►
From YouTube: MAY 24, 2023 | Planning Commission
Description
City of San José, California
Planning Commission, May 24, 2023.
This public meeting will be held at San José City Hall and also accessible 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=1104204&GUID=3F11F84C-763B-48F6-900C-A3B572971539
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
C
C
C
B
Now
we
will
do
roll
call
commissioner
lardinois
here,
commissioner
barrosio
here,
commissioner
Cantrell
here,
commissioner
Casey
here,
commissioner
Garcia
here,
commissioner
ornelas
wise
here,
commissioner
Rosario
here,
commissioner
young
here,
commissioner
tordillos
here
excellent
Now.
We
move
on
to
the
summary
of
hearing
procedures.
Yes,.
B
Yep
all
right
and
as
a
as
as
evident
through
that
we
will
offer
translation
tonight
in
Spanish.
So
if
you
want
to
address
the
commission,
please
fill
out
the
speaker
card
located
on
the
tables
up
at
the
top
and
over
here
to
the
side
and
then
drop
it
into
that
box
there.
B
B
The
meeting
technician
will
connect
those
persons
who
desire
to
speak
to
the
commission,
so
they
may
be
heard
generally.
Each
speaker
will
be
given
up
to
two
minutes
and
speakers
using
the
translator
will
have
to
double
the
time
at
the
discretion
of
the
chair.
The
time
allotted
to
each
speaker
may
be
changed
Depending
on
time,
management
of
the
meeting
after
the
public
testimony
the
applicant
and
a
repellent
may
make
closing
remarks
or
up
to
an
additional
five
minutes.
Plenty
kitcheners
planning
Commissioners
may
ask
questions
of
the
speakers.
B
The
public
hearing
will
then
be
closed
and
the
Planning
Commission
will
then
discuss
and
vote
since
we
do
have
the
housing
element,
which
is
a
high
level
of
interest,
and
we
expect
a
lot
of
participation.
We're
going
to
limit
all
public
comments
on
all
items
tonight
to
one
minute,
including
public
comment.
B
Continuing
on.
If
you
challenge
these
land
use
decisions
in
court,
you
may
be
limited
to
raising
only
those
issues
you
or
someone
else
raise
at
this
public
hearing
or
in
written
correspondence
delivered
to
the
city
or
prior
to
the
public
hearing
the
planning
commission's
actions
on
rezonings
pre-zonings,
General
plan
amendments
and
code
amendments
is
advisory
to
the
city
council.
The
city
council
will
hold
public
hearings
on
these
items.
Section
20.120.400
of
the
municipal
code
provides
procedures
for
legal
protests
to
the
city
councils
on
rezonings
and
pre-zonings.
B
B
F
B
D
Yeah
so
I
met
over
Zoom
with
Sean
Callie
Rye
about
item
4C.
The
Cannabis
ordinance
update
I
also
met
with
Ali
saberman
about
item
8A,
the
housing
element,
okay,
great.
G
I
met
with
Sean
Kelly
Rai
about
the
4C,
also
I'm,.
H
B
H
No,
not
an
application,
sir,
but
sent
a
letter
responding
to
the
housing
element.
B
Okay-
okay-
let's
see
here,
oh
public
comment
so
Now's
the
Time
for
public
comment
on
items
that
are
not
on
the
agenda
but
pertain
to
municipal
government
for
but
not
on
an
agenda.
The
commission
cannot
take
any
formal
action
without
the
item
being
noticed
on
the
agenda,
nor
May
any
suggestions.
We
can't
do
anything
in
the
purview
of
the
commission,
so
staff
do
we
have
any
speakers
for
public
comment
today
here
in
the
chambers
or
on
the
zoom
meeting
or
the
web
meeting.
B
B
Foreign,
okay,
great
okay.
So
if
I,
if
we
just
confirm
again,
there's
no
public
comment
from
anyone
on
the
meeting
right.
B
Okay
and
then
does
anything
being
deferred
or
removed.
Tonight
I,
don't
believe
so
so
we'll
move
straight
to
the
consent.
Calendar,
which
is
the
minutes
and
I,
did
receive
a
request
to
pull
an
item
which
would
be
item
C.
So
then
we
have
remaining
on
the
consent,
calendar
items
A
and
C.
Is
there
a
motion
to
approve
those
items,
A
and
B
right
yeah,
because
I
can't
read
A
and
B
so.
D
B
B
L
M
And
while
that's
loading
I'll
introduce
myself,
my
name
is
Martina
Davis
I'm,
the
division
manager
for
Citywide
planning.
I
am
joined
today
by
my
colleagues,
Wendy
sulazi,
the
division
manager
for
the
police,
department's
division
of
cannabis
regulation
and
Sergeant
Woolsey,
who
is
also
with
our
Police
Department's
division
of
cannabis.
Regulation
I
should
be
able
to
answer
any
of
your
questions,
but
if
there
are
areas
that
I
can't
answer,
they
can
help
me
out.
M
Okay,
so
today
we're
here
to
Pro,
send
updates
to
the
city's
cannabis
land
use
regulations
in
particularly
specifically
pertaining
to
cannabis.
Retail
businesses
see
so
I'll
start
with
some
background
to
contextualize
what
we're
doing
here
tonight,
I'm
just
starting
kind
of
from
the
beginning.
Pre-2014
we
had
about
a
hundred
over
a
hundred
businesses
operating
in
our
city
that
we're
operating
in
an
unregulated
fashion
in
2014
Council
adopted
what
is
essentially
our
current
regulations.
They
have
been
updated,
but
that
was
the
creation
of
our
our
Regulatory
and
land
use
program.
M
At
the
time
there
was
a
registration
window
open
for
everyone
to
come
in
compliance,
find
compliance
sites,
16
businesses
were
able
to
register,
and
those
businesses
remain
today.
Registration
for
cannabis,
retail
has
not
been
reopened
since
that
time,
with
an
exception,
I'll
talk
about
in
a
second,
they
did
all
convert
to
recreational
uses
in
by
2017.
So
we
now
have
16
recreational
Cannabis
businesses
in
our
city
and
operated
fairly
successfully,
so
in
2019
Council
said
you
know,
this
has
been
going
pretty
well.
Why
don't
we
look
at
expanding
this?
M
They
directed
staff
to
return
with
an
ordinance
to
expand,
wear
cannabis,
retail
could
occur
and
to
expand
the
number
of
businesses.
This
work
was
slowed
by
the
pandemic,
but
we
returned
to
Council
in
February
2022.
Many
of
the
Commissioners
tonight
heard
this
item,
probably
in
January,
and
we
allowed
cannabis
retail
in
commercial
zoning
districts
restricted
it
from
the
industrial
districts
modified
distance
requirements
to
sensitive
uses.
M
We
Council
also
voted
outside
of
the
zoning
ordinance
to
allow
the
16
businesses
to
open
a
second
location,
so
they
can
look
for
a
new
location
in
the
retail
areas
and
to
allow
up
to
10
Equity
applicants
upon
completion
of
the
city's
Equity
Academy
to
open
either
retail
or
delivery
only
businesses
and
that
Equity
Academy
has
actually
just
kicked
off
recently.
So
we
have
folks
going
through
that
right
now.
M
So
here
is
the
distance
is
established
to
sensitive
receptors,
most
restrictive
outside
of
downtown
and
urban
Villages.
Those
are
less
restrictive
because
of
the
denser
mixed-use
nature
of
those
areas.
The
most
stringent
standards
are
to
youth-oriented
businesses
or
institutions
such
as
daycare,
centers,
youth,
centers,
elementary
schools,
preschools
secondary
schools.
Those
distances
are
all
measured
as
a
straight
line
from
the
property
line
to
the
property
line.
M
So
the
industry
was
very
excited
to
start
looking
for
new
locations,
and
they
did
so
immediately.
Actually,
some
of
them
started
looking
before
the
ordinance
was
adopted
and
they've
run
into
a
number
of
challenges.
The
first
one
I
will
own.
This
are
analysis
for
the
ordinance.
We
really
missed
a
lot
of
sensitive
uses
when
we
were
preparing
that
analysis,
particularly
daycare
centers.
At
the
time
we
thought
there
was
going
to
be
about
1400,
potentially
compliant
locations
based
on
the
data
we
had
when
we
started
implementing
it
and
working
with
those
businesses.
M
Looking
at
the
sites,
we
found
that
we
were,
we
were
way
off.
It
was
not
nearly
the
1400
sites
that
we
thought
that
we
were
going
to
have
largely
due
to
again
some
errors
in
our
data
and
lack
of
information
that
we
had
to
be
able
to
fill
in
the
holes
so
outside
of
that,
the
industry
has
also
encountered
a
number
of
challenges
that
are
somewhat
unique
to
the
industry,
largely
having
to
do
with
them
being
a
federally
illegal
business.
M
To
this
day,
some
of
the
challenges
include
inability
for
a
lot
of
corporate
Property
Owners
to
lease
to
them
their
concerned,
potentially
about
taxes.
Essentially
the
federal
government,
one
area
they
found
that
a
couple
of
them
shared
with
me
was
even
a
surprise
to
them
how
much
of
an
issue
this
was.
Is
that
brand
name
tenants?
So
you
know
any
store
you
can
think
of.
You
know
T-Mobile,
just
throwing
you
know
Chipotle
McDonald's.
They
tend
to
have
least
conditions
that
say
that
the
property
owner
cannot
lease
to
a
illegal
business
is
to
protect
their
brand.
M
You
know,
Chipotle
doesn't
want
to
be
in
a
shopping
center
full
of
illegal
businesses,
but
what
that
means
is
that
a
lot
of
property
owners
that
would
otherwise
be
interested
or
unable
to
lease
to
cannabis,
businesses
and
largely
their
property
search
is
has
to
be
focused
on
smaller
single
tenant
sites
sites,
without
a
corporate
property
owner
and
sites
with
small
businesses.
So
zoning
restrictions
aside,
they
they
really
face
a
lot
of
challenges
that
are
unique
to
them.
M
They've
also
shared
with
me
that
there's
increased
cost
the
property
owner,
for
example,
their
insurance
will
go
way
up
and
a
lot
of
property
owners
are
just
not
interested
in
in
dealing
with
that
and
then
there's
also
property
owners
who
just
kind
of
fundamentally
don't
want
this
use
on
their
property,
and
that
is
something
a
challenge
they're
also
seeing.
So,
despite
looking
for
15
plus
months,
only
one
of
the
16
businesses
has
been
able
to
find
a
compliant
new
location.
We
very
much
expected
them
to
be
able
to
find
new
locations
pretty
simply
and
quickly.
M
We
prepared
a
status
update
as
we
had
been
requested
by
Council
initially,
and
we
shared
some
of
these
issues
that
we
had
encountered
so
Council
read
that,
and
you
know,
said:
hey
we
didn't
meet
the
Mark.
We
didn't
meet
our
goal,
which
was
to
allow
these
businesses
to
relocate
to
these
commercial
areas
and
they
provided
us
some
direction
to
come
back
with
some
modifications.
M
Specifically,
they
asked
us
to
come
back
with
a
request
with
modifications
to
the
distance
requirements
to
schools,
daycare
centers
and
youth
centers,
reducing
it
to
a
thousand
foot
path
of
travel,
so
that
would
be
from
the
Cannabis
business
entrance
to
the
closest
public
entrance
of
that
use
or
a
500
foot,
measured
in
a
straight
line
from
property
line
to
property
line,
and
whichever
is
more
restrictive
will
apply.
Our
analysis
is
likely,
and
probably
just
about
every
case.
The
500
foot
is
going
to
be
the
more
restrictive
measurement.
M
They
also
asked
us
to
adjust
distances
from
libraries,
community
and
rec
centers
and
Parks
down
to
500
feet.
We
had
initially
proposed
an
overlay
that
restricted
businesses
from
operating
in
a
or
opening
any
higher
crime
police
beat.
That
is
defined.
We've
got
that
out
of
Alcohol
Law,
that's
defined
as
a
police
beat
with
over
20
percent,
above
average
crime
reports.
We
found.
You
know
some
of
the
reasons
how
yeah
look
at
some
of
the
reasons
having
to
do
with
that.
We
just
found
it
didn't
in
practice.
It
didn't
make
a
lot
of
sense.
M
It
was
restricting
areas
that
kind
of
arbitrarily
police
beats
are
somewhat
sometimes
large,
sometimes
strangely
configured,
and
we
just
found
it
blocking
sites
without
a
good
reason.
So
council
did
recommend
removing
that
they
recommended
eliminating
the
distance
requirement
between
storefronts
and
then
to
propose
a
standard
to
address
concentration
of
cannabis.
Storefronts,
though
so,
not
a
strict
distance
between
each
other,
but
something
else
that
we
could
look
at
around
concentration.
M
So
for
the
proposed
concentration
standard.
We
looked
at
a
number
of
items.
There's
you
know
a
couple
ways
to
do
it.
You
can
look
at
a
predefined
geographic
area
and
you
can
say
no
more
than
so
many
within
that
area.
We
looked
at
that
first
and
we
looked
at
a
few
different
kind
of
options
around
that.
Would
it
make
sense
to
do
census
tracts?
Would
it
make
sense
to
do
police
beats
again?
Would
it
make
sense
to
do
zip
codes
council
districts?
M
We
just
felt
when
we
started
looking
at
all
of
those
all
of
those
Geographic
bounds
are
designed
for
other
purposes,
and
so,
when
you
start
kind
of
looking
at
them
as
a
concentration
standard,
it
does
start
looking
kind
of
arbitrary
council
districts,
for
example,
are
very,
very
large,
so
businesses
could
be
on.
You
know
in
total
separate
sides
of
the
council
district
and
it
wouldn't
look
very
close
to
each
other,
so
we
decided
not
to
go
with
that.
We
are
recommending
a
standard
that
again
we
are
borrowing
from
alcohol.
M
There
is
some
overlap
in
in
those
juices.
They
both
sell
intoxicants.
Essentially,
that
said,
cannabis
is
heavier
regulated
by
the
city
than
alcohol
is
so
we
looked
at
an
existing
concentration
standard
we
have,
which
is
no
more
than
for
storefronts
within
a
thousand
foot
radius.
That's
one
of
the
things
the
commission
and
Council
looks
at
when
determining
public
convenience
and
necessity
for
off
sale
of
alcohol,
and
that
would
be
locked
in
at
the
zoning
verification.
So
let
me
show
you
what
that
looks
like
so
we've
got
just
a
sample
site
just
be
clear.
M
M
Let's
see
you
can
do
a
couple
more
do
a
couple
more.
Do
this
fifth,
one
outside
of
the
radius,
where
we
run
into
a
problem,
is
with
this
one
in
blue.
M
How
it
works
so
if
it,
if
you
were
to
draw
the
thousand
foot
radius
just
around
that
one
in
blue,
it
would
be
okay
because
it's
the
fourth
within
its
own
radius,
but
it
creates
a
fifth
within
a
radius
of
one
of
the
other
businesses.
So
in
this
example
that
one
would
not
be
allowed.
So
that's
how
the
standard
would
work.
M
For
outreach-
and
we
had
done
extensive
Outreach
with
the
previous
ordinance
and
we
had
shared
interestingly
enough,
so
we
had
shared
the
maps
of
where
you
know
we
thought
compliance
sites
were
going
to
be
and
I
mentioned
problems
with
that
map.
We
have
greatly
improved
our
data
set
since
then,
and
we
prepared
a
new
map
and
when
you
compare
them,
they're
actually
pretty
close
to
the
same.
So
these
zoning
changes
that
are
proposed
tonight
actually
result
in
what
we
thought
our
original
ordinance
was
going
to
result
in.
M
So
we
focused
on
doing
information,
so
the
public
could
contact
us.
We
had
an
informational
website
with
a
video.
We
have
had
a
contact
list
of
people
over
the
years
who
have
asked
us
to
stay
updated
on
cannabis,
industry,
zoning
changes
and
other
changes
we
emailed
all
of
them
to
let
them
know.
We've
met
with
industry
stakeholders
and
we've
been
available
to
respond
to
comments
and
questions
for
SQL.
M
So
in
summary,
we've
found
that
you
know
we
thought
we
were
going
to
adopt
a
framework
that
would
allow
the
businesses
to
quickly
relocate.
They
are
very
interested
in
relocating
to
our
commercial
areas
and
that
will
help
the
the
concern
around
concentration
in
District
7..
We
didn't
hit
the
mark,
and
so
we
do
feel
that
updating
these
standards
would
Implement
that
direction,
that
we
thought
we
had
done
in
February
and
here's
the
new
map
I'll
just
share.
You
know
the
all
those
little
blue
circles.
M
So
I'll
end
with
our
staff
recommendation,
adopt
a
resolution
approving
the
Cannabis
business
ordinance
addendum
to
the
initial
study
and
negative
decoration,
and
it's
often
or
Nancy,
mending
chapter
20.80
of
Title
20
of
the
municipal
code
to
modify
distance
requirements
for
cannabis,
retail
businesses
to
schools,
daycare
centers,
youth,
centers,
community,
centers,
rec,
centers,
Parks,
eliminate
distance
requirements
between
storefronts,
add
a
standard
to
address
concentration,
remove
the
police,
beat
restriction
and
make
other
Technical
non-substitutive
and
formatting
changes
within
those
sections.
And
that
concludes
my
report
happy
to
answer
any
questions.
Thank.
B
You
very
much
I
see
we
have
some
Commissioners.
Do
you
want
me
to
go
for
public
comment?
First,
okay,
great,
do
we
have
any
I
see
no
cards
so
then
I
would
question
would
go
to
the
administrator
of
the
web
meeting.
Do
we
have
any
hands
raised
on
the
web
meeting.
J
Stadium,
okay,
I,
oh
sorry,
Sean
Holly,
right
You
are
an
unit
go
ahead
and
unmute
your
device.
O
Good
evening
capture
and
commission
members,
thank
you
so
much
for
your
time.
Martina
did
a
wonderful
job
in
overlaying
sort
of
the
the
issue
here
at
hand.
What
we're
talking
about
here
is
is
really
a
compatibility
of
the
map
to
the
language.
O
What
really
was
the
intent
of
the
council
having
worked
with
the
council
since
2019
through
covid
and
the
trials
and
tribulations,
and
so
now,
four
years
later,
in
changing
this,
this
ordinance
was
to
really
move
cannabis
from
industrial
use
where
it's
not
compatible,
neither
in
parking
or
other
retail
uses
to
a
more
compatible
commercial
and
Retail
uses.
Other
cities
do
not
put
cannabis
in
industrial,
they
put
it
in
retail
commercial
in
Union
City.
O
They
put
it
in
a
retail
commercial
shopping
center,
a
what
they
call
a
Super
Regional
shopping
center
and
in
Redwood
City,
all
of
their
zoning
and
all
of
the
new
dispensaries
there
of
which,
but
one
of
six
is
currently
open,
is
in
retail
locations.
So
that
is
really
the
way
that
it
is
is
working
since
the
original
passage
of
the
ordinance
the
Cannabis
Market
has
doubled
in
size
as
it's
gone
from
89
million
to
185
million.
So
you
have
doubled
number.
The
customers.
B
J
P
Yes,
thank
you,
chair
I'm,
the
one
who
requested
to
pull
the
item
and
I'm
going
to
talk
about
why
but
I
have
a
question
for
Staff.
First
of
all,
thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
the
staff
report,
which
was
really
really
thorough
and
well
done.
I
think
did
a
good
job
of
identifying
the
issues
so
I
have
a
process.
Question
I
just
want
to
make
sure
I
understand
what
we're
being
asked
to
do
tonight.
