was
in
you
know
our
opinion
overly
politically
motivated
and
saying?
Oh,
you
know
we
don't
want
to
blow
this
up
too
much.
D
We
don't
want
to
make
too
big
of
a
deal
of
it.
We
you
know,
maybe
the
flood's
not
going
to
happen.
We
don't
want
to
wake
people
up
right
and,
for
political
reasons,
had
had
made.
A
bad
call
and
irreparable
damage
could
have
happened,
would
have
happened
in
those
first
72
hours,
and
you
know
I.
I
appreciate
that
we
added
the
piece
about
the
emergency
training
for
the
mayor,
but
you
know
that's
just
going
to
be
different
from
the
kind
of
training
that
professional
staff
bring
in,
and
so
you
know
I.
D
I
also
really
appreciate
the
the
intent
of
aligning
aligning
creating
greater
accountability.
I
think
what
we,
what
we're
doing
here,
though,
is
in
order
to
have
accountability
where
we're
actually
increasing
the
power
of
the
mayor,
and
I
believe
what
we
should
be
doing
is
increasing
the
accountability
of
the
mayor.
I
don't.
D
I
don't
think
that
we
should,
in
order
to
have
the
public
perception
and
the
desire
for
accountability,
align
with
reality,
that
we
therefore
put
a
lot
of
power
in
elected
official
without
checks
and
balances
in
a
way
that
may
create
serious
problems
for
the
city
in
an
emergency.
I
think
that's
it.
There's
there's
too
much
at
stake,
and
we've
got
to
look
at
other
mechanisms
for
accountability.
A
Thank
you.
Well,
it
seems
to
me
that
we
are
here
discussing
this
because
of
two
specific
incidents
in
which
we
were
not
pleased
with
the
as
a
public
with
the
res
with
the
emergency
response.
So
I
don't.
I
can't
really
tell
if
we're
talking
about
just
leaving
it
as
it
is
and
get
used
to
it,
or
if
we
are
talking
about
transferring
that
emergency
power
to
someone
else,
I
I
I
have
to
say.
A
I
think
it's
not
a
standalone
that
a
that
a
mayor
would
be
charged
with
emergency
powers
and
have
no
skill
at
it
at
all,
because
I
think
what
would
go
along
with
this
would
be
the
skill
set
that
would
be
required
of
a
mayor
under
an
emergency
situation.
A
I
mean
presidents,
are
elected
to
to
govern
the
united
states
and
have
to
call
for
emergency
service
emergency
responses
on
sadly
a
regular
basis,
but
I
mean
I
don't
think
these
are
standalone
so
that
I
I
just
would
kind
of
like
to
know
what
we
are
thinking
of
as
an
alternative.
Then
thank
you.
S
All
right
well,
first,
I
want
to
compliment
commissioner
matt's
more
knife,
her
very
eloquent
description
of
what
I
would
say.
I
think
she
hid
it
right
on
the
head.
You
know
I
was
sitting
here
and
thinking
and
then
heard
what
commissioner
manley
had
said
is
what
are
we
saying
and
we're
about
to
change,
and
I
I
want
to
take
folks
back
to
1997.
S
that
was
actually
one
year
after
I
joined
valley
water
and
we
had
sleds
in
the
rock
springs
area
two.
I
believe
it
was
two
years
before
then
council
member
lazad
had
joined
the
city
council
she
joined,
I
believe
it
was
1999.
She
can
correct
me
my
memory
if
it's
wrong,
but
I
believe
that's
when
she
joined
when
the
flooding
occurred.
S
The
first
thing
that
they
didn't
have
the
city
of
san
jose
did
not
have
an
emergency
services
department
at
the
time
and
so
finger
pointing
went
everywhere
and
they
wagged
all
the
way
over
to
then
mayor
ron,
gonzalez
saying
that
he
didn't
make
the
call
for
calling
for
the
evacuation
before
the
flooding.
S
Well,
what
the
problem
was,
it
wasn't
the
accountability
of
the
mayor.
It
was
the
fact
that
they
weren't
following
the
nims
sims
methodology
of
emergency
services,
and
they
didn't
even
have
the
ability
to
call
for
the
evacuation
in
time.
I
don't.
I
am
a
strong
believer
that
I
do
not
want
to
support
the
politicizing
of
the
emergency
calls
of
evacuations
and
other
emergencies.
That's
just
where
I
said
this,
that's
the
the
professional
public
administrator.
I
mean
yes,
there
are
also
other
issues
as
it
relates
to
protests
and
how
different
communities
are
treated.
S
I'm
just
going
to
point
towards
january
6
in
the
capital
and
I'll
say:
what
do
you
think
would
have
happened
if
that
was
a
black
lives
matter,
movement
and
an
administrator
had
called
for
a
for
an
emergency.
Let's
be
real
here.