P
So
from
what
I
understand
the
city
council
directed
staff
after
their
November
first
meeting
to
make
specific
changes
to
this
cannabis
ordinance,
and
so
the
document
that
we're
reviewing
that
you
prepared
the
draft
ordinance
reflects
the
specific
changes
that
the
city
council
requested.
Is
that
correct
that.
P
There's
a
couple
reasons
why
I
pulled
the
item?
One
is
this
is
a
controversial
issue
both
amongst
the
members
of
the
commission,
I
think
that
was
reflected.
You
know
we
had
a
really
hearty
and
good
discussion
in
February
and
I'm,
pretty
sure,
there's
other
Commissioners
that
want
to
weigh
in
on
this
and
I
thought.
It
was
interesting
that
the
survey
that
was
done
in
the
residents
got
a
lot
of
input,
which
is
great,
and
it
was
about
50
50
from
what
I
read
right,
Pro
or
con.
P
All
that
being
said,
I
know
that
we're
I
know
that
we
are
looking
at
an
ordinance
that
was
developed
directly
from
input
from
the
city
council,
but
I
feel
like
this
commission,
we're
being
asked
to
be
a
fresh
set
of
eyes
on
issues
that
we
can
take
a
look
at
it
independently
and
then
give
our
input
to
the
council
and
I
wanted
to
do
that
tonight.
I
have
some
other
comments
but
I'm
going
to
reserve
them,
because
I'm
really
actually
really
interested
in
hearing
the
other
Commissioners
on
this.
Thank.
D
Yeah
excuse
me:
I
just
want
to
Echo
what
commissioner
young
says
thanks
Martina
for
this
presentation
and
staff
report,
and
also
commissioner
young
I,
appreciate
your
thoughtfulness
and
wanting
to
have
a
full
discussion
about
this
question.
All
the
distance
standards
that
are
you
know
part
of
this
ordinance.
They
apply
across
City
borders,
right.
M
Yeah
I
would
say
it
would
it
doesn't
specify
cannabis
businesses
in
the
city
of
San
Jose.
It's
cannot
create
more
than
four
cannabis
retail
storefronts
within
the
radius.
So
if
you
had
that
in
another
jurisdiction,
I
would
interpret
that
to
apply
okay.
D
And
theoretical
but
curious
they
are
I.
Definitely
you
know
want
to
hear
what
everyone
has
to
say,
but
at
the
same
time
my
view
of
this
item
is
the
council
already
took
an
action
to
adopt
the
current
version
of
the
ordinance
and
what
we
have
here
is
an
amendment
to
bring
it
closer
to
the
council's
original
intent.
So
I
think
that's
enough
for
me
to
make
a
motion
to
approve
this
item.
Q
P
F
B
Just
emotion,
motion
on
the
floor
of
a
second
Casey
for
your
notes.
Okay,
so
next
is
commissioner
ornelas
wise.
R
And
I'd
like
to
speak
on
behalf
of
mothers
and
I
I
have
two
children
a
five
and
eight
year
old
and
recently
my
five-year-old
was
in
daycare
and
now
she's
in
school,
so
I
would
not
want
any
of
these
businesses
near
my
children.
I
wouldn't
I.
Don't
think
that
I!
R
Just
like
I
like
to
gamble,
but
I,
don't
want
to
casino
my
backyard,
because
I
know
the
damage
that
it's
going
to
do
to
my
community.
It's
the
same
thing
I,
so
I'm
gonna,
you
know
for
me.
It
just
comes
down
to
there's
already
a
over
concentration
in
District
Seven,
which
is
my
district.
R
So
no
I'm
not
going
to
recommend
additional.
You
know
these
type
of
businesses
in
in
you
know
commercial
areas
in
my
district,
absolutely
not!
We've
already
taken
the
biggest
hit
right
and
they're,
really
close
to
Monterey
Road
and
Thule
Road
and
the
intersection
of
Thule
and
it's
truly
in
center
and
McLaughlin
and
Curtner
and
Monterey
are
the
worst
most
unsafe,
intersections
very
close
to
where
these
businesses
are.
Okay.
R
I
was
pretty
disappointed
that
this
was
on
the
consent
calendar
because
there
was
a
survey
that
was
done
in
March
2021
and
over
400
people
responded,
50
of
them,
which
were
opposed
to
this.
That's
a
big
group.
That's
a
big
group.
R
You
know:
I
have
to
go
to
bat,
for
the
children
and
and
for
the
families
and
for
the
Integrity
of
the
city.
I
mean
I
even
have
a
hard
time.
The
fact
that
this
is
so
that
would
exist
right
now
is
so
close
to
San,
Jose
State
and
the
students.
I
have
a
hard
time
with
that
yeah.
So
I
I,
don't
think.
I
I
think
that
when
you
have
a
use
like
this,
you
know
I
mean
if
you're
going
to
change
all
these
policies
in
the
zoning
ordinance.
R
Why
don't
you
do
it
for
other
small
businesses
that
were
really
hit
hard
during
covid?
Why
you
given
precedence
to
some
something
like
this
when
there's
a
lot
of
mom
and
pop
shops
that
were
hurt,
you
know,
unfortunately,
I
have
experienced.
I
know
people
that
marriages
have
been
broken
up.
Families
have
been
broken
up:
single
parent
households
because
of
of
drugs
right,
so
you
know,
I'm
gonna
have
to
say
no
yeah,
just
on
behalf
of
the
city
that
I
love
and
the
families
that
that's
where
I
stand
during
covet.
R
R
That's
just
that's
how
I
you
know
I,
don't
think
that
by
allowing
it
closer
to
Children
schools
that
these
these
organizations
are
going
to
be
able
to
overcome
some
of
the
obstacles
that
they're
already
facing
you
know
as
these
things
I
would
encourage
more
like,
like
an
annual
festival
or
something
like
that
where
you
in
you
know
more
like
a
festival
like
a
three-day
festival
or
concentrated
in
one
area,
just
kind
of
like,
like
a
special
district.
You
know
that's
far
from
Children
and
Families,
something
to
that
effect.
R
You
know
because
I
am
for
businesses,
but
yeah
for
this
I
I
I
have
to
speak
up
on
behalf
of
mothers
that
have
lost
their
children
to
drugs,
and
that's
that's
just
where
I
stand.
I
S
M
S
H
First
I
I
just
want
to
say
I
I'm,
a
single
dad
I
raised
my
children.
It
was
complicated
and
there
are
a
lot
of
things
in
the
world
to
worry,
about,
I,
respect
and
appreciate
your
perspective
and
I'm
always
glad
to
hear
you
voice.
It
just
know
that
definitely
I
I'm
also
curious,
though,
where
the
police
ring
in
on
this
I'd
like
to
hear
some
perspective.
H
I
I
I've
learned
on
other
issues
that,
if
you
don't
say
anything
it
may
mean
you're
saying
yes,
what
what
are
specifically
do.
You
have
any
concerns
from
this
from
a
policing
perspective
any
at
all
and
two
do
you
feel
that
this
addresses
any
of
your
concerns
this
this
movement,
or
does
it
actually
create
more
concerns
for
you
in
terms
of
policing.
T
The
changes
proposed
today
are
pretty
much
the
same
as
what
we
evaluated
and
looked
at
last
year.
Only
now
we're
kind
of
making
the
changes
that
you
know,
based
on
what
Martina
had
already
said,
that
we
thought
were
going
to
be
the
case
for
where
they
could
locate
somewhat
last
year.
It
does
allow
a
little
bit
more
flexibility
and
it
is
a
little
bit
closer,
but
we
we
do
regulate
this
cannabis.
Industry
very
I
think
we
have
a
robust
regulatory
program.
T
T
You
know
age,
verification,
electronic
scanning
devices,
things
like
that.
So
there's
a
lot
of
stuff
that
these
businesses
have
to
adhere
for
being
a
good
neighbor,
I
think
I
think
something
that's
like
within
300
feet.
They
have
to
have
graffiti
trash
removal.
All
sorts
of
things
like
that
from
from
like
the
public
eye,
I
think
you
know
again
we
put
things
in
place
in
in
title
VI
and
for
the
operating
that
that
we
feel
comfortable.
That
makes
it
safe
for
our
city
I
mean.
Can
things
happen?
T
T
T
No
and
yeah
the
16
businesses
are
still
currently
registered.
T
No,
usually
it's
a
lot
of
times
it's
just
if
we
notice
it
and
we
talk
to
them,
they
change
it
right
away.
Sometimes
it
could
result
in
a
finer
citation,
but
it
and
it
gets
resolved
right
away
because
code
enforcements
also
a
partner
with
us.
So
they
also
will
have
you
know,
site
inspections
too,
and
so
things
are
addressed
through
them
as.
H
Well:
okay,
one
final
question:
so,
in
the
in
the
process
of
opening
this,
this
up
to
additional
facilities,
will
you
be
able
to
provide
the
same
level
of
service
and
monitoring
that
you
currently
do.
T
I
mean
that's
our
hope.
We
haven't
increased
our
staffing
yet
again
we're
waiting
right
now
with
the
we
have
to
kind
of
wait
and
see
how
the
expansion
goes
to
see
how
many
businesses
are.
What
they're
allowed
to
do
now
is
the
16
registered
businesses
can
have
a
second
location,
and
these
expanded
retail
areas
like
Martinez,
said
there's
only
one
that
has
an
approved
location.
It
has
not
opened
up.
It
just
is
going
through
the
permit
process.
T
Now,
when
the
we
just
kicked
off
the
Cannabis
Equity,
Business
Academy,
and
so
that
just
started,
and
with
that
there
will
potentially
be
10
more
businesses
in
our
city
and
that
we
plan
to
address
it
from
with
from
a
staffing
perspective,
through
the
regular
Council
process
working
with
the
budget
office
and
then
city
council
to
to
be
able
to
address
that.
Okay.
U
Perfect,
thank
you
good
evening.
Everyone,
thank
you
for
the
presentation
and
just
as
valuable
as
a
police,
department's
presence
and
and
ability
to
respond
to
our
questions
is
is
very
much
appreciated.
I,
wonder
in
context
like
these
and
in
future
contexts
is.
Is
there
a
way
to
invite
more
expert
opinion
right,
for
example,
I,
really
wonder
and
I
appreciate
the
crime
stats
and
that
aspect
of
of
the
of
the
issue,
but
I'm
really
curious
about
what
what
perhaps
the
County
Public
Health
Department
has
to
say
right
is
there?
U
Is
there
an
uptake?
What
trends
do
they
see
around
around
such
businesses
and
have
they
triangulated
any
any
data
with
with
some
of
these
sensitive
areas
and
locations?
U
So
so
I
wonder
I,
know
they're
not
well,
if
they're
here
or
on
Zoom,
if
if
they
can
speak
to
two
possible
trends,
that
we
need
to
keep
in
mind
as
we
weigh
in
when
businesses
and
sensitive
locations
are
brought
closer
together
and
then
two
maybe
for
staff,
do
we
need
to
request
certain
departments
to
come
and
speak,
or
is
there
a
way
where
we
can
have
a
a
more
range
of
of
opinions?
Present,
to
give
us
more
context.
V
M
M
I
can't
force
County
Health
to
show
up,
but
if,
if
we
had
a
request
for
that,
we
could
certainly
reach
out
to
them
and
ask
so
yeah
moving
forward
for
definitely
it
hasn't
been
something
have
you
we
to
my
knowledge
that
they
haven't
tracked
it
and
I
will
say:
I
did
a
kind
of
a
quick
research
to
see
if
I
could
find
any
more
recent
studies
around
Trends
around.
M
Actually,
this
kind
of
I
think
things
Public,
Health,
Trends
I
wasn't
able
to
find
anything
that
I
thought
was
really
worth
sharing,
so
I
I
did
start
looking
at
that,
but
but
yeah
I
would
say
moving
forward.
If
you
have
specific
experts,
you
like
to
have
in
mind,
please
reach
out
to
us
and
make
that
request.
P
Thank
you
chair.
First
of
all,
commissioner
arnelles
wise.
Thank
you.
I
have
great
respect
for
you.
I
wish
we
had
more
women
on
the
commission.
Frankly
and
I
always
appreciate
your
input.
I
have
grandchildren,
I'm
old
enough
to
have
them
and
they're
in
you
know,
they're
in
a
daycare
center
and
frankly,
I
wouldn't
want
a
dispensary
near
them
either
so
I
I
get
it
totally
completely.
And
frankly,
that's
one
of
the
reasons
I
pulled.
The
item
is
I.
Remember
you
had
concerns
in
February
and
I
wanted
you
to
have
a
chance
to
express
them.
P
That
being
said,
I
am
in
support
of
the
motion.
I
do
have
a
question
for
the
staff
and
then
I
have
a
couple
comments.
What
is
the
definition
of
a
day
care
center?
How
many?
What's
the
minimum
number
of
children
that
qualifies.
M
N
M
Minimum
number
of
kids
you
would
need,
but
we
are
talking
the
Standalone
daycare
center,
so
it
could
be
a
range
small
to
large.
P
Now
the
reason
I
ask
is
when
you,
it
was
actually
really
revealing
to
me
when
you
had
the
the
map
with
all
the
blue,
dots
and
I
know
that
there
is
a
state
qualification
for
small
Family
Daycare,
which
is
a
Day
card
of
the
home
I.
Don't
I,
don't
know
if
that
would
apply
to
this
ordinance
or
is
it
just
Standalone
take
care
centers.
P
P
Okay,
what
so
under
the
new
proposal?
What
is
the
distance
to
a
daycare
center?
That's
being
proposed.
M
So
it
would
be
a
thousand
feet,
as
measured
from
the
entrance
of
the
Cannabis
retail
store
to
the
public
entrance
of
the
daycare
center
School
Youth,
Center,
Etc
or
500
feet,
as
measured
from
the
property
line
to
the
property
line
and
whichever
one
is
more
restrictive
would
apply
again.
Having
kind
of
looked
at
some
examples.
We
think
that
the
500
foot
is
likely
to
be
the
more
restrictive
measurement
in
most
cases,.
P
M
P
Thank
you.
So
you
know
I
just
want
to
talk
about
why
I'm
in
support
of
this
again,
with
full
respect,
commissioner
Nellis
wise
to
your
concerns.
First
of
all,
cannabis
is
legal.
In
California
we
voted
on
that.
There's
still
a
lot
of
controversy
of
whether
it
should
be
but
it,
but
it
is
that's
what
the
voters
decided,
as
is
alcohol
and
I,
would
argue
that
having
a
liquor
store
close
to
a
daycare
center
is
probably
worse.
P
That's
just
my
opinion
by
observing
the
people
that
hang
out
in
front
of
liquor
stores
and
that's
not
to
be
disrespectful,
I
want
to
make
that
clear,
not
being
disrespectful
to
folks
at
a
liquor
store.
So
I
would
like
to
retract
that
comment.
I
apologize,
but
my
point
being
that
we've
sold
liquor
in
California
for
a
long
time.
We
have
a
lot
of
liquor
stores,
I'm
sure
some
of
them
are
close
to
daycare
centers
as
well,
which
I
also
think
is
undesirable.
But
it's
a
fact.
P
M
Hold
crimes
to
his
name,
the
dispensaries
and
we
tried
to
compare
them
to
I,
believe
it
was
kind
of
commercial
areas
that
are
comparable
and
we
did
find
lower
crime
now
I
do
want
to
be
clear.
You
know
it
was
not
a
scientific
study,
it
was
just
us
pulling
the
crime
statistics,
but
we
were
curious
to
see
you
know.
Did
we?
What
did
we
find
and
we
were
a
little
I?
M
Don't
know
if
we
were
surprised,
but
definitely
the
numbers
did
not
show
increased
crime
around
the
dispensaries
as
compared
to
comparable
commercial
locations.
P
Great
and
I
think
that's
that's
really
really
good
right,
I
think
that's
an
argument
why
this
ordinance
is
okay,
two
more
points
quickly.
Having
read
in
the
media
and
I'm
sure.
You
have
too
that
the
legal
cannabis
industry
in
California
is
having
a
difficult
time
because
they're
competing
with
the
illegal
marijuana
growers
and
that's
really
unfortunate,
because
that's
one
of
the
reasons
why
I
think
that
at
least
I
voted
in
favor
of
it,
because
the
whole
idea
was
to
you
know,
make
it
legal
tax
it
regulate
it.
P
So,
my
point
being
that
anything
we
can
do
to
facilitate
legal
cannabis,
dispensaries,
I
think
is
a
good
thing,
because
the
harder
we
make
it
for
the
legal
industry,
the
more
we're
allowing
the
you
know,
the
the
illegal
folks
that
are
growing
marijuana
and
the
last
point
I
want
to
make
Canal
be
done,
is
I
believe
that
the
dispensaries
are
a
significant
source
of
tax
revenue
to
the
city.
P
I.
Don't
think
we
necessarily
need
that
number,
but
my
point
being
that
we
have
a
really
tough
structural
budget
deficit
in
the
city,
we're
going
to
talk
about
housing
tonight
we
need
more
housing,
but
we
also
have
a
housing
jobs,
imbalance
so
I
think
this
marijuana.
These
dispensaries
are
a
significant
source
of
tax
revenue,
which
can
then
be
used
for
affordable
housing.
You
know
other
services
for
folks
that
are
at
risk,
so
thank
you
for
listening,
I'll,
be
supporting
the
motion.
D
Yeah
so
Commissioners
wise
I
just
want
to
say
thank
you
for
your
comments
and
I
totally
respect
your
opinion
on
this
I
think
this
is
exactly
why
we
expanded
the
Planning
Commission
to
have
a
broader
range
of
perspectives
up
here
on
this
Deus
and
commissioner
brosio
just
want
to
say,
I
have
in
the
past,
asked
other
City
departments
to
attend,
give
their
feedback
on
an
item
and
found
that
really
helpful.
So
definitely
encourage
you
to
do
that.
D
I
just
wanted
to
Martina
just
one
more
question.
So
when
I
was
looking
back
at
the
history
on
this,
my
understanding
is
when
the
council
adopted
the
current
ordinance
in
2022,
they
added
a
moratorium
on
new
cannabis
businesses
in
District
Seven.
Is
that
correct
that.
M
Yeah,
so
the
staff
recommendation
would
not
change
that.
We
do
know
that
we
did
hear
from
the
industry
that
they
would
like
to
relocate
within
that
district
and
they
feel
that
it
could
actually
help
the
concentration.
So
I
will
put
that
out
there,
that
that
is
a
request
to
the
industry
to
remove
that
standard.
But
you
know
so
something
the
commission
could
consider
recommending.
But
we
kept
our
staff
recommendation
pretty
close
to
the
council
Direction
and
we'll
float,
we'll
explain
that
to
council
as
well.
So
they
can
consider
that.
D
B
Martina,
when
you're
doing
these
mapping
exercises-
and
you
use
like
mapping
GIS
software-
is-
are
those
already
populated
with
data
such
as
daycare
center
or
do
you
have
to
import
in
those
addresses
and
then
it
shows
up.
M
Populated
some
we
actually
have
to
look
for
it.
I
I,
don't
know
what
happened
with
the
daycare
layer.
Last
time,
I
thought
we
had
to
use
the
state's
data.
We
may
have
been
using
an
old
layer,
but
we
did
get
the
most
recent
layer
so
yeah.
Some
of
it's
definitely
manually
searching
I'll
Tell,
You,
Youth
centers,
for
example.
That
was
one
we
really
had
to
kind
of
manually.
Look
for.
We
don't
have
a
data
set
for
that,
so
it
just
depends
on
on
what
we're.
Looking
at
okay.
B
Thanks
yeah
appreciate
everyone's
comments.