I
think
that
what
we
need
is
non-politicization
of
the
emergency
services
system,
and
then
I
know
commissioner
motley
had
brought
up.
You
know
the
president's
role
of
in
emergencies.
S
I'll
just
bring
up
two
names
when
it
when
it
relates
to
you
and
let
you
see
what
you
think
about
what
an
emergency
would
look
like
if
the
two
names
of
donald
trump
and
an
emergency
was
called
and
how
the
reaction
was
been.
I
I
will
stand
firmly
on
where
I
am
I
am
not.
I
will
never
support
the
politicizing
of
emergency
management.
I
think
it
should
be
a
professional
public
administrator's
job,
and
I
believe
that
if
a
public
administrator
does
not
make
the
right
call,
then
their
job
should
be
on
the
line.
S
If
they
didn't
do
the
right
thing,
then
the
council
should
act
accordingly
and
get
rid
of
that
individual,
the
mayor
or
no
other
elected
official
should
be
jammed
into
the
role
of
being
forced
from
hearing
from
the
public
and
others
and
what
they
should
do.
You
would
never
believe
how
many
comments
from
all
different
sides
that
I've
seen
when
it
comes
to
natural
disasters.
We
should
not
force
elected
officials
to
have
to
endure
making
the
call
because
they're
afraid
of
what
may
happen
at
the
end,
the
next
election.
E
Yeah
great
discussion,
I
I
just
the
concerns
that
have
been
voiced.
I
I
can
understand
them,
but
I
want
to
reiterate
that
a
large
percentage
of
cities,
big
and
small,
have
the
elected
official
make
that
call
new
york
san
francisco
l.a
seattle.
E
You
know
those
were
just
some
of
the
few
that
I
that
I
grabbed
as
well
as
small
cities,
and
I
you
know
I
don't.
I
don't
see
the
the
the
horrors
or
the
potential
horrors
that
have
been
ex.
You
know
expressed
as
concerns
evident
in
those
in
those
cities.
They've
had
it
for
a
long
time,
and
you
know
I
had
not
found
any
big
cities
that
were
doing
this
and
not
a
preponderance
of
big
cities.
E
E
You
know
I
don't
want
to
bore
you
by
reading
you,
the
powers
that
the
city
manager
has,
but
they
all
have
to
do
with
life
and
safety,
health
and
safety
and
protection
of
life
and
limb,
and
you
know
they're
they're
very
limited
in
in
one
city.
They
they
elaborate.
They
go
on
forever
in
elaborating.
You
know
when
I
talked
to
ray
reardon
at
the
city
of
san
jose.
E
You
know
he
said
that
that
there's
a
very,
very
general
because
they
didn't
want
to
you
know,
go
way
out,
but
one
of
the
cities
I
looked
at
the
mayor
had
the
power
to
seize
guns
to
close
gun
stores.
To
seize
I
mean
it
was
it
just
went
on
and
on
and
I'm
thinking
to
myself.
Oh
my
god.
How
did
this
ever
get
past
anybody?
You
know,
whereas
you
know,
and
that
you
know.
E
Maybe
that
has
to
do
with
the
you
know
where,
where
it
was
in
the
part
what
part
of
the
country
it
was
and
the
concern
about
certain
elements.
But
you
know
all
of
these
one.
Two
three:
four:
five
powers:
it's
all
this,
it's
all
exciting
manager
has,
and
it
all
has
to
do
with
marshalling
assets
to
talking
to
department
heads
you
know
instituting
anything
that
that
helps
with
the
rules
and
regulations
that
that
help
with
public
safety
and
that's
probably
where
the
curfew
comes
from.
E
But
you
know
we'll
take
your
your
discussions
back
to
the
committee
and
we'll
see
what
happens
on
we're
doing
this
saturday
again
what
happens
on
saturday,
but
you
know
this
is
and-
and
you
know
I
I
I
understand
the
the
difference
between
you
know,
protests
and
and
natural
disasters,
and
you
know
that
that
may
make
it
tricky.
E
But
you
know
those
were
the
two
most
recent
calls
of
an
emergency.
You
know
that
happened
within
the
city
within
our
recent
memory
and
that's
why
I
used
them
as
examples.
No
other
reason
you
know
it
could
have
been
a
flood
and
then
a
earthquake.
T
I
I
think
it's
it's.
I
mean
it's
always
easy
to
look
back
on
something
that
already
happened
and
kind
of
second
guess,
and
how
would
we
have
done
things
differently,
knowing
what
we
know
in
the
moment?
But
but
if
you
go
back
to
the
the
prior,
the
decision
point,
it's
not
quite
as
easy,
and
I
think
you
know
we
can
criticize
you
know
as
I'm
one
of
people
who
would
you
know
the
city's
flood
response
or
the
curfew
response
or
to
the
protest
one.
I
think
we
acted
to
slow.
T
The
other
reacted
too
soon,
but
you
know
in
the
in
the
context
of
I
remember
that
day
before
I
called
the
curfew.