This
all
started
with
prop
64
1996,
when
the
California
voters
decided
to
make
cannabis
available
for
medicinal
purposes,
Then
followed
by
Attorney
General
Eric
Holder
of
Obama's
administration
in
2009,
who
said
go
for
it
and
I
was
actually
intimately
involved,
trying
to
make
sure
that
there
was
access
but
also
protections
for
neighborhoods,
and
we
had
the
our
author,
the
Cannabis
tax
in
November
2010,
which
had
a
78
approval.
B
That
doesn't
really
happen
that
often-
and
that
is
a
significant
revenue
for
the
city,
and
now
we
have
recreational
legal
since
November,
2016.,
I'm
comfortable
supporting
the
motion
I
know
not
everyone
would
support
it,
but
I
know
spouses
don't
agree
on
everything
either.
So
with
that,
let's
vote
commissioner
lardinois.
D
B
Commissioner
barrosio
no
commissioner
Cantrell,
yes,.
B
I
B
K
On
one
second
I
didn't
hear,
commissioner
barossa's.
B
That
was
a
no
no
okay,
yeah
and
so
I.
Let's
see
here,
go
back
to
okay.
General
plan
consent
calendar.
We
have
two
items:
are
there
any
hands
on
the
web
meetings.
K
One
second,
commissioner,
oliveirio
was
yes,
commissioner:
lardenbaugh
was
yes,
commissioner
barocio
was
no.
Commissioner,
Cantrell
was
yes,
commissioner
Casey
was
yes,
commissioner
Garcia
was
no
commissioner
ornelis
wise
was
no.
Commissioner,
Rosario
was
yes,
commissioner
tordillos
was
yes
and
commissioner,
young
was
yes.
That's
what
I
have.
B
B
Any
is
that
for
this
item,
no
got
it:
okay,
just
and
there's
no
one
from
the
audiences
wants
to
speaks
on
the
consent
calendar.
So
I
go
back
to
the
person
administrating
the
web
meeting
to
ask
if
there
are
any
hands
raised
for
the
general
plan,
consent
calendar.
B
Okay,
great
at
this
point
in
time
we
take
a
motion
or
someone
wants
to
discuss
it.
You
know
it's
up
to
the
commission.
P
I
move:
we
accept
the
con,
the
consent
calendar.
B
Second,
second
great,
so
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
tortillos
for
the
second
young
and
tordeos
Michael.
Is
the
secretary
this
evening
capturing
all
the
comments
from
everyone?
Okay
with
that
said,
if
there's
no
comments,
then
I
guess
we'll
just
move
to
a
vote
on
this
consent.
Calendar
item
commissioner
lardinois.
Yes,
commissioner
barocio.
Yes,
commissioner
Cantrell.
Yes,
commissioner
Casey.
Yes,
commissioner,
Garcia.
B
J
B
W
Good
evening
planning
Commissioners,
my
name
is
Ruth
Cueto
and
I'm.
A
supervising
planner
in
pbce
with
me
today
is
David
Keon
and
Rima
Muhammad
from
the
planning
division.
We
also
have
Josh
ishimatsu
from
the
housing
department
and
Jared
Ferguson
from
the
office
of
Economic
Development
and
cultural
affairs.
W
Before
we
begin
the
discussion
on
the
findings
in
the
housing
element,
I'd
like
to
summarize
the
timeline.
This
slide
is
a
high
level
view
of
the
timeline
of
our
work.
We
are
now
in
Phase
five
of
the
public
hearing
process
and
what
staff
will
present
tonight
is
a
culmination
of
a
multi-year
multi-departmental
effort
to
produce
a
substantially
compliant
housing
element.
W
It
helped
inform
some
of
the
programs
and
policies
in
chapter
three
and
aligned
with
the
requirements
of
ab686.
The
affirmatively
furthering
fair
housing
law.
2020
feels
like
quite
some
time
ago.
I
want
to
acknowledge
the
context
that
we
began
this
work
in
as
well
as
a
tremendous
effort
and
dedication.
This
team
has
maintained
throughout
the
process
and
that
first
year
of
the
pandemic,.
W
This
chart
describes
a
process
we've
engaged
in
since
the
public
release
of
the
draft.
Last
year
we
opened
a
second
optional
public
comment
period
held
study
sessions
with
Planning
Commission
and
the
Housing
and
Community
Development
Commission
and
consulted
with
Housing
and
Community
Development
Department
hcd
on
our
progress
to
achieve
a
compliant
housing
element.
W
So
the
housing
element
is
the
city's
official
housing
policy
document,
it's
required
by
state
law
and
incorporated
into
each
City's
General
plan
to
guide
housing
in
addition
to
fulfilling
state
law
and
refreshing
our
housing
policies.
The
update
is
also
an
opportunity
to
have
conversations
with
San
Jose's
residents
and
stakeholders
about
San
Jose's
growth
and
development.
W
This
chart
breaks
down
the
city's
Regional
Housing
need
goals
for
the
2023-2031
housing
element
and,
as
you'll
see,
we
have
to
accommodate
62
200
new
housing
units,
the
breakdown
by
income
level
of
units.
It
also
shows
a
breakdown
of
income
level
of
the
units
needed.
The
third
column
identifies
how
much
of
the
goal
is
for
each
category.
So
roughly
55
percent
of
the
first
three
rows
are
what
we
consider
affordable,
housing
and
45
percent
of
our
goals
are
for
above
Market,
above
moderate
or
market
rate
housing.
W
The
last
column
shows
the
change
in
the
number
of
units
in
each
category.
Since
the
last
cycle,
our
total
goal
went
up
by
27
120
units
to
clarify
the
city's
requirement,
for
these
goals
is
not
to
build
the
housing
itself.
It's
to
plan
to
accommodate
housing
need
by
putting
in
place
land
use
policies,
taking
actions
such
as
zonings
and
executing
on
its
policy
and
program,
work
plan
to
further
fair
housing
objectives
and
reduce
barriers
to
the
construction
of
and
of
Housing
and
the
preservation
of
housing.
X
So
this
slide
is
an
overview
of
our
community
development,
Community
engagement
process
for
the
housing
element,
and
let
me
start
by
saying
that
Public
public
engagement
is
a
very
important
part
of
the
process
to
create
the
housing
element
we
City
Staff
San
Jose
has
placed
a
huge
emphasis
on
doing
Outreach,
to
educate
and
to
get
feedback
through
a
variety
of
methods
both
from
General
members
of
the
public
and
from
subject
matter,
experts
and
stakeholders,
as
Ruth
outlined
earlier.
X
We
started
Outreach
for
this
for
the
entire
package
of
documents,
with
our
assessment
of
fair
housing
in
2019
and
since
then,
we've
been
hearing
from
folks,
including
emails,
and
comment
letters
right
up
until
today,
we've
tracked
feedback,
including
from
all
the
events
that
we
hope
that
we've
hosted
over
the
over
the
past
few
years,
and
this
slide
summarize
summarizes
some
of
the
statistics
from
our
community
engagement
process,
including
convening
over
100
meetings
and
engaging
with
over
4
200
participants.
Although
that
number
does
include
duplicates.
X
In
addition
to
this
list,
we
received
24
formal
comment,
letters
with
160
requests
and
comments
and
received
public
comments
through
our
website.
The
state's
requirements
are
to
hear
generally
from
the
community
and
also
to
focus
in
on
very
intentional
efforts
to
hear
from
members
of
the
fair
housing
law
calls
protected
classes
and
so
protect.
Your
classes
include
race,
gender,
family
status,
religion,
ethnicity,
disability
status,
veteran
status
and
there's
more
about
their
specific
housing
needs.
X
X
This
slide
outlines
five
major
areas
of
housing
needs
that
we've
identified
for
the
housing
element.
We
derived
these
from
analyzing
data
and
from
the
public
input
which
I
just
described.
X
The
first
identified
category
of
housing
needs
is
around
housing,
affordability
and
displacement.
San
Jose
is
one
of
the
most
expensive
places
to
live
in
the
country,
and
these
housing
costs
are
driving
many
working
class
and
even
middle
class
families
to
move
out.
The
second
identified
need
is
to
address
homelessness.
You
know,
as
housing
costs
have
increased
in
our
city,
so
it
has
homelessness,
and
we
also
have
to
address
segregation,
as
documented
in
our
assessment
of
fair
housing,
a
required
a
required
analysis
by
the
state
of
California.
X
Now
as
part
of
the
housing
element
by
the
Numbers
San
Jose
is
one
of
the
most
segregated
cities
in
the
Bay
Area
disparities
in
access
to
opportunity
because
of
the
segregation
and
historic
policies
such
as
redlining,
San
Jose,
has
sounds
many
San
Jose
residents
have
not
had
the
same
access
to
resources
and
to
opportunities,
as
others
and
finally,
access
for
persons
with
disabilities.
In
our
community
engagement
process,
people
with
disabilities
consistently
identified
issues
in
finding
accessible
housing.
X
This
next
slide
outlines
our
five
major
goals
for
the
housing
element.
The
intent
is
that
these
goals
align
with
the
needs
that
that
I
described
in
the
previous
slide.
It's
not
a
one
for
one
correspondence:
it's
not
exact
relationship,
but
you
know.
Hopefully
it's
obvious
how
they're
related
goal
number
one
is
that
we
should
have
an
abundant,
affordable
housing
stock
goal
number
two.
There
should
be
sufficient
housing
for
people.
Experience
experiencing
homelessness
goal
number
three:
there
should
be
housing,
stability
and
opportunities
to
build
wealth
for
all
residents
goal.
X
Number
four
is
that
we
should
have
healthy,
thriving
neighborhoods,
with
access
to
good
jobs,
good
Schools
transportation
and
other
amenities,
and
this
is
should
be
for
everybody,
and
I
also
want
to
note
here
that
this
is
part
of
this.
You
know
this:
the
new
version
of
a
firmly
furthering
fair
housing
to
make
sure
that
all
residences
experience
outside
their
homes
is
decent
and
safe,
no
matter
where
they
live
in
the
city
and
so
related
to
that
goal.
Number
five.
There
should
be
racially
and
socially
inclusive,
neighborhoods,
that
overcome
past
and
present
discrimination.
X
X
You
know,
and
so
you
know
as
an
example,
including
for
over
50
of
the
programs
and
policies
are
about
advancing
what
Wayne
Housing
called
the
three
p's.
The
first
P
is
for
production
so
of
the
127
strategies.
There
are
over
40
production
strategies
related
to
both
market
rate
and
affordable
housing.
For
example,
there's
a
there's
a
program
recommendation
about
developing
a
middle
density
housing
strategy.
X
The
second
P
is
for
preservation
and
there
are
11
preservation
strategies
in
the
housing
element,
for
example,
issuing
a
regular
preservation,
notif
of
notice
of
funding
availability.
The
third
is
protection.
There
are
approximately
20
protection
related
strategies,
for
example,
that
that
we
should
evaluate
a
right
to
council
program
and
program
alternatives
for
that.
The
policies
and
programs
also
reflect
the
state
of
California's
requirements
and
recommendations
for
what
should
be
covered
in
the
housing
element,
and
this
includes
reducing
barriers
for
housing
production.
X
X
Another
goal
that
the
state
of
California
wants
to
see
from
the
housing
element
is
that
there's
that
there
are
increased
housing
choices
and
so,
for
example,
here
where
there's
there's
there's
a
program
about
looking
to
Advocate
at
the
state
and
federal
levels
for
increased
funding
for
for
vouchers
and
finally
to
lessen
the
effects
of
segregation,
which
is,
as
I
talked
about
as
part
of
the
new
state
requirement
for
the
housing
element
to
firmly
further
fair
housing
and
more
on
this.
In
the
next
slide.
X
So
affirmatively
furthering
fair
housing
is
about
how
we
are
going
to
proactively
address
factors
which
contribute
to
our
city
segregation.
You
know
big
picture
through
racist
policies
like
redlining
communities
of
color
have
been
denied
Equitable
opportunities
to
build
wealth,
and
many
of
your
recent
and
current
policies
and
practices
have
continued
existing
patterns
of
segregation.
X
So-
and
this
is
something
the
city
has
been
complicit
in.
Of
course,
not
the
only
actor,
but
you
know
moving
forward.
X
Housing
policies
should
seek
to
redress
past
wrongs
and
to
ensure
that
we
do
not
continue
these
wrongs
as
one
example
of
how
the
housing
element
would
increase
access
access
to
higher
resource
areas
is
that
the
is
that
the
housing
element
includes
continued
implementation
of
the
citing
policy,
the
housing,
affordable,
housing,
citing
policy
to
incentivize,
more
affordable
housing
development
in
high
resource
areas,
and
also
that
current
or
planned
growth
areas
like
North,
San
Jose
and
the
Diridon
Station
area
include
affordable
housing.
X
Development
next
bullet
is
to
redress
current
and
historic
patterns
of
inequitable
investment
across
the
city.
The
housing
and
element
contains
policy
recommendations
for
increasing
public
investment
in
formerly
Redline
areas
for
the
third
bullet.
On
the
slide,
displacement
displacement
is
in
and
of
itself
a
fair
housing
issue
in
that
displacement,
disproportionately
harms
people
of
color
and
that
there's
a
high
correlation
between
neighborhoods
experiencing
displacement
and
neighborhoods
that
were
redlined
so
to
address
displacement.
X
The
housing
element
incorporates
most
of
the
policies
and
programs
that
were
that
were
passed
by
the
city
council
in
the
city
through
the
city-wide
anti-displacement
strategy.
X
Another
effect
of
our
ongoing
conditions
of
racial
inequity
is
that
there
are
racial
disparities
and
who
is
unhoused
among
other
policies
and
programs
addressing
homelessness.
The
housing
element
recommends
evaluation
of
racial
bias
and
the
shelter
and
Supportive
Housing
systems
and
increase
participation
of
persons
with
lived
experience
of
homelessness
in
housing
policy
decision
making
for
the
next
bullet
lack
of
access
for
persons
with
disabilities.
You
know,
as
I
mentioned
in
our
community
outreach
to
members
of
protected
classes.
X
Finally,
as
part
of
our
Outreach
and
engagement,
we
also,
we
also
heard
about
ongoing
discrimination
in
our
housing
market,
including
especially
around
source
of
immigration,
source
of
income
and
immigration
status.
X
So
the
housing
off
element
therefore
includes
Provisions
around
ongoing
anti-discrimination,
education
and
enforcement.
So
thank
you
and
I'll
pass
the
presentation
to
Jared.
Y
This
component
is
included
in
chapter
4
of
our
draft
we've
outlined
here
a
few
of
the
key
areas
identified
and
analyzed.
Well,
there
are
many
variables
in
the
production
of
housing.
Construction
costs
in
recent
years
have
been
the
most
significant
constraint
on
the
supply
of
housing
in
San.
Jose
construction
costs
have
increased
17
percent
in
the
Bay
Area
since
the
spring
of
2020..
Y
The
competition
for
limited
for
a
limited
amount
of
tax
credits
and
other
funding
sources
has
increased
significantly
recently,
making
it
more
challenging
for
projects
to
obtain
funds
to
start
construction
for
market
rate.
Housing
financing
has
generally
been
available.
However,
Rising
interest
rates
in
2022,
combined
with
Rising
construction
costs,
has
made
the
availability
of
financing
more
challenging.
Y
Y
Y
Y
This
table
lists
the
different
categories
we
use
to
meet
our
Arena
requirement.
State
law
allows
us
to
use
approved
housing
projects
already
in
the
pipeline,
anticipated
Adu
development
and
anticipated
development
on
opportunity
sites.
Opportunity
sites
are
our
largest
category
and
they
are
the
focus
of
this
section
to
hedge
against
the
risks
of
projects
not
being
developed
as
we
anticipate
the
unit.
Capacity
of
our
inventory
is
more
than
what
is
required
by
Arena,
with
a
total
buffer
of
37
percent
on
the
opportunity
sites.
Y
The
methodology
we
use
to
identify
opportunity
sites
included
sites
consistent
with
the
gp2040
that
already
allow
for
housing.
This
means
that
that
outside
of
North,
San
Jose,
all
Sites
we
identified
as
opportunity
sites
can
move
forward
with
housing.
Now
they
have
the
appropriate
General
plan,
designation
and
Zoning
to
facilitate
housing,
even
those
sites
within
unplanned
Village
Urban
villages
to
further
refine
the
site's
inventory
staff
filtered
for
Parcels
that
had
characteristics
more
conducive
to
development.
Y
Based
upon
the
experience
in
the
past
in
the
past
planning
period,
while
the
exact
methods
varied
by
location,
they
generally
include
filtering
out
properties
that
had
existing
multi-family
uses
had
existing
planning
permits
issued
within
the
last
four
years
had
building
permits
issued
for
new
construction
in
the
last
eight
years
and
were
smaller
than
half
an
acre
to
calculate
a
realistic
capacity
of
the
site.
Selected
staff
leverage
the
building
box
platform
from
Ptolemy.
That
is,
the
basis
of
the
city's
current
San
Jose
housing
site
Explorer.
Y
This
tool
integrates
data
from
various
City
systems,
such
as
zoning,
General
plan
designations,
Urban
Village
boundaries,
allowable
density
and
floor
area
ratios
historic,
parcel
level
factors
into
a
map-based
analytical
and
data
modeling
tool.
Using
this
tool
and
its
analysis,
staff
was
able
to
determine
the
estimated
capacity
of
sites
based
on
the
existing
conditions
of
the
sites
and
how
each
matched
with
properties
and
developments
that
have
been
built
in
the
city.
During
the
previous
cycle,
foreign.
Y
The
site
inventory
must
identify
sites
to
accommodate
Housing
Development
throughout
the
city
in
a
manner
that
affirmatively
affirmatively
furthers
fair
housing
opportunities.
Hcd
is
advised
that
this
means
that
sites
identify
to
accommodate
lower
income
to
lower
income
portion
of
the
Arena
should
not
be
concentrated
in
lower
resource
areas,
as
defined
by
the
state's
opportunity
Maps.
B
Out
of
curiosity,
it
was
being
about
three
sections
or
is
going
to
be
more.
It
seems,
like
you
know,
one
speaker
carried
one
section:
okay,
because
there's
just
so
much
content
right.
So
if
I
had
done
this
before
I
think
I
would
have
stopped
after
the
first
presenter
pause
to
see.
If
we
have
questions
next
positive
questions
on
these
really
complex
items,
let
me
get
a
consensus
of
the
commission.
Would
you
rather
have
this
in
bite-sized
morsels
or
have
them
present
and
do
everything
at
the
end?
What's
preference
well.
W
Okay,
so
this
slide
outlines
the
changes
that
we've
made
to
the
draft
since
December
2022
and
in
response
to
hcd's
first
comment
letter.
The
slide
summarizes
the
changes
which
include
supplementary
inventory,
analysis
and
non-vacant
site
Capacity
Analysis,
providing
more
detailed,
metrics
and
Milestones
to
the
programs
discussed
in
Chapter
3
of
the
housing
element,
and
we
also
completed
minor
technical
changes
such
as
adding
more
county-wide
and
Regional
demographic
data.
Again
in
response
to
hce's
comments,.
W
B
Two
slides
no
big
deal
all
right.
Well,
let's
start
with
members
of
the
public
that
are
gathered
here
in
the
chambers.
Speaking
time
will
be,
one
minute
call
you
to
come
down
feel
free
to
line
up
on
the
stairs.
We
have
Kenneth
doe,
Renee,
Bayes
and
Josephine
Aguilar
come
on
down
in
any
order.
Z
Evening,
my
name
is
Josefina
Aguilar
I
am
the
executive
director
of
the
South
Bay
Community,
Land
Trust,
the
first,
and
only
Land
Trust
in
San,
Jose
and
I'm
here,
basically
to
talk
about.
Well,
let
me
tell
you
our
mission.