You
know
someone
from
the
mayor's
office
called
me
and
and
told
me
hours
ahead,
that
this
was
going
to
happen,
and
I
had
this
response
and
I
had
the
discussion
and
I
kind
of
pushed
back.
Is
this
really
necessary
and
the
response
was
there's.
You
know
there's
intelligence
and
we're
seeing
these
things
happen.
Other
cities
and
you
kind
of
just-
have
to
clam
up
and
say
all
right.
T
We
shouldn't
second
guess
this:
one
person
should
steer
the
ship
and-
and
that's
you
so
go
ahead.
I
I
think
it's
just
important
to
remember
that
in
we're
talking
about
the
moment
of
emergency
here
and
and
it's
not
calm
times,
there's
there's
a
fire
burning
somewhere
or
an
earthquake
or
a
flood
impending
something
impending
happening,
and
in
an
after
like
an
after
event
report,
you
always
kind
of
look
through
that
and
the
people
who
make
the
decisions
they
do
have
reason
for
it.
It's
not
it's
not
arbitrarily
done.
T
You
can
disagree
that
you
might
have
done
something
differently.
You
might
weigh
the
evidence
differently,
but
those
people,
I
feel,
are
making
the
decisions
you
know
to
the
best
of
their
ability,
given
the
circumstances
and
the
reason
that
I
kind
of-
but
I
think
it's
important
to
be
said,
that
politicalization
is
another
way
of
saying
judgment
and
and
judgment
is
always.
T
You
know
debatable
right,
but
I
think
there's
something
to
be
said
for
having
accountability
to
the
mayor,
who's
accountable
to
the
public,
but
also
having
the
the
public
accountable
for
electing
people
who's,
who
they
feel
have
the
judgment
to
make
these
sort
of
decisions
right.
T
Yes,
you,
you
could
have
a
city
manager
hypothetically
lose
their
job
over
something,
but
but
the
pressure
for
that
on
a
city
council
to
call
for
some
of
these
jobs
is
different
than
the
public
going
directly
to
the
polls
and
and
recalling
or
unelecting
or
not
re-electing
somebody
they
voted
for,
and
I
think
it's
important
to
align
that.
So
I
I
appreciate
what
commissioner
lazad's
doing
and
I
would
support
her
proposal.
That's
all.
C
S
I
did
this,
she
was
I
I
try
not
to
comment
too
much
at
the
issues.
This
one
she's
definitely
touches
the
nerve,
and
I
do
want
to
thank
commissioner.
This
is
one
that
I
would
not
have
recommended
she'd
take
on
because
of
the
personal
nature
of
her
service.
S
Justice
is
instant,
is
instant
action.
If
the
city
manager
had
made
the
call,
if
the
folks
that
made
the
call
they
should
have
been
held
accountable,
we
shouldn't
have
to
wait
for
every
four
years
to
decide.
If
we're
going
to
remember,
to
hold
you
accountable
for
an
emergency
management
decision
that
you
make
I'll
also
point
to
one
of
the
things
that
actually
happened
in
is
actually
northern
california.
S
There
was
a
phone,
there
was
data
that
was
being
collected
and
you
had
folks
in
the
police
management
system
that
were
told
that
a
bus
full
of
antifa
individuals
were
headed
in
or
headed
north
in
order
to
cause
trouble,
so
they
sent
up
police
helicopters
and
otherwise
helicopters
and
planes
to
find
a
bus
full
of
individuals
that
were
going
to
be
coming
to
their
town
and
causing
trouble.
It
ended
up
being
a
q
anon.
You
know
q
anon
fantasy
that
someone
had
made
up
well.
S
This
is
where
I
don't
want
things
to
be
politicized.
I
would
hate
to
have
a
bust
full
of
a
black
family
reunion
headed
north
and
have
something
go
wrong
because
something
was
politicized
and
the
pressure
of
what
was
on
the
internet
or
otherwise
ended
up
making
people
make
wrong
decisions.
What
had
happened
in
that
instance
is
probably
within
one
hour
of
the
information
being
given.
It
was
knocked
down,
it
was
knocked
back
and
things
were
gone.
All
right
tell
us,
go
google
it.
This
is
real.
This
actually
occurred.
S
So
I
am
not
a
believer
in
the
politicization
of
emergencies
when
it
could
impact
my
my
people
in
so
many
different
ways.
It
doesn't
matter
if
it's
floods,
it
doesn't
matter
if
it
earthquakes
it
doesn't
matter.
If
it's
fires
I
would
prefer
to
have
public
administrators
held
responsible.
If
that
public
administrator
made
the
wrong
call,
then
they
should
be
responsible
to
the
council
to
the
board,
to
the
special
district
to
any
agency
that
they
report
to,
and
the
aid
in
the
community
should
not
have
to
wait
for
three
two,
two
three
four
years
for
justice.