We
basically
acquire
properties,
take
them
off
the
speculative
Market,
protect
tenants
from
displacement,
and
then
we
do
rehab
or
repairs,
and
then
we
commit
to
affordability
and
perpetuity
for
that
community.
Z
That
is
never
resold,
so
basically
we're
here,
because
we
have
filed
a
complaint
with
the
Housing
and
Community
Development
Department
of
the
state,
because,
even
though
we've
seen
all
these
statistics
now,
unlike
many
years,
I'm
an
urban
planner
of
over
35
years-
oh
my
goodness,
we
only
have
one
minute
anyway.
The
reason
we're
opposing
it
is
because
there's
all
this
community
input,
but
now
these
resources,
the
tools-
have
been
taken
out
of
the
toolbox.
Z
AA
Z
AB
Good
evening
planning,
commissioner,
my
name
is
Kenneth
doe
I'm,
with
the
Carpenters
Union
at
local,
five
in
San
Jose
I'm,
a
member
of
District,
Six
and
I'm.
You
know
active
in
the
community
in
the
church
and
that's
why
I'm
proud
to
come
up
and
present
this.
So
you
guys
talked
about
protection
under
protection.
I
was
thinking
that
they
should
protect
local
hire.
AB
I
wanted
to
introduce
you
what
Redwood
City
did
in
their
2023
housing
element.
This
is
on
page
49
policy
5.7.
It
encouraged
developers
and
contractors
to
elevate
hiring
local
labor,
hiring
from
a
apprenticeship
program
and
increase
labor
compliance
and
provide
a
livable
wage
and
in
Menlo
Park.
This
is
page
eight
goal.
H7
0.1
encourage
developing
and
contractors
to
elevate
hiring
local
labor,
hiring
from
a
contributing
apprenticeship,
increasing
labor
compliance
and
providing
a
living
ways.
Thank
you,
foreign.
AA
Good
evening,
chair
planning,
commissioner
staff,
thank
you
for
all
your
hard
work
on
the
housing
element.
My
name
is
Renee
Baez
and
I'm.
A
field
representative
for
the
carpenters
union
and
today
I
want
to
speak
about
three
simple
things
which
will
benefit
the
housing
element
in
San
Jose,
and
that
is
one
the
use
of
apprenticeship
programs,
meaning
every
worker
is
trained
to
do
the
work
correctly
and
also
safely.
Number
two
is
health
care
for
workers
and
their
families
and
number
three
is
local.
AA
Hire
I
understand
that
construction
costs
have
went
up,
I
understand
that
and
we
need
the
housing.
We
need
affordable
housing,
but
if
you
don't
require
local
hire
in
your
housing
element,
you
get
workers
from
out
of
town
out
of
state
and
developers
that
come
in,
make
that
money
and
then
take
it
back
to
their
place,
meaning
we
don't
get
the
tax
dollars.
So
therefore,
as
we
don't
require
those
things,
we're
losing
money.
AA
So
if
we
Implement
that
kind
of
language,
local
higher
health
care
for
the
workers,
that
means
the
health
care
that
the
company
pays
us
as
residents,
don't
have
to
pay
for
those
workers
right
and
so
the
money
and
money
out.
So
if
we
can
Implement
some
kind
of
Labor
language
in
that
housing
element,
it'll
benefit
the
great
city
of
San
Jose.
Thank.
B
E
Hi,
thank
you.
Thank
you
all
and
thank
you
and
I
wear
many
hats,
one
of
which
is
a
property
manager
and
I
have
a
property
that's
listed
here.
That
is
an
active
strip
mall.
So
my
concern
is
the
the
data
set,
the
the
non-vacant
sites
and
the
feasibility
of
really
converting
them
and
creating
or
displacing
jobs.
E
So
I
just
wanted
to
bring
that
to
to
your
attention
and.
Q
AC
Hello,
chair,
lovario
and
Commissioners.
Much
of
this
is
complicated.
Here's
an
easy
one
for
you
on
page
3-8
of
the
draft
housing
element
before
you
tonight
in
the
column,
titled
strategies,
strategy,
p,
dash,
11,
says
I'll,
read
it
examine
allowing
sb9
type
projects
to
properties,
zoned
R2
to
family.
AD
Good
evening
my
name
is
Catherine
Hedges
I'm,
a
downtown
resident
and
affordable
housing
and
I
come
to
a
lot
of
these
meetings.
I've
been
involved
in
affordable
housing
advocacy
since
2016
and
I
agree
with
the
previous
speakers
concerns,
but
overall
I
think
the
housing
department
has
put
in
an
amazing
effort
for
a
very
good
housing
element
and
the
effort
that
went
on
public
input
sessions
as
well
and
I
realized
that
the
city
does
not
actually
build
housing
to
meet
the
housing.
Only
goals
you're
just
trying
to
get
out
of
the
way
of
developers.
AD
However,
these
goals
will
not
be
achieved
without
adequate,
affordable
housing
funding.
Voters
approved
measure
e
in
2022
and
Council
voting,
and
a
spending
plan
that,
as
I
recall,
supports
the
descriptions
in
the
housing
element.
So
this
makes
me
extremely
concerned
that
the
mayor's
proposal
to
zero
out
measuring
funding
for
permanent
Supportive
Housing
other
permanent,
affordable
housing
will
prevent
us
from
reaching
actual
production
goals.
AE
My
name
is
Ali
saferman
I
am
a
downtown
resident,
but
I'm
also
calling
on
behalf
of
the
housing
Action
Coalition.
You
should
have
received
a
letter
for
myself
and
Greenbelt
Alliance
on
Jordan
Grimes
and
the
Crux
of
our
letter
is
is
based
on
the
public
trans
lack
of
public
transparency.
Do
you
feel
as
if
we
haven't
not
had
enough
time
to
adequately
respond
to
the
new
draft
element
which
we
referenced
in
our
letter?
We've
flagged
some
big
concerns
that
we've
noticed
in
this
latest.
AE
This
latest
draft,
which
leads
us
to
believe
that
hcd
will
not
certify
this
housing
element
if
submitted,
as
is
the
housing
element,
is
no
longer
a
paper
exercise,
we're
working
on
housing
elements
all
across
the
state
and
we're
seeing
that
the
punishments
are
steep.
If
we
don't
get
this
right,
this
is
really
important.
We
get
right,
we
lay
it
out
in
our
letter,
so
I'm
going
to
finish
my
clinic
for
tonight,
but
thank
you
for
your
work
on
this.
AE
B
Okay,
I
thought
there'd
be
a
lot
more.
Maybe
people
tune
in
later.
Okay.
Now
it's
back
to
commission
and
I'm
curious.
Could
we
at
slide
one
maybe
go
to
that
slide,
see
what
questions
Commissioners
have
then
move
on
to
the
next
slide,
so
we're
kind
of
all.
Q
Q
W
Thanks,
commissioner,
arena
is
Regional,
Housing
needs
allocation,
and
that
is
the
allocation
in
terms
of
housing
units
that
we
receive
from
hcd.
That
is
our
goal
for
building
affordable
housing,
and
it's
let
me
actually
I
can
yeah
it's
this
table
and
it's
broken
up
in
terms
of
affordability,
levels.
Okay,
so.
W
K
I
don't
know
last
I
heard
in
the
last
housing
element.
It
was
only
Beverly
Hills
because
they
built
nine
Nanny
units
and
they're
only
had
a
low
income.
Reading
a
number
of
nine
low-income
units,
which
is
one
of
the
reasons
this
housing
element
this
time
around,
is
very
different.
There's
a
lot
of
criticism
on
that,
but
I
will
say
so.
Most
cities,
including
San
Jose,
meet
their
above
moderate,
their
market
rate
other
than
maybe
one
or
a
couple.
Nobody
meets
their
low-income.
B
H
Yeah
I
I
know
this
is
tough.
I
know
that
this
is
difficult
for
communities
to
meet
these
standards
and
even
if
we
we
go
through
this
process,
there's,
let's
be
honest,
there's
no
guarantee!
This
is
actually
going
to
happen,
but
I
think
we
have
to
try
as
hard
as
we
can
to
get
this
as
right
as
we
can
I
look
at
the
low
to
very
low
income
range
and
see
24
and
I
I
think
about
the
community
and
what
portion
of
the
community
this
actually
covers
in
reality.
H
X
I
mean
we,
we
were
look
we're
looking
at
where
affordable
housing
has
been
located.
You
know
throughout
the
city,
in
patterns
of
where,
where
it's
been
located,
you
know
and
we
have
policies
to
more
evenly
distribute
affordable
housing
across
the
city.
So
we
you
know
we
this
time
through.
We
took
a
very
conscious
Equity
lens.
We
looked
at
patterns
of
investment
and
investment
in
lack
of
investment,
not
just
you
know,
across
different
types
of
public
and
private
investment
as
well,
and
you
know
and
found
correlation
between
communities
of
color.
X
Historically
Red
Line
communities
have
had
lower
levels
of
investment
than
you
know,
then
then
other
communities,
and
so
we
have
some
policies
to
try
and
in
the
small
ways
that
we
have
control
of
that,
because
this
is
a
you
know.
This
is
much
bigger
than
the
city.
This
is
also
like
private
Investments.
This
is
where
mortgage
lending
has
gone
historically
through
the
city.
It's
not
just
about
like
things
that
the
city
has
control
over,
but
you
know
for
the
for
some
of
the
pots
of
funding
that
we
have
like
cdbg.
X
The
Community
Development
block
grant
we're
looking
to
we're.
Looking
to
you
know,
put
incentives
into
our
processes
to
be
able
to
for
more
of
that
funding
to
go
to
communities
where
there's
been
historic,
disinvestment
or
under
investment.
Okay,.
H
H
That's
an
equity
lens.
Let's
look
at
that
population.
Where
is
it
going?
The
population
of
unhoused
continues
to
increase
for
African
Americans
and
by
saying
putting
these
words
on
these
slides,
we
have
no
earmarks.
We
have
no
way
of
actually
affecting
equity
for
those
people
who
cannot
be
counted
or
will
not
be
counted
or
will
not
be
heard.
H
H
V
Thank
you,
chair,
yeah
I
just
wanted
to
also
step
back
and
put
some
of
these
numbers
in
kind
of
a
larger
context.
We
can
see
that
between
the
very
low
income
and
the
low
income
allocations
that
we've
received
for
the
coming
cycle,
it
looks
like
we're
being
asked
to
plan
for
more
units
of
low
and
very
low
income
housing
over
the
next
eight
years.
Then
we've
managed
to
build
total
housing
over
the
previous
eight
years.
V
I
think
that
we
do
need
a
bit
of
a
reset
in
terms
of
how
we
view
these
strategies,
if
we're
ever
going
to
actually
start
to
affect
the
sorts
of
changes
that
we
need
to
see
in
terms
of
our
housing
policy
and
just
to
provide
some
more
historical
context.
It's
been
already
mentioned
that
cities
don't
generally
meet
their
low-income
Arena
targets,
but
looking
at
San
Jose's
history,
it
looks
like
in
the
fourth
cycle,
between
2007
and
2014.
V
We
missed
our
Arena
goal
by
about
50
percent
and
in
the
most
recent
fifth
cycle,
that
just
wrapped
up
in
January,
we
missed
our
Target
by
over
40
percent,
including
a
shortfall
of
12,
000
low
and
very
low
income
units
and
about
3
600,
moderate
income
units.
So
in
some
that
means
that
we're
effectively
being
asked
to
build
10
times
as
much
low
and
very
low
income
housing
over
the
next
eight
years,
as
we've
managed
to
for
the
previous.
So
I
do
think.
V
We
just
need
to
kind
of
have
that
reset
in
mind,
as
we
kind
of
hopefully
push
for
more
aggressive
strategies
to
actually
start
to
make
progress
on
our
low-income
allocations.
K
Why
can
I
just
respond
to
that
so
I
think
the
biggest
you
know
so
again
we
this
this
process
is
about
planning
to
show
you
can
accommodate
these
numbers.
We
don't,
for
the
most
part,
build
housing
in
San
Jose,
so
you
know
their
goals
and
how
we
can
how
we
can
accommodate
that
the
real
challenge
of
the
affordable
housing,
the
biggest
challenge,
is
the
money
and
I.
K
Don't
know
if
Josh
can
talk
about
that,
but
the
the
biggest
barrier
to
building
affordable
is
money
that
you
needs
government
subsidies
to
build
it
and
it's
probably
in
the
trillions
of
dollars
and
in
the
Bay
Area
California
at
least
and
so
I
think.
That's
the
challenge
on
on
the
positive
side:
San
Jose,
voters,
past
measure
e,
which
I
think
is
a
fairly
unique
measure
that
has
contributed
to
more
money
than
we
had
in
the
past
for
affordable
I.
K
Think
it's
just
about
50
to
50
million
a
year,
or
so
maybe
it's
100
million
I
can't
remember,
but
it
actually
exceeds
what
the
Redevelopment
agency
used
to
provide
for
affordable
housing
before
it
went
away
and
then
measure
a
which
is
pretty
much
capped
out
at
this
point
was
another
big
source
of
flooding.
So
one
of
the
big
things
I
think
to
we
need
to
think
about
is,
is
how
do
we
identify
funding
for
more
affordable.
R
Back
on
what
was
said
right
now
in
regards
to
you
know:
financing,
affordable
housing
and
I
think
with
the
anticipated
interest
rates
going
high,
that
might
that
challenge
might
increase
even
more.
R
However,
you
know
why
why
not
recycle
and
reuse
existing
buildings
that
we
have
and
convert
them
to
house
our
poor
I
know
that
there
seems
to
be
a
high
vacancy
with
some
commercial,
maybe
changing
those
land
use
designations
to
mix
live
work,
zoning
units,
so
that's
something
that
I
think
that
we
can
do
a
better
job
with
Recycling
and
reusing.
What
we
have
I
mean
this
is
Silicon
Valley.
This
is
where,
like
the
most
Innovation
comes
from
right.
R
That
changes
like
the
way
we
function,
World,
Wide,
so
I
think
that
we
could
set
an
example
of
of
allowing
people
to
get
really
creative
by
changing
policy,
to
make
it
easier
for
people
to
convert
existing
spaces
to
better
use.
I
know
that
there's
been
I
know
down
the
Monterey
Corridor
there's
some
housing
that
has
ground
floor
retail.
That's
been
vacant
for
a
very
long
time
that
I've
seen
and
because
of
that
I,
it's
the
windows
got
smashed
and
now
it's
all
fenced
and
it's
been
vacant
and
very
nice
for
a
whole.
R
R
I
I'd
really
like
to
see
some
policy
around
that
and,
of
course,
if
sb9
you
know
came
down
from
the
state
at
the
local
level,
it
was
really
meant
to
help
ease
things
to
make
it
easier
for
people
to
build.
So
we
should
not
make
it
harder
but
make
it
easier
for
people
to
that
want
to
build
to
build
in
their
own
backyard.
I
I
definitely
believe
that
in
regards
to
pipeline
and.
R
Yeah
I
also
wanted
to
well
I
mean
the
workforce.
Does
the
city
have
the
workforce
to
accommodate
I
feel
like
there's,
not
enough
planning
staff
or
resources
in
the
housing
department?
R
So
I'd
really,
you
know,
suggest
to
the
city
council
or
you
know,
to
really
hire
more,
even
if
you
have
to
subcontract
to
other
people
that
plan
check
or
whatever
you
got
to
do,
to
help
streamline
the
process
for
folks
that
want
to
come
in
and
build,
including
the
mom
and
pop
people,
because
it
all
adds
up
right
in
regards
to
community
engagement.
R
I
I
saw
the
list
and
it
was
really
nice.
Of
course,
you
know:
I
had
the
privilege
working
at
the
Santa
Clara
County
planning
office
to
work
on
the
housing
element
and
we
went
into
the
jungle
we
went
in
there
and
so
I
want
to
know.
X
On
the
Outreach
side,
we
did
do
some
persons
who
lived
the
experience
of
homelessness
Outreach.
We
tried
to
do
that
in
community
centers
that
are
located
near
known
encampments
and
in
times
of
day
you
know
when,
when
people
are
not
looking
to
hunker
down
so.
I
Experience
focus
groups
as
part
of
as
part
of
our
Outreach.
Y
Y
Think
you
know
what
some
of
our
research
has
has
led
us
to
to
that
we've
found
is
that
it
can
be
hard
to
convert
Office
Buildings
because
of
their
their
configurations,
often
make
it
cost
prohibitive,
but
it
is
something
we're
interested
to
learn
more
about,
but
that
can
be
really
that
the
challenge
is
not
so
much
on
on
our
end
in
terms
of
the
actual
zoning
of
the
building,
but
really
in
kind
of
the
financing
of
it.
K
You
know
there's
also
state
laws
that
was
so
I
mean
I.
Think
just
be
the
the
general
plan
framework
particularly
allows
for
affordable
housing
allows
in
urban
Villages
and
even
commercial
properties
outside
of
Urban
Village.
It
allows
them
under
with
certain
criteria
to
be
converted
too
residential
for
if
it's
affordable,
so
we
we
do
have
that
and
there
isn't
a
requirement
that
affordable
housing
provides
commercials.
K
So
there
is
that
opportunity
to
convert
at
least
an
affordable
project,
the
the
the
the
unused
commercial
space
to
affordable,
housing
and
and
again
there's
the
the
state.
Laws
have
been
passed
right
now,
they're
going
to
allow
a
lot
more
opportunities.
Abe
2011.,
we're
gonna
have
an
info
memo
that
Martina
is
working
on
that
that
will
go
out
in
in
next
month,
and
that
has
a
lot
more
information
about
State
Law
changes
that
will
facilitate
affordable
and
just
housing
in
general.
B
U
Perfect,
thank
you.
I'll
keep
mine
brief,
because
I
know
we
got
a
lot
of
slides
to
go
through
in
regards
to
the
comments
on
we
should.
We
should
really
be
focusing
on
low
low
income
and
the
very
low
income,
because
that
is
a
hard
road
to
to
to
hit
my
understanding
and
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
the
fund
that
developers
pay
into
when
they
don't
opt
in
to
build,
affordable
housing.
What
happens
to
that
money?
U
Does
that
money
get
earmarked
to
improve
those
numbers
and,
if
not,
please
share
with
us
what
we
can
do
to
maybe
leverage
that
money
to
help
improve
the
numbers
around
very
low
income
and
low
income.
Thank
you.
Y
So
market
rate
developers,
if
they
don't
provide
15
of
affordable
units
on
site,
are
required
to
pay
our
inclusionary
housing
ordinance
in
Luffy
and
and
that
funding
goes
directly
to
to
subsidize
other
affordable,
low-income
units.
U
U
Okay,
and
in
your
analysis,
do
you
think
it
would
be
Timely
to
and
I
don't
know
if
it
was
done
out
of
the
137
I
believe
proposed
plans
and
policies
is,
is
that
program
being
looked
at?
Is
it
working?
Is
it
something
that
is
is
easy
to
pay
into,
but
the
the
return
on
investment
isn't
isn't
impacting
the
the
target
areas,
as
as
a
spirit
of
this
program,
I
think
is
geared
towards.
X
X
You
know,
I,
think
that
you
know
one
thing
that
we'd
like
to
look
at
going
into
the
future
is
to
how
to
have
how
to
have
the
proper
incentives
that
more
developers
actually
build.
The
inclusionary
housing
on
site
as
part
of
their
development
versus
Pang
Dean,
Lou
fees.
But
you
know
so
that's,
but
that's
an
ongoing
thing
that
staff
would
be
looking
at.
P
Just
a
process,
question
I,
guess,
chair,
I,
have
sort
of
a
general
question,
but
I'm
not
sure
it's
on
this
slide.