C
T
I
just
want
to
register
my
disagreement
with
the
idea
that
justice
should
be
swift.
I
think
passions
of
the
of
the
masses
should
be
cooled
by
institutions
and
you
know,
even
in
our
justice
system
there's
you
know
due
process
and
argument
and
all
that,
so
I
I
just
want
to
register
that
for
the
record.
A
D
Thank
you
I'll,
be
brief.
Having
spoken
a
couple
times
before,
I
was
just
able
to
finally
pull
up
the
municipal
code
again,
and
I
think
hopefully
this
can
clarify
so
the
reference
section.
As
commissioner
said,
a
through
d
have
very
specific
powers,
but
item
e
does
say
to
execute
all
the
ordinary
powers
as
city
manager,
as
well
as
all
the
special
powers
conferred
on
currently
says
him
or
her.
D
So
so
that
actually
does
mean
that
if,
if
we
reference
that
section
all
of
the
powers
of
city
manager
would
be
transferred
to
the
mayor,
we
won't
read
it
so.
Just
to,
since
we've
discussed
that
a
little
bit,
I
thought
that
clarification
could
be
helpful.
Knowing
that
we're
going
to
go
back
to
work
on
this,
of
course,
as
a
committee.
C
And
and
attorney
danny,
if
you
could
weigh
in
on
that
to
the
subcommittee
be
helpful,
does
that
mean
that
those
powers
of
the
manager
only
specifically
in
regards
to
the
event
emergency
itself?
Yes,
is
it
a
blanket
kind
of
statement
at
the
end,
so
I
think
the
attorney
should
help
us
make
sure
that
the
subcommittee's
reading
of
it
is
accurate
to
the
law.
That
would
be
helpful.
P
C
So
because
it
refers
to
the
city
manager,
it's
basically
saying
they
have
the
emergency
powers
to
do
all
these
things
for
the
emergency
and
they
keep
their
day
job
right.
They
still
maintain
all
the
other
powers
that
they
have
because
they
are
the
city
manager,
so
that
would
be
the
place
where
there
needed
to
be
a
revision.
C
Otherwise
the
mayor
would
be
usurping
all
the
power
as
the
city
manager
at
that
time,
so
it
makes
sense
when
it's
a
city
manager,
it
doesn't
make
sense
unless
that's
the
intention
when
it
becomes
the
mayor,
so
manager
still
has
his
day.
Job's
gonna
still
do
everything
else.
In
addition,
has
these
special
powers
that
are
specific
to
the
emergency?
D
C
All
right
seeing
no
other
hands.
We
will
now
move
to
our
next
item
on
the
agenda.
Thank
you
for
that
very
fruitful
discussion.
That
gives
lots
of
thought
to
go
back
to
our
subcommittee,
whose
work
is
cut
out
for
them,
and
I
want
to
thank
them
on
behalf
of
the
commission
for
all
their
work
and
being
able
to
present
tonight's
presentations.
C
We
have
a
hopefully
a
short
item.
The
subcommittee
reports.
This
is
it.
Are
there
any
questions
from
a
subcommittee
to
another
subcommittee
that
we
need
to
do
in
public?
M
Commissioner,
you
muted
perfect.
Thank
you
good
evening,
everyone
in
in
regards
to
the
climate
change
presentations.
If
that
was
to
be
taken
on
by
a
subcommittee
where
would
it
be
best
aligned
in
I
kind
of
I'm
assuming
one
subcommittee
in
particular,
would
would
be
able
to
take
it
on,
and
I
wonder
if
that
accountability
subcommittee
has
a
bandwidth
to
take
it
on.
G
Thank
you
just
in
response
to
commissioner
borrosio.
I
think
our
consultant
is
looking
into
getting
us
additional
speakers
on
climate
change,
so
perhaps
he
could
give
a
report
on
that.
I
think
he's
also
doing
research
on
different
cities
that
have
climate
change
commission
as
part
of
their
charters,
so
I'll
just
pass
that
over
to
the
consultant,
but
we
are
looking
to
to
get
you
more
information
and
more
speakers
on
that
for
our
last
speaker
day.
R
Thank
you.
I
have
a
question
too
related
to
the
the
question
of
equity
and
inclusion
and
wanted
to
know
if
the
policing
committee
is
going.
You
know
who
brought
the
presenters
to
the
meeting
if
you're
going
to
cover
that,
because
I've
been
working
on
something
related
to
equity,
with
respect
to
the
charter
and
language
related
to
the
the
the
city
budget.
G
We
are
not
touching
the
budget,
I've,
it's
and-
and
I
guess
I'm
not
familiar
with
what
you're
working
on.