So
would
you
like
me
to
wait
or.
B
B
H
Now
I'm
curious,
if
you
guys
were
able
to
this,
looks
like
a
lot
of
community
input.
Were
you
able
to
map
this
input
back
to
changes
that
you
may
have
made?
H
X
You
want
I
mean
we
took
a
lot
of
the
input
and
used
it
to
make
the
policies
themselves
or
to
rate
and
rank
the
policies
to.
We
had
some
rating
and
ranking
exercises
that
that
groups
went
through
so
sort
of
like
what
ended
up
on
the
list
to
some
extent
reflects
Community
input.
X
We,
you
know,
we
definitely
made
some
of
the
changes
based
on
comment,
letters
and
other
community
input.
So
you
know
we
have
a
little
bit
of
that
mapped
out.
You
know.
Part
of
what
we
want
to
do.
X
You
know
before
we
submit
to
the
to
Council
in
the
state,
is
to
do
a
little
bit
better
job
of
mapping
some
of
that
out,
but
we
do
have
we
did.
We
did
take
the
community
input
very
seriously
and
you
know
use
it
both
in
the
formation
and
and
in
the
rating
and
ranking
and
in
and
some
revisions
afterwards,
too.
Y
I
just
add
to
that
a
little
bit,
we
do
in
chapter
one.
We
do
map
that
out
and
and
also
in
chapter
three
in
the
list
of
programs,
there's
also
a
column
that
kind
of
lists
the
where
the
source
of
the
program
came
from
like
what
groups
in
particular,
you
know,
requested
or
commented
on.
H
W
We
did
map
some
of
the
changes
in
chapter
one.
So
when
we
talk
about,
for
example,
the
surveys
or.
C
W
More
formal
meetings
of
focus
groups:
there
is
some
outline
there,
but
also
in
chapter
three.
We
do
have
a
column
for
chapter
three.
It's
programs
and
policies,
there's
a
column
that
identifies
where
that
specific
policy
or
program
idea
may
have
come
from.
Sometimes
it's
like
statutory.
We
have
to
do
it.
A
H
A
I
D
Yeah,
if
am
I,
writing
an
understanding
in
chapter
one
that
there
have
not
been
any
further
Community
engagement
meetings
since
the
first
seminal.
Y
Yeah,
that's
correct,
I
mean
our
strategy.
Kind
of
going
in
was
really
to
to
front
load
the
community
outreach
so
that
it
could
really
inform
our
programs,
as
we
talked
about,
so
that
the
development
would
really
be.
You
know,
based
upon
that
input
that
we
had
received
through
all
of
those
meetings,
so
that
was
kind
of
intentional
on
our
part
in
how
the
it
was
all
designed.
Gotcha
well,.
D
K
The
draft
was
out
and
then
the
second
draft
right
that
we
we
do
send
out
emails
and
notifications.
Let
people
know
that
it's
out
and
available
for
review,
and
so
we
would
get
additional
comments
when
we
did
put
the
draft
and
out.
So
it's
not
like
a
lot
of
the
hardcore,
Outreach
and
really
intents
happen
at
the
beginning,
but
it's
not
like
that
was
the
end
of
it.
It
went
it's
been
going
on
throughout
the
whole
process.
X
And
we
had,
we
had
an
extensive
letters
from
both
rounds
of
releasing
drafts
and
you
know
we
which
are
also
posted
on
the
website.
But
you
know
we
have
and-
and
you
know,
emails
and
we've
had
some
people
who
who
call
us
and
talk
to
us
as
well
I
mean
we
haven't
had
the
public
meeting,
but
we've
been,
we've
been
deeply
engaged
with
with
I.
K
B
And
then
on
this
one
I
have
one
question,
since
we
had
a
public
speaker
comment
that
hey
my
property,
there's,
you
know
there's
being
some
change
to
it.
Does
the
planning
department
reach
out
to
every
property
owner
either
phone
eat
a
letter
Etc
that
we're
doing
the
housing
element
and
your
parcel
is
going
to
have
a
you
know
a
different
color
on
the
map.
W
We
did
not
reach
out
to
each
individual
property
owner.
We
have
roughly
437
sites
on
the
inventory
and
designating
a
site
on
the
site.
Inventory
doesn't
automatically
mean
that
only
housing
can
go
there.
It's
showing
hcd
that
housing
can
be
built
here,
there's
a
path
forward
for
it,
but
it
doesn't
commit
a
property
owner
to
doing
to
building
the
site
building
housing.
There.
K
Yeah,
that's
ultimately
the
property
owner's
decision,
whether
they
want
to
build
housing.
The
other
thing
I,
think
it's
really
important
to
highlight
that
gets
to
your
spline
of
this
comment
is
that
a
lot
of
cities
in
the
Bay
Area
had
a
huge
increase
in
their
Arena.
Their
allocation
for
housing,
San
Jose
did
not.
We
have
the
second
largest
absolute
number
of
units
right
because
we're
the
biggest
city
in
the
Bay
Area
only
San
Francisco
got
more.
They
got
more
than
us,
but
as
a
percentage
increase,
we
got
off
relatively
light.
K
I
can
talk
about
that
if
you
want
it
why
that
is,
and
so
we
have.
Our
existing
General
plan
for
framework
can
accommodate
our
77
000
housing
units.
So
there
are
no
General
plan
changes
that
you
are
considering
to
people's
property,
so
there,
if
there
were
General
plan
changes
that
we
were
proposing
to
people's
property
for
housing.
We
would
have
informed
them
on
that.
K
This
is
really
more
of
an
exercise
to
show
that,
within
our
existing
General
plan,
that
we
have
sites
that
meet
the
criteria
that
we've
identified
and
the
state
has
told
us,
we
need
to
use
that.
We
can
accommodate
this
this,
the
the
arena
allocation
of
something
77,
000
housing
units
or
62
000.
Excuse
me
great.
U
Perfect,
thank
you.
This
is
my
second
of
three
questions
and
I
know
they're
back
to
back
a
question
around
the
Outreach.
We
did
have
two
two
members
from
from
local
labor
come
out,
and
my
question
is
well
I'm,
assuming
that
they're
captured
here
right
are
there
small
focus
group
a
tabling
event
or
something
thing?
Is
there
something
that
changed
because
of
comments
from
from
labor?
U
And
if
so,
if
you
can,
if
you
can
highlight
those
and
at
the
same
time,
if,
if
they're
not
explicitly
stated
with
words
like
encourage
local
labor
apprenticeship
stuff,
like
that,
how
far
are
we
from
that
kind
of
language
adopting
that
kind
of
language?
What
are
the
pros
and
cons
in
terms
of
a
city?
Doing
that
not
doing
that?
U
So
that's
those
are
my
two
part
questions.
Thank
you.
Y
Yes,
we
have
engaged
with
the
the
Carpenters
and
had
several
meetings
with
them,
and
you
know
it's
something
we
did
consider
in
development
of
the
programs.
You
know
we
did
talk
to
them
about.
You
know,
for
our
affordable
projects
that
receive
city
funding.
You
know
prevailing
wages
is
a
requirement
and
there
are
other
standards
applied
to
those
projects.
Y
The
city
has
been
continued
to
develop
its
its
wage
theft,
ordinance
and
and
other
Workforce
standards
as
well,
and
so
you
know,
we've
discussed
those
those
programs
with
them
and
something
that
we're
you
know
continuing
to,
follow
and
and
consider
as
part
of
this.
U
And
in
terms
of
putting
something
on
paper
like
I,
think
San,
Mateo
or
Redwood
City
I
forget
the
cities
they
quoted
are
we
are
we
ready
for
a
line
like
that
city
of
San
Jose
encourages
this
and
this
and
this
from
developers,
and
if
not
obviously
you
know
I'm
learning
today
is
that
is
that
a
language
that
that
gets
a
city
in
trouble
or
limits
certain
projects?
U
What
are
some
unintended
consequences
if
we
explicitly
put
it
out
there
and
if
not,
if
there's
no
real
danger
or
consequence?
How
far
are
we
from
maybe
including
that
and
I?
Don't
know
if
not
a
City
attorney
or
the
director
can
help
with
this
level
question.
Y
It's
something
that
we
can,
we
can
consider
and
we
there's
no
concerns
that
have
been
expressed
from
hcd
in
terms
of
of
adding
those.
So
you
know
we
can
take
the
feedback
in
and
consider
that
that
language
moving
forward.
If
that's
something
that
the
the
commission
wishes
to
you
know,
ask
us
to
do,
and.
K
I
would
say:
that's
something
you
would
if
you
want
to
do
that.
You
should
pass
that
on
to
city
council,
because
this
is
sort
of
a
larger
issue
that
gets
Beyond
just
the
housing
element
that
the
city
council
has
you
know
taken
under
consideration.
The
past
I
think.
Ultimately,
it
would
be
up
to
them
to
sort
of
set
some
direction
on
that.
So
that's
the
kind
of
matter
that,
if,
if
it's
interesting
commission,
you
can
add
that
to
your
passing
it
along
in
your
recommendation
to
city
council.
P
Yeah
commissioner,
young
I
do
have
I
believe
it's
from
this
slide.
So
from
page
18
on
the
staff
report,
there's
just
a
acronym
that
I
I
wasn't
familiar
with
and
it
was
preservation.
X
I'm
sorry
I
should
have
spelled
that
out.
That's
a
notice
of
funding
availability.
So
it's
a
it's
when,
when
the
the
housing
department,
for
example,
has
has
funds
that
we
want
to
to
use
to
contribute
to
affordable
housing
development.
In
this
case
it
would
be
acquisition
in
rehab
of
an
existing
existing
apartment
building.
X
AA
X
Acronym
stands
for
and
it's
related
to
you
know
public
subsidy
of
of
affordable
housing
in
this
case.
H
H
These
are
really
strong
words
because
I,
honestly
I,
don't
think
you're
going
to
move
the
needle.
We
have
no
history
of
that.
It
feels
like
we're
taking
an
act
of
a
work
of
fantasy
and
trying
to
create
reality
in
the
words
that
we
use
to
frame
it
and
and
I
I
just
take
issue
with
that.
I,
don't
I,
don't
think
we're
going
to
address
these
issues.
G
Sure
I,
you
know
this
is
my
first
time
going
through
a
housing
element.
I've
been
on
this
commission
since
July
of
last
year,
and
you
know
working
to
try
and
get
up
to
speed
the
best
that
I
can
but
every
single
graph
that
I've
seen
of
our
goals
as
a
city
with
regards
to
housing,
I,
don't
think
I've
seen
one
where
we
exceeded
or
even
or
met
our
goals.
I.
Think,
commissioner
tordillos,
you
know
has
a
good
point.
There
I
think
in
the
letter
from
hcd,
which
they
even
point
out.
G
This
is
where
our
goal
for
adus
are,
but
we
think
this
is
unrealistic.
Commissioner
Cantrell
right
now
he
gave
his
opinion
saying
he
thinks
this
is
unrealistic.
I
I,
guess
my
question
is
sort
of
white.
G
Do
why
do
all
of
these
projections
seem
to
fall
short
and
I
know?
That's
not
an
easy
question
and
I
appreciate
all
of
the
work
that
you
do
but,
and
maybe
the
chair
may
know
more
than
I
or
Mr
Brio,
but
it
just
seems
like
every
single
chart
that
I've
seen
for
last.
However,
long
and
I've
been
watching
Planning
Commission
meeting
since
2019.
G
always
fall
short.
So
when
I
read
this,
it's
like
well
should
I
divide
this
number
by
10,
I,
don't
know,
and
it
just
it
just
seems
tough
to
me
to
be
able
to
interpret
things
like
that
when
it
seems
like
it's
always
incorrect.
Does
that
make
sense.
X
Sure
it
makes
sense,
maybe
I
can
just
back
up
a
second
and
and.
I
X
Something
that
commissioner
Cantrell
said
so
you
know
your
your
point
is
well
taken.
I,
don't
think
the
use
of
the
word
address
meant
to
in
the
sense
to
solve
or
to
you
know,
I
think
addressed
me.
It
was
meant
to
like
you
know,
address
as
and
to
speak
to
you
know,
but
not
address
as
into
to
be
the
final.
You
know
the
to
be
the
end-all
be-all
I
mean
I.
Think
everything
you
said
is
is
exactly
true.
X
We
don't
have
the
resources
dedicated
to
to
do
everything
that
that
you
know
to
to
solve
these
problems
and
it
is
addressing
in
in
the
sense
of
of
as
you
were
speaking
about,
like
attempting
to
to
mitigate
attempting
to
do
something.
So
you
know
if
it
if
it
communicated
you
to
that
it
was.
The
intention
is
to
solve
everything.
That's
not
that
that
was
not
the
intent
and
then,
commissioner
Rosario,
you
know
just
to
build
on
what
you
know.
X
Deputy
direct
or
Bureau
was
was
talking
about
one
of
the
fundamental
things
it's
like
kind
of
the
elephant
in
the
room
that
we
say,
but
maybe
we
don't
say
it
in
a
way
that
sings
Sin
enough
is
that
there
is
a
structural
mismatch
across
the
whole
state
in
terms
of
what
the
needs
are
and
what
the
resources
available
are
in
terms
of
what
the
funding
funding
available
is
so
affordable.
X
Housing
is
not
possible
to
build
without
public
subsidy
it
just
doesn't
it
just
won't
financially
work
without
some
level
of
public
subsidy
and
one
of
the
main
sources
of
public
subsidy
for
affordable
housing
is
the
low
income
housing
tax
credit
which,
which
essentially
ends
up
functioning
like
Equity,
within
an
affordable
housing
within
an
affordable
housing
development.
And
if
you
look
at
in
the
state
of
California
the
there's,
a
state
agency
called
the
tax
credit
allocation
committee,
which
allocates
which
allocates
the
low-income
housing
tax
credit
they
have.
X
X
So
you
know
that's
like
a
structural
Statewide
funding
reason
why
almost
every
jurisdiction
is
me
is
is
short
of
its
Arena
goals,
because
any
any
jurisdiction
that
has
any
kind
of
scale
for
for
producing,
affordable
housing
is
not
going
to
be
able
to
get
enough
money
from
the
state
to
be
able
to
produce
that
housing
and
that's
true
across
federal
funds.
Local
funds,
you
know,
there's
just
not
enough
public
subsidy
to
complete
all
the
affordable
housing
that
we
need
to
complete.
X
So
you
know
we
do
a
lot
of
things
about
the
about
creating
the
right
planning
conditions,
the
right
policy
conditions
to
be
able
to
to
have
affordable
housing.
We
create
incentives,
and
so
we
do
most
of
the
things
that
we
can
do
without
without
putting
in
more
money.
X
So,
but
one
of
the
fundamental
problems
is
we
just?
We
just
don't
have
that
money.
G
K
I
might
be
able
to
answer
why
they
do
that.
I
think
it's,
so
they
want
to
make
sure
that
you
have
lots
of
opportunities
for
affordable
housing
and
a
particularly
that
you
have
those
opportunities
at
high
resources:
communities
you're,
not
just
playing
them
in
low-income
neighborhoods
that
concentrate,
you
know,
disadvantaging
poor
people,
and
but
you
don't
know
that
property
owners
are
going
to
want
to
sell
their
property
to
affordable
housing
developer.
K
You
don't
know
if
it's
going
to
work
out
for
that
developer,
it's
kind
of
like
when
you
go
into
a
clothing
store
to
buy
a
suit.
You
don't
want
to
have
you
know
one
suit
to
choose
from
you
want
a
selection
of
Suits,
because
you
don't
know
if
that
one's
going
to
work
for
you
or
that
one
that
one
they'll
sell
it
to
you
for
whatever
reason.
K
So
you
have
to
have
sort
of
a
wider
portfolio
of
opportunities
so
that
by
having
that,
you
can
ensure
that
you're
going
to
be
built,
you're
going
to
start
building,
affordable
housing.
If
you
got
to
the
actual
reality
of
what
you
could
build
and
identify
sites
to
that
exact
number,
like
San
Jose
Josh,
do
you
know
like
how
many
affordable
housing
units
have
like?
Historically?
Will
we
build
in
eight
years
in
San,
Jose.
X
We
built
like
close
to
25
of
our
Arena
allocation
is
in.
K
The
last
cycle,
so
is
that
like
15
000
units
or
so
so
you
want
to
have
more
than
those
15
000
sites.
You
want
to
have
a
lot
more
than
that,
so
you
have
because
you
again
that
gentleman
that
came
up
says
well
I,
don't
know
that
we
want
to
develop
our
strip
mall
in
the
housing
whoops.
Well
that
one's
not
going
to
work
now.
So
that's
sort
of
the
rationale,
I
think
from
the
state
of
why
they
give
you
a
big
number
and
you
plan
for
it.
If
that
helps.
K
B
You
good
commissioner
Nellis
wise
on
this
slide.
R
You
know
you
just
mentioned
incentives
what
the
city
could
do
as
providing
incentives,
I
one
of
the
things
that
I
actually
been
thinking
about
for
a
while
was
re
reclaiming
land
right,
for
example,
maybe,
as
an
incentive,
the
city
can
map
out
city
land
that
can
be
donated,
maybe
to
an
affordable
housing
developer,
so
that
could
help
subsidize
the
cost
and
when
I'm
talking
about
donating
land
that
includes
streets
that
are
like
cul-de-sacs
that
have
no
end
or
like
that,
I
don't
keep
going
forward
I.
R
You
know
every
time
I
pass
through
Center,
Road
and
I
see
history
park
and
there's
like
a
restaurant
and
there's
like
the
old
baby
food
and
across
the
street.
There's
you
know
the
entrance
into
the
historic
part
and
then
there's
like
this
wide
Street
and
then
there's
the
creek
and
it
kind
of
dead
ends
and
that's
such
a
waste
of
land
to
me,
I
think
like
wow,
you
need
to
reclaim
that
space
either
convert
it
to
a
park,
but
in
this
particular
case,
really
working
collaboration
as
an
incentive,
because
San
Jose
is
large.
R
It's
it's
like
the
largest
city
right
in
Santa,
Clara,
County
I,
believe
so
we
have
a
lot
of
land
right.
So
we
need
to
leverage
our
resources
and
maybe,
as
an
incentive,
do
these
land
donations
where
we,
you
know
where
we
have
an
easement
for
a
street,
turn
that
Dead
End
Street
into
potential
space
to
grow,
affordable
housing
to
to
build,
affordable
housing.
So
I
think
that
would
be
an
incentive
that
that
could
be
added
in
a
policy
of
some
sort,
because
I
think
that
something
we
can't
do
it
alone.
P
Yes,
thank
you
chair,
since
we're
talking
about
funding
I
just
wanted
to
maybe
provide
another
perspective.
So
on
page
six
of
the
staff
report
it
talks
about
4.8
billion
dollars
in
City
subsidies.
P
X
P
Right
understood
just
just
for
a
frame
of
reference,
could
you
tell
me
like
what
amount
of
City
subsidy
we
might
have
in
the
past
fiscal
year,
just
kind
of
to
give
us
a
frame
of
reference?
It
doesn't
have
to
be
exact,
but
just
ballpark.
X
I
mean
we
have
on
the
order
of
tens
of
millions.
You
know
something
less
than
100
million
in
the
past
the
past
year.
I,
don't
remember,
I'm,
sorry,
I,
don't
remember
the
exact
number
I
can
I
can
look
it
up,
but
I
don't
have
it
at
top
of
mind.
So.
X
P
What
I
was
going
to
say
so?
I
I
think
it's
important
to
bring
some
perspective
into
this
conversation
that
that
goes
back
to
what
Michael
Brio
said.
It's
a
money
problem
right.
You
know
to
meet
our
Arena
goals.