R
Well,
okay,
in
in
looking
at
the
areas
for
the
for
the
governance
committee,
one
of
the
topics
was
budget,
and
so
that's
been
something
that
I've
been
looking
at
and
and
I
was
able
to
get
the
assistance
from
lawrence
and
his
team
on
some
questions,
and
one
of
them
had
to
do
specifically
with
equity,
and
I
mean
there's
various
questions
and
then
also
after
listening
to
the
presentations
that
we
heard
on
september
9th
I
was
absent,
but
I
I
listened
to
them
a
couple
of
times
after
the
meeting
I
see
how
it's
it's
all
going
to
fit
together
that
we
we
look
at
the
situation.
R
Well,
this
is
the
way
I'm
I'm
I'm
looking
at
it.
Looking
at
the
situation
in
our
in
our
city
and
looking
at
the
disparities
and
the
importance
of
addressing
equity
in
in
the
equity
and
inclusion
in
the
city
charger
which,
in
the
city
charter
where
it's
you
know,
it's
it's
not
addressed.
G
Bob
brownstein
he
he
presented
some
language
charter
amendments
and
equity
language,
so
that
is
something
that
our
subcommittee
will
be
talking
about.
If
there's
specific
things
regard
regarding
budgets
and
equity
in
the
budget
we
haven't
talked
about
that
yet
and
we
we
didn't,
we
don't
have
plan,
I
mean
I,
I
wouldn't
know
how
to
coordinate
with
you
under
the
brown
act.
Commissioner,
that's
my
question
too,
commissioner.
Clinton
thoughts
on
this.
C
Yeah,
let
me
ask
this,
commissioner
puentes.
I
thought
the
governance
committee
had
made
their
recommendations
already.
Do
you
have
an
additional
one?
Yes,
okay,
we
need
to
talk
about
when
that's
going
to
be
presented,
because
that's
that's
got
to
get
on
the
schedule.
If
it's
coming
from
your
subcommittee,
let's
take
that
offline
and
then
I
can
respond
back
to
commissioner
siegel.
C
I
think
they
are
aligned,
but
not
conflicting
as
I
understand,
but
let
me
take
that
offline
to
figure
out
how
we
address
that
issue
and
be
in
respect
of
the
brown
act
as
well.
C
M
And
I
would
just
ask,
given
that
you
know
I
are
there
any
other
recommendations
from
the
governance
structure
subcommittee
or
voting
in
elections.
M
Our
official
kind
of
call
for
final
recommendation
to
share
has
passed
for
both
subcommittees,
so
I'm
a
little
hesitant
to
say,
let's
go
back
to
the
well,
but
you
know
we
are
kind
of
winding
down
our
ability
to
be
able
to
go
through
the
same
process
with
every
recommendation
that
is
presentation
to
commissioners,
public
hearing
feedback
and
then
revisiting
revising
and
doing
provisional
voting.
So
if
there's
anything
else
left
in
the
table,
we
need
to
know
about
it
as
soon
as
possible.
C
Thank
you
for
that
question.
I'm
going
to
ask
the
city
clerk
to
help
us
on
that
to
make
sure
that
we
understand
what
we
can
find
out
from
the
redistricting
committee.
I
know
some
of
their
deliberations
are
different
than
ours
and
in
terms
of
what
they
can
share.
So
I'll
ask
the
city
clerk
for
that,
and
if
we
can
get
a
report
back
from
them
and
what
that
can
contain,
that'll
be
one
of
the
things
that
we
do
in
follow-up
this
week.
G
Oh
I'm
sorry,
I
just
forgot
to
take
my
hand
down,
but
I
I
think
that
maybe
the
consultant
does
want
to
give
a
I'm
wondering
if
he
wants
to
give
a
report
to
answer.
Commissioner
borosio's.
C
C
Any
other
questions
of
subcommittees
to
subcommittees,
so
we
have
follow-up
on
the
redistricting
committee.
We
have
follow-up
with
commissioner
fuentes
on
the
budget.
Okay,
awesome,
I'm
going
to
move
us
to
our
next
item,
which
is
old
business.
I
don't
have
a
reason.
C
H
Hi.
Thank
you.
Thanks
for
this
item,
blair
b
quinn
here,
yeah
bob
brownstein's
words
a
few
weeks
ago
about
how
we
can
talk
about
the
future
of
affordable
housing
within
the
charter
process,
doesn't
have
to
be
so
specific
but
some
broader
ideas.
H
He
gave
a
great
example
how
we
can
work
towards
that
and,
I
think,
can
be
applicable
to
many
other
projects
and
subjects
within
how
we
talk
about
the
future
of
the
charter.
I
think
he
gave
a
great
example
with
that:
the
ideas
to
quickly
try
to
mention
the
ideas
of
equity
in
accounting
in
san
jose.
H
It's
been
kind
of
an
important
subject
and
it's
it
kind
of
works
to
help
the
equity
projects
that
san
jose
city
government
works
on
with
community
and
it
works
you
know
with
and
without
and
around
and
about-
and
it
does
some
interesting
stuff-
and
I
I
I
just
thought
I'd
bring
that
out,
but
san
jose
has
been
doing
some
interesting
work
with
it
on
on
all
sides.