We
would
need
4.8
billion
dollars,
and
you
know
our
city
can
afford
to
have
tens
of
millions
of
dollars.
That's
a
huge
problem
and
it's
not
a
problem.
We
hear
on
this
commission
or
the
city
council
can
solve
it's
a
Federal
problem,
a
state
problem.
P
X
X
P
K
It
yeah
I
mean
this
is
a
actually
a
classic
case
of
market
failure
right
in
the
back
in
different
markets
and
different
places.
The
the
the
the
regular
old
housing
market
provided
all
kinds
of
housing
and
for
all
different
levels
of
income,
and
there
wasn't
the
need
for
the
subsidy,
but
because
of
the
time
we
live
in
the
place,
we
live
in
the
economy,
we're
in
the
most
expensive
plate,
Market,
probably
on
the
planet,
or
at
least
one
of
them.
D
Yeah,
commissioner,
young
I
think
it's
actually
600
million,
not
60.,
but
also,
if
I
recall
from
the
staff
report.
Just
I
want
to
confirm
this.
That
4.8
billion
estimate
is
purely
construction
costs.
It
excludes
land
costs.
D
X
Of
total
of
a
total
development
cost,
so
in
addition
to
that,
there'd
be
like
another
that
which
is
roughly
I,
don't
know,
20
of
a
total
of
the
total
development
costs
for
for,
for
that
and
there'd
be
other
financing.
Public
and
private
that'd
be
coming
in
to
you
know
another!
It's
like
every
dollar
that
the
city
puts
into
an
affordable
housing.
Development
is
leveraged
five
to
six
times
over
by
the
developer,
because
they
go
out
and
get
other
funding.
They
get
funding
from
the
state,
the
federal
government
they
get.
L
H
Lofty
goals
but
hey,
let
me
look
I
just
I
have
to
the
reason
I'm
saying
this
is
not
about
you
and
the
work
that
you
do.
I
know
this
is
difficult.
It's
about
our
city
and
how
we
view
the
people
who
live
within
it.
H
H
I
I
think
there's
a
this
when
I
say
this
is
an
act
of
fantasy
I
think
we
all
know
that
I
think
that's
a
that's
just
a
reality
that
we
we
would
love
to
see
all
these
things
come
to
fruition,
but
the
likelihood
is
approaching
zero.
Every
moment
we
breathe
in
this
room,
it's
not
going
to
happen
and
I
think
we
should
honestly
reflect
on
that,
and-
and
maybe
these
types
of
reports
should
go
back
to
the
governor
with
that
tinge
of
reality.
H
I
I
I
think
that's
our
our
real
reality
here,
but
I
also
take
issue
with
I
sit
in
this
room
and
I
hear
the
words,
equity
and
inclusion
all
the
time,
and,
quite
frankly,
we
fail
to
actually
adjust
our
lens.
When
you
say
Equity
inclusion,
you
have
to
actually
understand
these
communities
that
we
intend
to
impact.
H
You
have
to
know
that
since
1990
African
Americans
have
been
declining
in
population,
so
significantly
that
it's
less
than
half
of
what
it
was
then
primarily
because
of
housing
costs,
secondarily
because
of
income.
So
when
our
Union
Brothers
here
say,
we
need
local
folks
to
take
these
jobs.
Believe
me:
we
need
local
folks
to
take
these
jobs.
H
This
is
the
reality
we're
in
so
when
when
you,
when
we
put
it
on
these
pages
first,
do
me
one
favor
go
out
and
analyze
the
data
on
these
Equity
communities.
We
talk
about,
look
at
it,
embrace
it
and
understand
it,
because
we're
talking
about
the
lives
of
people
who
are
trying
to
survive
in
this
Valley,
and
we
can
see
clearly
by
the
trends
in
population
now
extended
to
others
in
recent
years.
It's
not
just
our
most
vulnerable
Community
we're
just
the
canaries,
we
stop
singing
and
nobody
noticed.
H
These
are
the
realities,
and
this
is
when
you
do
this
work.
Please
actually
look
through
that
lens.
Actually
look
at
that
information
and
understand
it.
It'll
give
more
meaning
and
purpose
to
the
work
that
you're
doing
and
it'll
actually,
hopefully
impact
people
with
real
thinking
about
what
we
can
do
to
help.
That's
why
I
say
this
I'm
passionate
about
it,
because,
quite
frankly,
I
am
fighting
for
my
own
life
here.
R
When
just
to
piggyback
on
what
was
said,
you
know
when
you
focus
on
the
you
know,
when
you
have
outlined
the
goals
and
the
focus
you
know
does
the
housing
element
include
the
challenges
that
that
you're
facing
with
all
that
stuff
Does.
It
include
likes.
You
know,
like
the
re,
realistic
challenges.
X
I
mean
commissioner
I
know
this
was
I
mean
the
best
of
our
limited
abilities.
We
we
tried
there
as
an
appendix
B
to
the
housing
element.
We
have
like
a
180
page,
assess,
plus
assessment
of
fair
housing,
and
you
know
there's
there's
a
lot
of
a
lot
of
detail
in
there
about
about
the
numbers
and
the
stories
about
what
we
heard.
X
You
know
I
mean
we're
it's
it's
imperfect,
of
course,
but
you
know
we
did
our
best
as
staff.
We
did
a
sincere
effort
to
both.
You
know
fulfill
what
the
fulfill,
what
the
state
of
California
is
asking
of
us-
and
you
know
what
we
think
is
like
our
our
moral
responsibility
as
people
who
care
about
this
city.
Q
V
Thank
you,
I
actually
did
have
a
comment
on
the
previous
side,
as
it
relates
to
policies
and
programs.
I
just
wanted
to
start
by
calling
out
some
of
the
really
solid
strategies
that
I
think
have
been
identified
by
City
staff.
I
was
particularly
happy
to
see
policy.
P7
ministerial
infield
approval
ordinance
coming
up
in
the
next
couple
of
years.
My
Hope
here
would
be
that
we
can
make
that
as
broad
as
possible
same
with
the
other
kind
of
buy
right
and
ministerial
approval
reforms
that
are
called
out
here.
V
I
saw
a
policy
P-38
mentioned
rezoning
for
buy
right
development
of
20,
affordable
housing
projects
on
sites
that
were
identified
in
the
fourth
and
fifth
planning
cycle.
From
my
perspective,
why
not
expand
that
and
make
it
buy
right,
affordable
housing
developments
with
20,
affordable
units
anywhere,
regardless
of
whether
those
were
on
sites
that
were
previously
identified
in
previous
planning
Cycles
also
was
very
happy
to
see
a
P20
mixed
on
income
housing
coming
into
Focus,
as
well
as
P35
small
unit
multi-family
housing
for
up
to
10
units
in
high
opportunity
areas.
V
I
wanted
to
call
out
that
one
in
particular
seems
like
it
segues
pretty
nicely
with
the
recently
passed
State
legislation
sb10,
which
gives
cities
the
authorities
to
rezone
for
multi-family
projects
up
to
10
units
and
as
part
of
sb10
cities,
have
the
option
of
making
those
projects
ministerial
approvals.
So
I
would
hope
that,
as
we
develop
this
policy,
we
can
take
the
full
advantage
of
the
leverage
that
the
state
has
given
us
there
and
then
I
think.
V
The
final
thing
that
I'll
say
on
strategies
here
would
be
that
you
know
it's
been
mentioned
multiple
times
here.
The
purpose
of
the
housing
element
is
to
plan
for
housing,
not
for
the
city
to
build
housing.
I
would
actually
push
back
on
that
a
little
bit
and
say
that
that
could
be
a
strategy
here
would
be
to
have
the
city
actually
lean
into
building,
affordable,
housing
themselves.
V
I
think
social
housing
is
something
that
is,
you
know
increasingly
a
part
of
our
conversation
around
the
housing
crisis.
You
know
at
the
state
level,
San
Jose's
own
Alex
Lee
introduced
ab309.
V
The
social
housing
act
to
try
to
get
some
of
the
infrastructure
in
place
for
a
public
sector,
housing
developer
in
the
state
of
California
and
then
further
north
Senator
Senator
Aisha
wahab
also
introduced
SB
555,
the
state,
affordable
housing
act
of
2023,
and
this
one
would
set
a
10-year
goal
of
creating
1.2
million
units
of
social
housing
over
the
next
10
years
with
a
five-year
goal
of
creating
600
000
units
of
social
housing.
V
So
when
you
start
to
look
at
that
five-year
goal
in
particular,
that
would
be
you
know
completely
within
this
next
eight
year
planning
cycle.
If
this
bill
actually
does
move
forward,
so
I'd
love
to
see
the
city
start
to
incorporate
social
housing
as
a
strategy
moving
forward,
I
think
right
down
the
block.
We
have
a
pretty
good.
V
You
know
model
that
we
could
use
for
that
sort
of
development
with
San
Jose
State's
Workforce
housing
project
with
the
Alquist
Redevelopment,
so
that
project
will
be
50
affordable
with
500
units
of
affordable
housing
for
specifically
employees
of
San,
Jose,
State
we'd
love
to
see
the
city
invest
in
similar
strategies
for
Workforce
housing
for
city
employees.
V
There's
been
mention
of
you
know:
persistent
understaffing
and
retention
issues
for
city
employees
and
I
think
what
better
way
to
address
that
then
by
guaranteeing
City
staff,
affordable
housing
at
the
actual
income
levels
that
they
are
making
working
to
improve
our
city,
yeah
and
then
I
guess.
V
The
other
strategy
that
I
would
call
out
here
there
was,
you
know,
mentions
of
again
a
focus
on
infill
development,
as
well
as
a
small
multi-family
housing,
and
to
that
end,
I
would
also
encourage
the
city
to
look
into
reforming
our
building
codes
to
make
those
sorts
of
development
more
feasible,
specifically
have
an
eye
care
towards
reforming
our
building
codes
to
increase
the
height
limit
for
single
staircase
apartment
buildings.
A
single
staircase
apartment
buildings.
Up
to
six
to
eight
stories
is
one
of
the
dominant
housing
forms
all
throughout
Europe.
V
V
Some
of
those
building
codes
at
the
state
level,
so
I
think
this
is
something
that
could
open
up
a
lot
of
smaller
parcel
developments,
bring
down
the
cost
of
construction
with
some
of
these
more
middle
densities,
as
opposed
to
just
focusing
on
kind
of
low
densities
and
high
densities
and
I
think
it
could
also
broaden
the
number
of
developers
who
could
actually
feasibly
look
into
financing
a
project
like
this,
since
it
would
be
smaller
unit,
counts,
smaller
parcels
and
simpler
construction.
So
I
think
this
one
has
a
lot
of
Promise
as
well.
Thank
you.
Q
B
You,
commissioner,
terius
I,
look
forward
to
you
leading
one
of
our
study
sessions
on
the
variety
of
the
policies
that
you
covered.
It
is
extensive.
There
are
a
lot
of
opportunities
out
there.
I,
don't
say
that
in
an
adjusting
way,
there's
just
a
lot
out
there
and
appreciate
that
I
know
we're
going
to
the
next
slide.
X
What
we
used
in
the
in
the
housing
element
assessment
of
fair
housing
is
the
state
of
California.
Hcd
has
and
tcac
the
tax
credit
allocation
committee.
They
have
Maps
where
they've,
where
the
state
has
designated
by
census,
track
High
resource
areas,
middle
resource
areas,
okay,.
Q
B
Y
Land
cost
is
an
area
that
we're
required
to
analyze.
We
do
have
an
analysis
of
that
in
in
the
housing
element,
I.
Think
generally,
you
know.
Land
costs,
I
mean
they're,
obviously
a
factor
in
the
development
cost,
but
they
haven't
been
kind
of
the
most
significant
cost
that
has
really
led
to
kind
of
you
know,
infeasibility
of
projects.
Generally,
you
know
we
do
have
sites
available
and
and
land
prices
haven't
really
been
kind
of
the
the
most
significant
factor
in
terms
of
feasibility.
So.
I
B
And
under
government
construct
governmental
constraints,
why
would
we
not
list
sequa,
SQL
litigation
that
delays
countless
headline
projects
across
the
state,
both
public
and
private
for
years?
Why
wouldn't
we
list
that.
Y
We
touch
on
it
a
little
bit
in
the
Resident
opposition
section
and
in
terms
of
how
that
that
can
be
used
in
ways
to
delay
projects,
and
then
you
know
we
do
have
some
programs.
You
know
kind
of.
We
don't
necessarily
mention
it
directly
as
a
constraint,
but
we
do
have
some
programs
identified
related
to
SQL
in
terms
of
doing
additional
analysis
of
entire
Urban
villages
to
try
to
speed
up
individual
projects.
So
they
have
to
do
less
analysis,
and
then
you
know
pursuing
that.
Y
B
Y
I
would
just
add
you
know
for
for
the
city,
the
state
streamlining
process
through
SB,
35
and
ab
2011.
You
know
most
of
a
lot
of
our
affordable
projects.
Are
you
know,
utilizing
those
routes
to
approval
and
those
do
you
know,
have
a
SQL
exemption
and.
AA
Y
B
There's
certainly
been
spot
legislation.
I
know
the
legislature
will
exempt
a
a
billionaire
Sports
Arena
type
of
facility,
but
then-
and
then
I
was
listening-
a
podcast
with
Senator
weiner,
who
was
saying
well
I'm
sponsoring
a
bill
on
secret
reform,
but
it's
for
a
specific
neighborhood
in
San,
Francisco
and
I'm
like
what
about
the
rest
of
the
state.
You
know
so
anyway.
I'll
go
on
to
the
rest
of
the
colleagues
here.
If
they
have
questions,
commissioner
tordillos.
V
Yeah,
there's
been
a
lot
of
mention
throughout
this
meeting
about
all
of
the
different
headwinds
that
we're
facing
here,
that
you
know
as
a
body
and
as
a
city
we're
not
really
empowered
to
solve.
I
think
it
could
be
useful
to
use
this
chapter
of
the
housing
element,
constraints
on
housing
to
actually
lay
out
a
road
map
for
what
some
of
that
state
level
reform
that
could
actually
enable
us
to
move
more
here
could
be
so
that
could
be.
V
You
know,
citing
those
same
figures
around
the
four
point:
whatever
it
was
billion
dollars
in
City
subsidies,
that
would
be
required
to
actually
built
out
our
low
income
housing
requirements.
You
know
maybe
framing
that
around
what
the
actual
Gap
in
the
terms
of
the
state
funding
need
is
to
reach
some
of
these
goals,
as
well
as
things
like
SQL
reform
and
other
things
that
really
primarily
sit
at
the
state
level.
Q
V
G
Just
want
to
agree
with
commissioner
tordillo's
I
think
that
would
be
great
to
spell
out.
So
we
have
a
realistic
picture
that
we're
showing
in
our
housing
element,
which
everyone
reads
well.
V
V
It
mentioned
that
there
was
a
study
back
in
2019
that
looked
at
entitlements
between
2014
and
2019
and
then
a
little
bit
later,
looking
at
how
many
of
them
actually
landed
in
construction,
and
it
was
62
percent
of
the
projects,
and
that
also
appears
to
be
kind
of
the
discount
factor
that
we're
applying
here.
But
I
opened
the
study
and
read
into
it
a
little
bit
more
and
it
looked
like
there
were
some
pretty
significant
disparities
in
terms
of
different
building
forms,
in
terms
of
which
ones
actually
made
it
into
construction.
V
There's
also
been
mention
of
increased
construction
costs
kind
of
on
an
ongoing
basis.
So
I
guess
both
looking
at
the
topologies
of
the
actual
buildings
in
the
pipeline.
Was
that
taken
into
account
and
also
did
we
factor
in
the
current
market
conditions
and
construction
costs
when
choosing
that
discount
factor
for
the
pipeline
projects.
W
So
we
we
applied
a
discount
Factor
across
all
projects.
We
did
not
look
at
the
the
building
form
but
I'm.
Sorry.
What
was
your
second
question.
V
W
Y
Yeah
I
would
just
add,
I
mean
in
that.
In
that
analysis
we
were
looking
at
the
last
five
years.
I
mean
I
I,
understand
where
you're
coming
from
I
think
it
is
hard
to
account
for
all
those
very
variables
I
mean
we
didn't
know
in
2021.
The
interest
rates
would
be
where
they
are
now,
but
I
definitely
understand
where
you're
coming
from,
and
you
know
one
of
one
of
the
things
that
the
city's
done
and
we've
we've
highlighted
in
our
programs
to
continue
to
do
is
to
have
third-party
analysis.
Y
You
know
of
the
costs
of
construction
in
the
city
and
to
understand
the
cost
by
by
construction
type.
You
know,
understanding
the
cost
of
high-rise
and
mid-rise
and
low
rise
in
the
city.
Y
V
V
That
haven't
had
a
ton
of
visible
progress
that
I'm
skeptical
are
going
to
be
built
in
the
planning
cycle,
including
one
where
the
developer
went
defunct
and
the
property
was
foreclosed
by
the
lender,
but
still
listed
in
the
pipeline
project,
seemingly
with
the
same
discount
Factor
as
anything
else.
So
we'd
like
to
see
some
I
guess
a
little
bit
more
rigor
there.
In
terms
of
the
analysis
of
the
pipeline
projects,
I.
Y
Mean
I
guess
just
to
add
a
little
a
little
bit.
You
know
I
think
you
know
there
is
such
a
significant
I
mean
the
discount
factor
is
based
on.
You
know
the
past
five
years.
You
know
and
I
I
think
that
in
that
real
historical
example,
you
you
do
see
with
that
significant
40
reduction.
You
know
you
do
see
that
there
are
a
lot
of
projects
that
aren't
going
to
make
it.
You
know
so
I
think
we'd
through
that
historical
analysis,
are
you
know
those
variables
are
kind
of
factored
in
there?
V
I
understand
where
you're
coming
from
too,
mostly
just
trying
to
make
space
for
the
fact
that,
if
it
ends
up
being
that
only
20
of
those
projects
break
ground
instead
of
60.
That's
obviously
you
know
we're
looking
at
twenty
thousand
plus
pipeline
approved
units
here.
So
any
discrepancy
between
the
discount
factor
that
we're
applying
and
what
the
actual
reality
ends
up
being
will
have
a
very
large
impact
in
terms
of
what
our
actual
Arena
allocation
ends
up.
V
So
looking
at
the
hcd
inventory
handbook
for
how
we
should
calculate
expected
densities,
for
these
I
noticed
a
quote
that
it
said
the
capacity
calculation
must
be
adjusted
to
reflect
the
realistic
potential
for
residential
development
capacity
on
the
sites
within
the
planning
or
within
the
planning
cycle
period,
and
it
also
made
specific
mention
of
the
facts
that
jurisdictions
should
look
to
their
own
past
experience
with
successfully
converting
existing
uses
to
higher
densities
and
residential
development,
as
well
as
market
trends
conditions
and
any
regulations
or
incentives
that
the
city
is
providing.
V
Y
Yeah,
so
when
looking
at
the
Capacity
Analysis,
what
using
the
the
tool
that
I
mentioned,
that
the
building
blocks
telling
me
what
what
they
helped
us
with
is
looking
at
the
sites
in
the
inventory
and
then
matching
those
sites
based
on
their
characteristics
with
sites
that
redeveloped
in
the
last
cycle
and
sites
that
match
the
most
closely
to
those
redevelopments.
We
took
look
at
those
capacities
and
then
came
up
with
a
capacity
estimate
for
for
those
sites,
so
for
every
site.
Y
V
Yeah
I
appreciate
that
thank
you.
I
spent
quite
a
bit
of
time
last
night,
looking
through
the
telemet
tool,
actually
kind
of
diving
into
the
inventory
here.
So
I
was
curious.
I
represent
D3,
obviously
so
I
looked
at
the
26
highest
density
sites
that
were
identified
within
D3
and
I
noticed
that
a
lot
of
them
in
their
comps
seem
to
have
outliers
that
kind
of
swung
the
average
density
quite
considerably
and
then
digging
into
it.
V
Y
Yeah
I
guess
I'd
have
to
see
some
of
those
specific
examples.
I
mean
generally
the
the
assumptions
never
exceed
what
the
allowable
capacity
is
under
the
general
plan
and
more
often
than
not
are
below
what
the.
What
the
you
know.
Allowable
capacity
is,
and
so
you
know
we're
trying
to
be
as
rooted
in
in
data
as
possible,
so
I
think
in
a
lot
of
cases.
Y
Some
may
actually
underestimate
you
know
in
terms
of
capacity,
but
you
know
they're
always
there
are
outliers
because
of
site
size
as
well,
and
you
know
but
try
to
filter
that
out
by
trying
to
to
match
based
upon
characteristics.
But
you
know
some
sites
are
just
a
lot
more
different
than
others
and
may
not
have
a
perfect
match.
You
know,
but
you
know
we
tried
to
use
as
much
much
data
as
possible.
So
thank.
B
B
I'll
ask
this
question
here:
maybe
about
neighborhood
business
districts,
so
I
think
you
have
some
competing
policies
of
the
city,
ones
that
for
neighborhood
business
districts
that
are
inclined
to
have
ground
floor
retail
commercial
and
then
you
have
you
know
low-income
project
that
would
not
be
having
any
retail,
and
so
when
it
comes
to
protecting
neighborhood
business
districts,
does
the
staff
see
a
way
that
is
it
contradictory
or
should
neighborhood
business
districts
allow
for
housing
on
top
with
some
commercial
on
the
bottom,
in
a
neighborhood
business
district.
K
Think
we
go
ahead,
Michael
yeah,
so
so
I
think
just
kind
of
stepping
back
we've
been
having
real
challenges,
with
planning
for
mixed
use,
just
in
general
in
this
city,
and
a
lot
of
it
has
to
do.
I
mean
you
know.
Mixed
use
for
planners
is
like
the
secret
sauce
right
of
success
for
urbanism
and
we've
planned
for
mixed
use
in
a
lot
of
places.
K
However,
with
State
Law
changes
such
as
density
bonus
law
there,
it's
very
hard
to
you,
can't
it
makes
it
difficult
to
get
the
commercial
and
it
makes
it
difficult
to
require
the
commercial,
particularly
with
it's,
with
affordable
housing
or
a
project
that
integrates
affordable
housing,
that's
market
rate,
and
so
that
that's
created
real
real
challenges.
So
if
you
really
wanted
to
just
preserve
businesses
on
a
neighborhood
business
district,
you
should
not
allow
housing
to
be
honest
with
you.
It's
mixed
use.
It
ain't
gonna
work!
K
If
that's
what
you
want
to
do,
I
think,
however,
there's
new
state
laws
that
just
got
passed
as
being
sb6
and
ab
2011.
That
now
say.
Oh
now,
you
can
do
housing
in
those
commercial
areas.
So
at
this
point
the
state
is
is
taking
us
down
that
road
and
in
the
bigger
picture
we
think
it's
the
right
thing
to
do.
It's
just
that.
K
There's
a
lot
more
complications
around
state
laws
and
what
we
can
and
cannot
require,
and
then
the
city
council
got
rid
of
the
requirements
anyway
for
affordable
housing
provide
Market
rates.
So
one
of
the
things
that
we
have
to
sort
of
thread,
the
needle
is
come
up
with
a
a
zoning
code
framework
that
in
in
that
will,
you
know,
encourage
allow
require
where
we
can
as
much
as
we
can
integration
of
commercial
within
new
mixed
use,
project
and
mixed
use
development.
K
The
council
did
approve
a
general
plan
change,
but
the
zoning
work
hasn't
been
done
yet
and
that's
the
next
piece
that
will
be
coming
over
the
next
probably
12
months
or
so.
So
we
have
to
figure
that
out.
It's
really
going
to
be
challenging
sure.
B
B
You
know
central
location,
it
would
seem
like
that's
where
it
could
work,
but
on
the
40
mile
per
hour,
Street,
maybe
not
so
much
because
it
doesn't
have
the
pedestrian
traffic
so
I'm
trying
to
understand-
and
you
know,
would
then
someone
be
able
to
knock
down
an
existing
retail
building
put
in
the
housing,
100,
affordable,
low
income
and
there'd
be
no
commercial
requirement
at
all.
On
that
you
know
this
sort
of
Premier
business
district
streets.
K
Correct
so
there
could
be
a
requirement.
Well,
we
so
first
of
all
the
council
says
we
can't
require
it,
but
even
if
we
did
require
it
and
we
did
until
last
fall
in
some
cases
because
of
State
density
bonus
law,
affordable
housing
developers
could
get
concession
and
waivers,
and
they
would
just
concession
that
away.
So
it's
not
that
there
are
occasionally
an
affordable
housing
developer
that
might
put
some
kind
of
ground
floor
space,
but
generally
because
it's
very
difficult
to
finance
that
space
I
think
my
understanding,
Josh
Curry
been
wrong.
K
There
were
financing
mechanisms
in
the
past
that
would
contribute
towards
that
construction
ad
space
that
aren't
there
anymore
so
that
there's
a
trend
now
that
they
they
don't
want
to
build
it,
and
they
really
brought
up
that.
That's
a
financial
Challenge
and
the
council
heard
them
and
eliminated
that
require
so.
I
Q
R
R
You
know
like
on
Monterey
Corridor,
where
everyone's
going
like
speeding
right,
but
then
you
look
at
like
older
models
that
have
worked
like
in
the
downtown
area
in
the
Burbank,
where
you
got
like
a
neighborhood
and
then
you
got
that
corner
convenience
store.
You
know
something
like
that.
That
may
just
be
something
on
a
corner
that
could
provide
some
convenience
with
some
food.
Just
yeah.
B
K
I
just
want
to
highlight
in
the
slide
a
key
takeaway
is
that
of
our
affordable
housing
units.
89
of
the
sites
are
in
those
moderate,
high
or
highest
resource
areas.
That's
a
really
important
part
of
the
inventory
and
only
5.5
of
the
lower
income
sites
are
in
the
racially
ethnically
concentrated
areas
of
poverty.
The
recap
areas
so
I
think
that's
a
really.
K
The
the
state
really
wants,
as
an
affirmatively
addressing
for
housing
is
to
put
create
opportunities
for
people
to
live
in
those
moderate,
high
and
high
resource
communities
and
not
say
hey
we're
just
going
to
build
more
low
income
in
your
neighbors.
You
have
to
stay
there
now.
That
being
said,
we
have
heard
from
some
communities
that
they
that
are
under
threat
of
gentrification,
that
are
low
income
and
they
want
may
want
the
opportunity
to
stay
in
their
neighborhood
and
not
be
forced
out
which
gentrification,
if
it.
K
R
Of
course,
I
would
like
to
see
you
know
possible
streets
that
could
be
taken
back
and
converted
into
affordable
housing.
That's
what
I
would
like
to
see.
As
far
as
you
know,
when
you're
talking
about
inventory
analysis,
I
I
think
that
we
need
to
really
take
a
look
at.
You
know
reclaiming
some
of
that.
You
know
all
the
streets
that
maybe
maybe
there's
certain
streets
that
that
we
could
do
away
with
to
create
more
housing.
Y
I
just
wanted
to
comment:
if
I,
could
you
know
in
some
of
our
Outreach,
particularly
to
the
affordable
housing
developers,
there's
there's
kind
of
a
sweet
spot
for
kind
of
the
site
size
that
they
look
for
to
build,
affordable
projects
based
on
you
know
the
subsidies
available
and
really
it's
from
about
half
an
acre
to
one
and
a
half
acres,
and
so
those
smaller
sites,
while
they
might
create
some
opportunity,
might
be
difficult
to
you
know,
produce
affordable
housing
on
and
actually
hcd
asks
us
not
to
include
sites
less
than
half
half
an
acre
without
additional
analysis,
and
so
most
all
of
our
sites,
except
for
a
select
few,
are
above
half
an
acre
and
sites
for
lower
income
generally
below
one
and
a
half
acres
for
the
most
part.
R
B
R
Yeah,
no
I
really
think
that
that
site
that
I
was
talking
about
near
hell,
hobby,
hello,
Park
in
and
I
think
that's
a
really
large
I
think
it
could
be
half
an
acre.
That's
just
what
I'm
saying
and
it's
not
close
to
well,
it
might
be
close
to
some
housing,
but
it's
next
to
a
Creek
in
a
park,
so
I
think
that's
worth
exploring.
I'm.
B
Okay
next
slide-
and
let's
see
here,
commissioner
Cantrell.
H
Good
question
one
of
the
the
callers
mentioned
that
there
wasn't
enough
time
to
adequately
evaluate
the
the
find
or
the
last
update.
How
much
time
did
we
actually
give.
W
The
draft
was
posted
last
week
last
Wednesday,
so
seven
days
consistent
with
Planning
Commission
posting
requirements.
It
was
seven.
H
W
We
it
is
consistent
with
the
requirements
for
Planning
Commission,
but
we're
also
trying
to
meet
our
schedule
to
get
this
to
city
council
by.
H
What
I
thought,
and
so
we
we
assemble,
we
we
put
the
fire
engines
together
and
then
wait
and
then
we
dispatch
them
so
I,
I,
I,
I,
think
there's
a
I
know
we're
we're
a
Planning
Commission
and
your
planners
I
think
that
proper
planning
gives
time
for
analysis,
thought
and
reflection.
F
F
September
was
the
first
draft
right
that
was
submitted
to
hcd
of
last
year.
Hcd
provided
comments
to
us
in
December
and
listed
out
changes
that
we
needed
to
make
for
compliance
and
I
think
that
last
slide
listed
out
bullet
points
of
all
the
changes
that
needed
to
be
made.
So
there's
no
legal
requirement
that
we
then
go
back
again
for
another
round,
because
there
was
substantial
public
comment
more
than
what's
required
through
law
through
state
law.
So
there's
no
requirement.
F
There's
no
State
requirement
to
go
back
again
for
another
round
of
public
comment
right.
We
were
given
a
list
of
items
that
we
needed
to
include
to
become
compliant
with
the
state,
housing
element,
law
and
I.
Think
we've
done
that
and
I
think.
At
this
point
we
have
to
rely
on
the
profession,
professionals
right
the
experts
who
are
in
our
city
staff
to
substantially
comply,
and
so
I
just
wanted
to
refocus.
F
Also
for
the
the
commission
that
the
resolution
that
you
may
or
may
not
be
recommending
tonight
is
about
whether
or
not
this
housing
element
is
substantially
compliant
with
state
law
right.
So
there
are
requirements
right
this
one
size,
fits-all,
housing
law
right
that
the
state
promulgates
and
then
lays
it
into
the
hands
of
these
fine
folks
to
interpret
and
devise
this
housing
element
that,
hopefully,
will
address,
quote
unquote
address
these
housing
problems,
we're
not
going
to
solve
it
with
this
housing
element.
F
H
H
Get
that
I
think
we
could
have
been
maybe
two
weeks
earlier
on
delivering
this.
That's
that's
my
assessment
is,
you
know,
I
think
if
we
know
what
the
end
date
is,
we
should
plan
better
when
we
deliver
this
so
that
we
can
actually
have
the
community
provide
their
their
thoughts
and
Analysis
and
digest
it
and
reply
if
necessary.
Quite
possibly,
they
could
go
through
it
over
the
next
three
weeks
and
find
out,
oh
turns
out,
everything's
just
fine,
but
we
we
should
have
planned
to
afford
the
opportunity
for
that
to
happen.
D
Yeah,
excuse
me
I,
believe
we're
at
the
end
of
the
presentation
and
I
want
to.
This
is
more
General,
but
it
is
in
the
vein
of
this
conversation.
That's
been
had
here.
Excuse
me,
so
all
right,
so
I
think
Daniel
I
want
to
thank
you
for
bringing
it
back,
because
that
really
is
the
focus
here.
Is
the
city
made
a
submittal
last
year
and
it
was
not
substantially
compliant.
Hcd
sent
a
letter
back
to
the
city
that.
D
All
right,
let
me
thanks
for
clarifying
that,
but
regardless
HD
sent
the
city
back
a
letter
asking
for
significant
changes
in
order
to
make
the
housing
element
substantially,
compliant
and
and
right
now
my
understanding
is
the
city
is
subject
to
the
Builder's
remedies
that
correct
and
because
someone
on
staff,
just
very
briefly
just
talk
about
what
the
Builder's
remedy
is
and
how
it
impacts.
San
Jose.
F
I
would
love
to
talk
to
you
about
the
Builder's
remedy.
Well,
no
I
mean
so
hey
Builder's
remedy
is
there's
no
such
thing
as
the
Builder's
remedy.
It's
kind
of
this
fiction
right.
So
it's
a
part
of
the
housing
accountability
act
where,
if
we
do
not
as
a
city,
adopt
or
have
certified
a
housing
element,
then
there
are
five
findings
in
the
housing
accountability
act
that
are
made
as
far
as
how
a
city
can
deny
an
affordable
housing
project
right,
affordable,
housing,
development,
that's
it's
actually.
F
F
So
there
are
five
findings
that
enable
us
to
deny
that
project,
one
of
them
being
whether
or
not
it's
adverse
to
public
health
and
safety
another
one
being
whether
or
not
we
have
a
compliant
housing
element
right,
and
so,
if
we
do
not
have
a
compliant
housing
element,
it's
been
proposed
that
there's
this
Builder's
remedy
that
you
don't
need
to
comply
with
the
zoning
ordinance
or
the
land
use
designation
under
the
general
plan
for
a
particular
property
right.
F
So
that
has
been
interpreted
even
though
there's
no
case
law
really
on
this
right.
It's
been
interpreted
as
if
you
don't
have
a
housing
element,
that's
substantially
compliant
or
certified.
Then
a
developer
can
come
in
and
propose
a
project
that
is
not
consistent
with
the
general
plan.
Land
use
designation,
not
consistent
with.
AA
F
So
that
throws
a
big
wrench
into
everything,
because
nobody
really
knows
what
it
means
right,
so
we're
all
trying
to
figure
out
what
does
that
really
mean
and
there's
been
a
ton
of
not
a
ton,
but
there
have
been
multiple
Builders
remedy
applications,
mostly
in
Southern
California,
but
there
have
been
plenty
here
in
the
Bay
Area
we've
received
two
and
so
and
therefore
commercial
properties,
and
so
we're
kind
of
trying
to
figure
out
how
we
can
you
know
respond
to
these.
Is
that
I,
don't
know
if
that's
answering
your
question
enough.
W
I
was
just
gonna
Michael's
saying
we
have
four
applications,
I
think
the
other
two
may
not
be
formal
applications,
I
think
they're
just
preliminary
applications.
Okay,
so
unless
I
have
different
data,
but
there
is
interest
in
pursuing
the
Builder's
remedy.
D
K
K
I
think
there's
a
number
of
them
floating
out
there,
it's
between
three
and
four
formal
ones,
and
three
or
four
floaters
out
there.
So
I
mean
yes,
there
are
Builders
remedy
coming
to
San,
Jose
yeah.
D
And
so
thank
you
for
explaining
that
way.
Better
than
I
could
because
I
wanna
highlight
that,
because
we
don't
currently
have
a
housing
element,
that's
been
accepted
by
hcd.
D
We
are
subject
to
the
Village
remedy
and
while
there
may
be
ambiguities
around
what
exactly
that
means
that
could
lead
to
projects
and
areas
we
don't
want
them
like
could
be
potentially
I
mean
and
maybe
I'm
wrong
about
some
of
these
things,
but
maybe
potentially
outside
the
urban
growth
boundary
or
potentially
in
areas
like
Coyote,
Valley
or
redeveloping
mobile
home
parks
that
the
city
has
put
a
lot
of
effort
into
preserving-
or
even
you
know
like
it
was
was
mentioned
just
now-
converting
commercial
property
into
housing,
which
could
have
a
big
impact
on
our
goals
to
improve
our
jobs,
housing
balance
so.
D
As
commissioner
Cantrell
raised,
the
current
draft
of
the
housing
element
was
published
a
week
ago
and
I
understand
that
that's
the
minimum
required,
but
I
found
it
very
difficult
to
make
any
kind
of
evaluation
in
that
amount
of
time.
If
I'm,
correct,
I
believe
the
track
changes
version
was
only
posted
yesterday.
Is
that
correct.
D
And
then
is
there
I
don't
think
there
is?
Is
there
a
document,
because
let
me
step
back
hdd's
letter
is
17
pages
long
I
didn't
count
the
number
of
changes
they
asked
for,
but
it's
I
believe
in
the
dozens
and
a
lot
of
them
are
I,
don't
know
if
other
folks
read
the
letter,
it's
a
lot
of
the
changes.
Aren't
just
you.
Have
this
technical
thing
wrong
and
how
you
did
your
housing
element.
There
are
some
of
the
request.
Changes
are
fundamental
disagreements
about
whether
you
know
certain
policies
and
an
initiative.
D
The
city
has
are
meeting
what
we're
required
to
do
by
state
law
and
I
was
going
through
with
you
know,
first
with
just
the
draft
and
then
with
track
changes
version
trying
to
for
myself
determine
if
you
know
some
of
those
things
were
addressed
or
not.
Is
a
staff
prepare
a
document
that
basically
says
all
right
here
are
all
the
suggestions
from
hcd
and
here's.
What
we
did
to
address
them
does
anything
like
that
exist.
No.
W
D
Thank
you
for
clarifying
that
and
it
would
have
been
really
helpful
for
us
and
I
want
to
step
back
because
I
I
know
my
tone
sounds
critical.
I
really
appreciate
all
the
hard
work
that
staff
put
into
this
I
understand
that
there's
you
know,
housing
element
has
been
required
for
what,
like
50
years
now,
there's
50
years
of
state
laws
and
regulations
that
have
gone
into
creating
this
process.
D
I
know
it's
a
big
undertaking,
that's
been
many
years
in
the
making,
but
that
document
would
have
been
really
helpful
to
have
for
us
to
draw
conclusions
about
the
draft.
D
D
Take
that
go
read
those
parts
of
the
general
plan
make
our
own
conclusions
and
contribute
that
to
the
decision
that
we
make
here
on,
the
Deus,
so
I
feel
like
I
was
not
able
to
really
make
review.
To
my
satisfaction
of
the
draft
one,
because
there
was
only
a
week
total
two
because
there's
only
a
day,
total
of
having
a
track
changes
version
and
then
also
of
not
having
it
explicitly
outlined.
D
How
the
city
addressed.
Hcd's
concerns
about
the
first
draft
and.
D
I
want
to
ask
my
colleagues
to
consider
continuing
this,
so
we
could
have
that
time.
I
mean
my
understanding.
There
was
that
slide
that
had
what's
coming
up.
The
Housing
Community
Development
commission
is
seeing
this
on
June
6th.
Is
that
right,
June.
X
D
June,
8th,
sorry,
June,
8th
and
then
the
council
is
seeing
it
on
June
20th.
Our
next
scheduled
meeting
would
be
the
14th
I
know.
Previously.
We
discussed
over
email
having
a
special
meeting
next
week
to
discuss
this
item.
I,
don't
know
what
the
decision
staff
was
made
that
led
to
being
at
this
meeting,
but
I
I
think
we're
all
here.
We
all
have
the
same
goal:
getting
a
housing
element
accepted
certified
substantially,
compliant
by
hcd
as
soon
as
possible
and
I
think
for
us
to
fully
exercise
our
advisory
function.