The
city
of
oakland,
I
I
think,
is
kind
of
a
peer
right
now
in
in
we're
really
working
towards
ideas
of
reimagine.
H
More
than
most
other
various
cities,
so
congratulations
to
that,
but
they're
having
a
bit
of
trouble
with
their
accounting
and
equity
ideas.
They
they've
got
their
their
reimagined
council
going
on
projects,
but
but
auditing
and
inequity
is
not
working
out
too
well.
They're,
not
aligning
so
good
luck,
how
we
can
work
on
the
issues
and-
and
please
try
to
be
able
to
work
on
for
the
future.
H
The
subcommittee
process
meeting
minutes
process
that
can
clearly
explain
what
subcommittees
were
about
and
and
to
make
sure
to
offer
steps
when
you
have
public
hearings
in
the
future.
What
what
you
were
talking
about?
Those
subcommittees
to
make
the
public
hearings
relevant
to
what
we're
discussing
at
public
hearing
time,
and
so
good
luck
in
those
connections
and
thank
you.
A
J
Thank
you.
Thank
you
to
all
for
your
work
on
these
proposals.
I'd
also
like
to
apologize
to
commissioner
marshman.
I
misspoke
earlier
during
commissioner
results
presentation.
So
my
apologies
and
thank
you
again.
C
Thank
you.
Okay.
Now
we're
going
to
go
to
reports,
I
don't
have
a
report
report
from
the
clerk,
I'm
not
sure
does.
Does
the
clerk
have
anything
to
report
at
this
time.
M
Great
thank
you.
I
want
to
walk
you
through
the
changes
that
we
made
to
the
work
plan,
given
the
directive
during
the
last
commission
meeting
to
move
ahead
as
soon
as
possible
on
the
the
final
voting
for
timing
of
mayoral
elections.
M
So
this
is
the
updated,
revised
work
plan
that
was
sent
out
on
friday.
M
You'll
see
that
we
have
september
20th
today
september
25th
this
saturday
as
you
as
a
reminder,
we
have
a
public
hearing
on
the
governance
and
structural
recommendations
that
are
being
heard
for
the
first
time
tonight.
M
Next
sunday,
we
have
a
study
session
which
will
incorporate
the
topics
of
police
next
monday.
Excuse
me
next
monday.
Thank
you
september
27th,
topics
of
police,
accountability
and
oversight,
sacred
land,
acknowledgments
and
climate
change,
a
particular
possibility
of
a
climate
change.
Commission.
The
guest
speakers
that
are
listed
here
are
confirmed.
M
We
are
in
conversation
with
the
city
county
of
honolulu,
who
did
adopt
a
charter
change
which
led
to
a
climate
change
commission,
so
hoping
to
confirm
that
as
well
for
for
next
monday's
study
session,
and
that
will
be
a
study
session
only
and
the
the
next
meeting
where
we
could
do
the
the
final
voting
on
the
timing
of
mayoral
elections.
Recommendation
would
be
monday
october
4th.
M
So,
in
addition
to
hearing
having
provisional
voting
and
final
discussion
or
at
least
discussion
before
the
provisional
voting
on
the
governance
structure,
governance,
governance,
structure
subcommittee,
recommendations,
we
had
added
the
final
voting
on
timing
of
mayoral
elections,
recommendations
and
then
the
other
item.
The
other
change
here,
the
the
rest
of
the
the
calendar
stayed
the
same
as
far
as
the
the
final
reports
and
and
review
and
and
timeline
for
delivery.
M
But
we
did
add
another
study
session
on
monday
october
25th
on
topics
still
being
identified
and
finalized.
We
will
have
two
guests
about
the
function
of
auditing,
both
at
the
city
and
I
guess,
from
the
county
of
santa
clara.
M
So
those
are
the
updates
for
now
a
reminder.
The
the
final
recommendations
for
the
the
pleasing
municipal
law,
accountability
and
inclusion
subcommittee
are
due
will
be
discussed
november
1st,
so
they
will
be
due
on
october
29th
and
really
that
is
the
the
and
that's
so
we
can
get
them
in
this
previously
scheduled
public
hearing
on
november
6th
also
on
a
saturday.
M
So
that's
the
the
the
update
on
how
we
have
revised
the
schedule
based
on
on
your
desires,
and
I
see
a
comment
from
commissioner
lazad
her
hand.
E
Yeah
lawrence,
I
printed
off
the
work
plan
today,
yeah
and
when
you
were
talking
about
september
27th,
it's
not
what
I
have
on
mind.
So
what
were
you?
Where
are
you
reading
that?
From
did
I
get
the
wrong
one?
Climate
change.
M
Yeah
well,
climate
change,
it
doesn't
say
climate
change.
As
a
topic
here.
Apologies
there
probably
should
be
unconfirmed
speaker
on
climate
change.
Here
you
know
we're
we're,
like.
I
said,
still
trying
to
confirm
that
speaker
so,
but
do
you
see
the
rest
of
the
speakers
here?
M
E
Well,
not
sure
where
I
downloaded
it
but
mine
says,
confirm
guest
sergio
perez.
Do.
A
M
Yeah
you're
right,
I
did
not
update
these
speakers
here.
My
apologies
and.
E
M
Thank
you
for
that
catch
we're.
You
know.
We've
heard
from
you
all
that
you
want
to
have
the
speakers
updated
on
the
agenda
and
in
the
work
plan,
and
you
know
we're
committed
to
doing
that.
So
thank
you
for
keeping
us
accountable.
M
Other
questions
on
this.
M
All
right,
I
did
hear
from
the
city
clerk
that
she
did
have
an
update
to
share,
as
it
relates
to
virtual
meetings.
Chair.
Do
you
want
to
go
to
the
city
clerk
now.
A
Hey
this
is,
this
is
really
quick.
Ab361
was
signed
by
the
governor
thursday
evening.
This
will
allow
us
to
continue
virtual
meetings
through
the
declared
emergency.
We
expect
the
declared
emergency
to
at
least
go
through
january,
so
we
will
be
continuing
with
fully
virtual
meetings.
A
The
only
provision-
that's
that's
slightly
different
than
our
current
provisions
is.
If
zoom
goes
down,
then
we
pause
the
meeting
until
it
comes
back
up,
which
we
would
need
to
do
anyway,
because
we're
fully
virtual
but
other
than
that
we
will
stay
virtual.
Let
me
know
if
you
have
any
questions.
M
A
L
Sorry
about
that,
the
the
I'm
getting
an
echo,
the
request
is
that
you
post
the
updated
work
plan
on
the
website
as
soon
as
possible.
Please
thank
you.
H
Hi
blair
beekman
here
I
just
had
to
quickly
wash
my
hands.
Thank
you
for
this
item.
I
am
interested
how
you
have
work
plan
ideas
of
auditing
in
through
mid-october.
Thank
you.
It's
my
real
sincere
hope
that
you
know
the
ideas
of
reimagine
the
city
manager's
letter
brought
out
a
few
weeks
ago
can
be
negotiated
and
it
become.
It
can
become
easier
to
talk
about
a
negotiation
process
that
I
think
by
mid-october
can
yield
some
good
results
for
all
sides.
H
I
think
we
can
come
to
some
interesting
ideas
how
to
move
forward
on
the
future.
I
will
talk
about
reimagine,
good
luck
in
those
efforts
and
thank
you.
C
Thank
you,
mr
beekman
just
reminded
me
we're
also
looking
at
connecting
with
the
reimagine
committee
and
getting
their
report
back
to
the
commission
as
well.
So
at
this
point
we
will
take
up
an
item
that
has
been
tabled
until
tonight,
which
is
the
discussion
and
possible
action
on
the
charter
review.
Commission
bylaws.
C
I
don't
know
if
the
city
attorney
wants
to
report
on
them.
It's
been
a
while,
since
folks
looked
at
them.
If
their
people
have
comments
around
them,
do
we
want
to
connection
on
them?
Go
ahead.
Mark.
P
As
far
as
the
recital
language
goes,
that
was
developed
in
conjunction
with
the
commissioners
who
had
volunteered,
and
so
I
provided
a
clean
version
of
it
as
well
as
attract
changes,
and
I
apologize
it's
not
in
blue
and
red,
but
strikethroughs
and
the
additions
are
there
and
I'm
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Anyone
may
have.
O
Thank
you
no
questions,
but
in
terms
of
some
of
the
revisions
mai,
along
with
vice
chair
johnson
and
commissioner
fuentes,
we
wanted
to
make
sure
we
incorporated
some
of
the
earlier
decisions
of
the
commission
around
our
focus
and
with
the
lens
that
we
would
be
adopting
as
we
considered
these
proposals.
O
O
So
those
would
be
the
first
four,
whereas
clauses
and
but
through
the
rest
again
there
really
aren't
any
substantive
changes
to
any
of
the
operator
operative
provisions.
C
All
right,
christopher
calendar.
S
C
Thank
you
for
your
question.
I
was
just
about
to
say
the
same
thing.
We
can
take
a
motion
if
somebody
wants
to
take
action.
If
we
take
no
action,
we
simply
move
on.
We
will
hear
from
the
public
on
this
issue
because
it's
an
agenda
item,
but
it's
really
the
pleasure
of
the
commission
at
this
point.
C
So
I
would
entertain
emotion
or
I
would
entertain
no
motion
at
this
time
and
we
can
go
to
the
public
on
either
one
pleasure
of
the
commission,
commissioner
tran.
O
I'll
move
to
adopt
the
bylaws
as
proposed.
C
A
H
Hi
blair
beekman
here
I
hope
these
words
can
be
relevant
to
this
item
as
you're
going
to
be
working
on.
You
know,
final
deadlines
like
by
mid-november
and
and
or
late
november
and
mid-december.
H
I
mean
I'm
understanding
that
the
the
election
things
for
the
mayor
has
to
be
all
ready
to
go
by
say,
may
2022..
H
I
hope
that
you
know
the
other
study
processes
processes
that
you're
going
through
if
needed,
it
can
possibly
be
granted
extension
time.
I
don't
know
how
long
that
extension
time
may
need
to
be.
There
is
a
a
really
important
covid
19.
H
I
don't
know
economic
study
forum
that
san
jose
will
be
starting
up
soon,
and
I
I
don't
quite
know
if,
if
your
group
should
have
a
place
with
that
with
that
group,
but
that
may
be
too
political,
but
to
have
some
sort
of
say
and
possibly
some
help
in
how
that
group
will
function.
Maybe
is
a
is
a
you
know,
a
as
a
steady
resource
could
be
an
important
concept
that
to
mention
at
this
time
and
as
we're
as
you
know,
they're
trying
to
decide
these
things.
A
A
Molly,
yes,.
K
K
O
L
C
C
Thank
you
and
thank
you
to
the
commissioners
who
worked
on
that
document
at
this
time,
we'd
like
to
call
for
the
open
forum
of
the
public.
So
this
is
comments
to
the
the
commission.
You
believe
the
commission
needs
to
hear
on
an
item.
That's
not
been
our
agenda.
The
clerk
can
call
the
first
speaker.
Please.
H
Hi
blair
beekman
here
this
was
a
really
really
interesting
meeting
and
one
that
probably
should
be
shared
in
the
future
of
our
process
as
a
a
guideline
of
how
we're
working.
So
thank
you
to
quickly
conclude
my
thoughts
from
the
previous
item.
You
know
to
be
available
as
to
be
allowed
just
the
to
continue
to
study
of
yourselves
with
no
pressure,
which
is,
is
what
can
be
interesting
as
well.
H
H
We're
talking
about
a
few
items
of
subtlety
about
the
future
of
a
strong
mayor,
but
that
really
can
be
balanced
with
the
ideas
of
new
concepts
of
what
council
can
be
allowed
to
do,
and
I
hope
you'll
be
exploring
those
ideas.
Those
are
just
as
valid
and
as
important
as
these
strong
mayor
things
and
and
what
my
point
I
was
talking
about:
aclu
surveillance
and
technology,
ordinance
ideas
from
2014
that
I
think,
are
having
an
effect
on
on
your
decision
making
at
this
time.
H
It's
like
an
old
mother
hubbard
here
that
it
it
it.
It's
meant
to
talk
about
overall
practices,
how
we
can
work
together
and
that's
how
that's
what
I'm
trying
to
address
so
what
the
commissioners
addressed
about,
how
to
invite
the
council
more
to
the
process.
H
As
for
the
future,
the
strong
mayor
is
just
awesome
and
so
good
luck
what
you'll
be
working
towards,
and
you
know
my
feelings
very
well
now
about
we're
talking
in
a
good
way
about
things,
and
I
think
this
is
as
far
as
we
can
go
with
the
strongmare
stuff
and
good
luck.
What
you
can
do
with
it.
Good
luck!
How
we
compare
prepare
for
opening
upcoming,
possible
earthquakes
in
the
next
few
years
and
decades.
A
L
Thank
you.
So
this
is
a
brief
follow-up
on
something
I
suggested.
I
believe
it
was
a
couple
of
weeks
ago
to
the
the
governance
committee
is
that
instead
of
having
a
city
council
when
you
have
more
council
members,
is
to
think
more
about
a
layered
approach
between
the
individual
council
members.
However
many
they
are
and
the
individual
communities,
because,
as
some
of
you
have
pointed
out
tonight,
some
of
them
kind
of
tend
to
turn
off.
L
C
C
I'm
going
to
join
us
to
our
next
meeting,
which
is
this
saturday,
we're
scheduled
for
a
public
hearing
on
september
25th
at
11
o'clock.
It
will
also
be
a
virtual
meeting.
We
will
hear
from
the
public
again
on
the
issues
that
were
raised,
the
recommendations
that
were
made
tonight
and
to
be
able
to
recognize
the
public's
input
from
tonight
and
the
next
in
our
public
hearing,
so
that
we
can
take
a
provisional
vote
at
a
regular
meeting.
C
Our
next
scheduled
regular
meeting
of
the
charter
review
commission
is
september
27th
at
5
30,
which
is
also
going
to
be
a
virtual
meeting
and
until
then
I'll
see
you
on
saturday,
we
are
adjourned
from
mr,
mr.