Here
we
need
more
time.
K
Yeah,
so
right,
I,
just
yeah,
so
the
other
issue
that
we
didn't
talk
about
is
that
there
are
potentially
grants
that
we'd
be
ineligible
for
as
well.
This
housing
element
out
of
compliance,
particularly
as
relates
to
Transportation
housing.
We
think
we
okay,
so
so,
if
we
don't
go
and
so
I
think
the
key
thing
is,
how
do
we
is
there
a
way
to
squeeze
in
a
Planning
Commission,
so
we
can
still
get
to
Council
on
June
20th.
If
we
don't
go
to
June
20th
we're
going
in
August.
K
B
Michael
I
know
that
city
council
was
considering
canceling
their.
What
day
was
this
going
to
go
to
council
the
27th
they
canceled
is
the
20th
right,
but
the
council
isn't
Council
still
considering
having
a
meeting
on
the
27th.
B
B
F
The
plan
it
sounds,
it
sounds
like
what
is
happening
here
would
be
two
things
right.
One
is
maybe
having
a
special
meeting
on
Wednesday
the
31st
like
was
kind
of
proposed
earlier
last
week,
or
to
not
recommend,
because
you
didn't
have
enough
time
to
review.
That's
what
it
sounds
like
right.
D
And
so
yeah
I
mean
what
I
would
like
to
be
able
to
do
is
have
the
time
to
go
through
the
changes
that
were
made
to
the
draft
and
and
for
all
of
us,
and
if
we
feel
that
there
are
any.
You
know,
elements
of
things
that
hcd
asked
for
that.
We
feel
that
the
draft
is
not
adequately
addressed,
that
we
can
give
that
feedback
as
part
of
a
recommendation.
D
So
again,
that
would
be
our
preference
rather
than
us,
making
a
recommendation,
making
some
kind
of
negative
recommendation
here.
I,
don't
think
that's
helpful
I,
don't
think
we're
giving
the
council
useful
information.
If
we
do
that
and
as
a.
D
I
mean
I
think
it's
better
than
than
what
we've
had
so
far,
okay
and
actually
just
if
I
could
ask
I
mean
I,
know
that
I
know
Michael.
D
Just
Ruth,
if
I
could
have
some
clarifying
question
that
you
know
document
I
brought
up
about
outlining,
specifically
how
hdd's
requests
were
addressed.
Do
you
have
a
sense
of
when
that
document
will
be
available.
W
D
B
B
As
a
commission
commissioner,
Young.
B
P
No
I
had
some
general
questions,
but
I.
Think
commissioner,
larden
wise
question
is
more
urgent
at
this
point,
so
I'm
just
going
to
defer
mine,
okay.
U
Q
V
Just
wanted
a
second
that
I
would
appreciate
the
additional
time.
I
know
that
there
was
the
discussion
of
a
possible
special
session
next
week
and
then
I
believe
we
also
have
a
meeting
scheduled
for
June
14th,
which
would
still
be
before
this
item
goes
to
council.
That
would
be
another
option.
K
K
It's
something
we
could
probably
pull
off,
but
literally
the
next
Wednesday.
Is
it
yeah
I
mean
I.
Think
one
thing
we
could
do
I
mean
just
gives
you
more
time
to
review
what
you
have,
and
perhaps
you
know
we
could
talk
about.
We
could
do
a
presentation
that
gets
a
little
more
detail
on
some
of
the
bigger
comments
that
we've
got
and
just
talks
about
how
we
address
them.
Maybe
a
little
more
detail.
K
But
there
isn't
time
to
put
together
that
that
that
document
that
that
you're
asking
for
commissioner
Lord
and
while
there's
just
they're
just
not
if
the
goal
is
to
get
it
to
Council
on
June
20th.
W
B
Okay,
let's
see
here
who's
left
to
speak
on
this
topic,
commissioner,
Cantrell.
H
Yeah,
without
due
respect
with
as
much
respect
as
I
can
muster,
this
is
a
problem
of
your
own
making.
Once
again,
this
happened
recently
with
a
change
with
the
EPA
requirements
for
storm
water.
Runoff
is
a
consistent
problem
that
you
you
bring
these
things
to
us
with
a
real
sense
of
urgency,
because
we
didn't
plan
for
the
the
thought
and
reflection.
That's
required,
I
I,
you
know
wait.
H
Let's
be
realistic
about
how
much
time
it
takes
to
do
these
things
I'm
willing
to
show
up
here
next
week
to
to
get
through
this
in
a
in
a
more
fair,
practical
and
thought
out
manner.
But
what
I
would
like
to
see
is
that
it
doesn't
always
come
this
way
that
there's
time
for
this
kind
of
reflection
and
adjustment
built
in
to
this
process,
I
say
that
with
respect,
but
quite
frankly,
I
say
it
with
concern.
B
I
share
a
concern,
but
I
assure
concern
knowing
that
we
have
limited
resources
in
the
planning
department
and
they
are
frankly
working
as
hard
as
they
can
I,
don't
believe,
there's
any
ill
intent
by
staff.
I
just
think
they're.
Just
you
know
like
every
there's,
so
many
cities
I
forget
what
percentage
are
behind
on
their
housing
element.
I
mean
it's
over
50
percent
I
mean
something
75
I
mean
yeah.
I
mean
it's
it's
you
know
there's
all
these
cities
are
struggling
to
compete
there
complete
their
element
and
I.
B
Think
our
staff
is
caught
between
a
variety
of
priorities
that
the
council
puts
them
in
ETC.
So
I
just
think
it's
it's
a
tough
place
to
be
and
I
I.
Don't
you
know,
I
mean
I,
think
attending
a
meeting
as
a
commissioner
or
a
city
council,
member
I'm,
always
thinking
of
well.
Who
actually
does
the
work?
B
You
know
and
I
I
think
it's
it's
professional
staff
that
has
to
do
that.
Work
and
policy
makers.
Will,
you
know,
have
a
variety
of
scenarios
and
I'm
not
pointing
at
the
commission
I'm,
even
pointing
it
back
at
the
city
council.
When
colleagues
would
request
reports,
they
would
never
read.
B
You
know,
I
mean
it's,
it's
just
part
of
the
things
that
ends
up,
creating
all
this
backup
for
staff,
so
I
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
and
I
know
the
commissioner
had
zero
ill
intent
and
I'm
not
trying
to
portray
that
at
all
I
just
feeling
of
of
what
what's
going
on
with
you
know,
with
staff
in
many
departments.
P
I
I'm
torn
actually
on
this
and
I
I,
definitely
agree
with
you,
commissioner
Cantrell.
This
is
reminiscent
of
the
Coyote
Valley
to
me
where
this
commission
was
not
able
to
approve
that
because,
in
my
opinion,
we
didn't
have
sufficient
time.
We
had
requested
a
study
session.
We
didn't
get
a
study
session
so
and
and
I
don't
I,
don't
want
to
criticize
the
staff
at
all
I.
You
know,
as
I've
said
before,
I
came
from
local
government.
P
I
know
how
hard
you
folks
have
to
work
and
I
know,
as
the
chair
has
said,
you're
under
a
lot
of
constraints,
but
it
it
just
makes
it
difficult
for
us
to
really
I.
Think,
as
commissioner
said,
do
our
job
as
an
oversight.
I'm
wondering
if
you
know
the
City
attorney
mentioned.
One
option
is
just
to
basically
vote
no
and
if
that
would
not
be
my
preferred
option,
I
will
say
so.
Maybe
I
should
put
I
think
we
have
enough
information
to
vote
on
this
tonight.
P
I'm,
not
sure,
speaking
for
myself,
what
additional
information
I'm
going
to
get
from
the
staff
that
is
going
to
help
me
make
a
better
decision.
So
my
I
guess
my
preference
would
be
that
you
know
we
vote
tonight,
but
I.
You
know
I'm
willing
to
come
on
the
31st
I'm,
not
sure
Michael,
a
question
if
if
it
was
a
quorum
issue,
that
was
the
reason
that
special
meeting
was
not
held.
If
it
is,
then
it's
on
us
right
anyway.
That's
my
that's
my
two
cents,
I
guess.
D
Yeah
and
I
just
I
want
to
say
again
I
understand
that
staff
has
been
working
really
hard
on
this
and
is
under
a
lot
of
pressure
to
get
this.
You
know,
keep
this
on
schedule
and
I.
D
D
If
we're
unable
to
continue
this
I
I,
don't
think
we
should
vote
no
I
think
that's
one
will
be
misunderstood
as
what
we
mean
by
that,
but
also
I,
don't
think
that's
helpful,
but
in
terms
of
commissioner
young,
you
asked
like
what
more
would
be
accomplished
in
a
week,
I
I
mean
I'm,
just
speaking
for
me
personally,
and
perhaps
other
folks
feel
this
way.
D
This
is
a
large
document
with
a
lot
of
information,
and
you
know
a
lot
changed
in
this
draft,
especially
looking
at
the
track
changes,
version
and
I
mean
in
that
case
you
know
that
wasn't
seven
days.
That
was
one
day
that
you
know
actually
like
being
able
to
okay.
This
is
exactly
what
changed
and
trying
to
reconcile
that
with
the
feedback
hcd
gave
on
our
first
draft.
I
I
feel
like
I
need
more
time
for
that.
D
Excuse
me,
if
we
can't
I
guess,
can
I
get
a
straw
poll
like
how
many
folks
feel
like
they
can
make
next
week.
If
we
have
a
meeting.
D
D
V
B
Commissioner
Casey
or
no
you
dropped
it
lets
him.
Let
me
clear
the
list
here:
I
want
to
make
sure
who's
if
you
want
to
speak
hit
it
now.
Commissioner,
brosio.
U
All
right
very
technical
question,
but
thank
you
thank
you
for
getting
us
to
this
point,
commissioner
laude
very
technical
question
90
or
89
percent.
This
was
one
of
the
last
slides
about
correct
me
from
wrong.
89
of
the
identified
low-income
sites
are
in
moderate
to
high
resource
areas.
Correct
yes,.
U
U
Did
you
find
that
of
the
127
proposals
that
you
had
to
integrate
some
sort
of
language
that
could
mediate
some
of
the
public
outcry?
That
will
say
no,
not
in
my
neighborhood,
but
it
will
help
with
Distributing
low-income
housing
throughout
the
city.
W
I
believe
there
is
a
program
in
chapter
3
that
speaks
to
improving
how
we
talk
about
housing,
how
we
talk
about
affordable
housing
and
there's
there's
more
to
that
program.
But
that
was
one
way
for
us
to
address
that
issue
of
you
know
folks
coming
out
and
not
wanting
affordable
housing
because
of
XYZ.
There
is
one
program
to
that
point
and
then
there
is
also
the
streamlined
proposal
so
that
we,
when
someone
applies
through
this
program
for
a
Housing
Development.
K
Just
want
to
note,
though,
that
affordable
the
issue
of
nimbies
and
using
SQL
against
affordable
housing
has
largely
been
addressed
by
the
state
of
California.
It's
called
SB
35,
so
a
significant
number
of
our
affordable
housing
projects
are
using
SB
35
streamlining,
there's
no
public
hearing.
There
does
not
have
to
be
any
Community
meetings
at
all.
There
often
are
just
because
the
developer
wants
to
be
a
good
neighbor
and
it
goes
to
the
director.
We
check
the
boxes,
the
director
stamps
you're
approved
and
there's
there's
by
the
way,
there's
no
sequa.
K
So
that
is
a
that.
Is
this
process.
The
state
established
that
actually
has
been
very
successful
in
San,
Jose
and
I.
Think
throughout
the
state
and
we're
actually
very
happy
with
it
and
that's
a
model
that
I
would
say.
Probably
most
would
you
say
most
affordable
housing
developers
are
using
sp35
now.
K
W
And
a
commissioner
it's
program
h-12
the
neighborhood
Outreach
and
education
on
homeless,
housing
and
other
housing
topics.
U
B
Okay
and
along
those
lines,
I
mean
I,
I,
can't
even
recall
a
housing
project
in
the
city
of
San
Jose
that
Zone
on
land.
That's
for
housing,
that's
been
denied
by
the
city
council.
So,
even
though
that
chart
cited
nimby's,
it
didn't
make
a
difference
when
it
came
to
implementation,
whether
it
was
at
the
city,
council
level,
Planning,
Commission
level,
planning,
director
level.
W
B
That's
always
there,
okay,
so
we're
here
we
are
any
other
Commissioners
wanting
to
make
a
comment.
We
currently
have
a
motion
to
continue.
The
meeting
open
continue
with
open
public
hearing
on
this
item
to
be
heard
at
the
31st
any.
P
Commissioner
young,
thank
you.
If
I
could
just
ask
a
clarifying
question,
commissioner,
do
you
do
you
feel
that
staff
has
enough
information
of
what
additional
information
we
specifically
need
to
to
because
and
here's
the
reason
I'm
asking
the
question
is
the
worst
case
scenario
I
see
of
this?
P
Is
we
continue
it
and
and
I
understand
your
reasons
for
that
and
then
for
some
reason:
either
we
don't
get
a
quorum
or
we
don't
feel
there's
enough
information
and
then
what
happens
right
and
then
so
I
I'm,
really
torn
I
mean
I
I
very
much.
You
know,
respect
your
request
and
understand,
but
but
I'm
just
a
little,
not
sure
what
to
do.
I
guess
sure.
D
And
to
be
clear,
I'm
I'm,
not
asking
staff
for
additional
information
between
now
and
then,
if
it
was
possible
to
provide
like
I,
mentioned
a
document
explaining
specifically
how
hhcd
comment
was
addressed.
That
would
be
helpful,
but
it's
not
possible
to
provide
that
in
that
amount
of
time.
D
So
really
what
I'm
just
asking
for
is
time-
and
you
know
time
for
me
and
everyone
else
on
this
commission
to
really
dig
into
the
draft
and
the
letter
from
hcd
and
come
back
if
we
feel
that
there
are
any
areas
that
things
need
to
be
changed
to
meet.
What
hcd
is
asking
for
and
I
totally
agree
with
you.
It
would
be
frankly
embarrassing
if
we
didn't
get
a
quorum
next
week,
but
at
the
same
time
that's
on
us
and
I
think
you
know
that's
part
of
our
obligation.
D
F
P
Yeah
so
commissioner
I'm
just
kind
of
a
devil's
advocate
with
very
much
respect.
P
F
Can
also
I
could
I
mean
just
as
a
proposal
to
move
this
along.
You
could
rescind
it
right
table.
It
can
make
a
new
motion
to
approve
or
to
recommend
take
that
vote
yeah
or
substitute
motion.
If
you
want
to
do
that,
however,
you
want
to
do
it,
but
I'm,
just
that's
just
a
recommendation
to
keep
us
moving
along
or
we
can
take
the
vote
on
that.
B
Well,
I
see
more
Commissioners
would
like
to
chat
so
I'm
all
up
for
that,
commissioner
and
LS
wise.
R
It's
just
some
things
that
were
brought
up
today
that
just
you
know,
I
guess
I
really
wish.
The
document
really
spoke
to
the
hardship
of
what
it
takes
for
us
to
really
fulfill
this
right
in
a
little
bit
more
I
guess
raw
real
reality.
But
what
if
we
also,
then
what?
If
we
just
voted
for
it
with
some
sort
of
I,
don't
know
almost
kind
of
like
review?
R
We
obviously
will
get
more
time,
and
maybe
if
we
could
get
those
documents
that
are
going
to
go
to
City
Council
and
have
the
opportunity
to
make
some
comments
and
make
some
sort
of
recommendation
to
the
council
at
that
point
you
know
and
have
that
included
in
somehow
I
don't
know
just.
B
B
Commissioner
loss
wise
I
want
to
ask
a
question
of
the
City
attorney.
So
if
we
came
to
our
June
14th
meeting-
and
we
what
you
know,
commissioner
lardon
wants
and
others
might
say
to
say,
hey
more
time
to
review
and
even
though
the
item,
let's
say
just
fictitiously,
for
this
purpose,
we've
we
pass
it
on
to
the
city
council
and
then
along
the
way
we
are
able
to
have
more
time.
B
F
So
maybe
bringing
another
bringing
this
back
for
additional
review.
I
mean
I'm,
wondering
we're
just
kind
of
piecing
this
through
with
Michael
whether
or
not
there
would
be
individual
comments
or
if
this
were
going
to
be
something
where
you
could
approve
tonight
and
then
come
back
with
additional
recommendations.
K
I
I,
don't
believe
it
go
so
I
think
we
could
have
a
discussion
next
week.
It's
going
to
really
cause
us
to
scramble
to
turn
that
around
the
council,
but
I
think
it's
possible,
but
but
beyond
that
next
week,
I
don't
see
how
it's
possible
over
the
commission
to
have
a
discussion
and
then,
as
a
group,
pass
a
recommendations
to
council
that
then
we
would
turn
around
it
wouldn't
be.
B
That
it
would
be,
you
know,
we
passed
the
house
just
throwing
this
out
there
potentially
push
on
that.
Whatever
words
you
want
to
use,
the
housing
element
goes
to
council.
We
have
an
item
to
discuss.
Maybe
it's
on
our
agenda,
as
we
typically
have
the
section
called.
B
Hang
on
I
want
to
just
get
the
correct
report
from
city
council
and
maybe
a
report
from
city
council.
Individuals
of
the
commissions
could
say:
I've
had
more
time
to
review
the
housing
element,
I'd
like
to
State
this
on
the
record
and
then
when
you're
doing
your
because
you
always
write
a
summary
of
the
commission
discussion.
B
So
you
got
plenty
tonight
to
hear
about
our
summary
discussion
and
then
this
is
just
like
a
you
know,
a
extra
informational
memo
of
what
the
commission's
comments
were
at
the
June
14th
meeting
regarding
their
prior
vote
and
more
time
to
take
a
look
at
things.
It's
not
a
vote.
It's
just
people
to
share
their
feedback.
Well,.
D
I
actually
I've
got
an
alternative
suggestion,
something
I,
so
I
used
to
be
on
the
Housing
Community
Development
commission,
and
there
were
several
occasions
where
we
formed
a
subcommittee
to
write
a
letter
and
then
that
came
back
to
the
Planning
Commission,
because
Michael
I
understand
when
we
make
a
formal
recommendation.
D
D
For
a
letter
city
council,
like
you,
said,
with
additional
comments
on
the
housing
element
and
then
at
the
June
14th
meeting
we
vote
as
an
as
a
complete
body
to
approve
that
letter
or
to
you
know
without
any
edits
that
the
commission
as
a
whole
wants
to
make
doesn't
have
to
go
back
to
planning
to
formalize
the
memo.
We
just
send
that
off
straight
to
city
council
and
it's
complementary
to
the
memo
so.
H
H
D
AB
A
D
Are
sure
so
this
is
a
an
alternative
suggestion
to
the
motion.
That's
currently
on
the
table,
we
vote
on
the
staff
recommendation
here
tonight.
We
form
a
subcommittee
to
draft
a
letter
to
city
council
with
additional
recommendations.
F
Yeah
and
then
I'm
hearing
what
commissioner
Cantrell
is
Raising
is
that
does
that
really
involve
the
public
and
their
concerns,
but
I
think
it's
a
lot
easier.
If
we're
either
voting
to
approve
tonight
or
just
doing
a
special
meeting
next
week,
I
mean
I
I.
Honestly,
that's
just
about
complicating
with
the
subcommittee
and
all
that
stuff
it's
either
tonight
or
next
week.
F
B
Is
fair
enough?
Another
idea,
potentially
push
along
the
housing
element,
take
any
amendments
from
the
floor,
such
as
we
did
not
believe
we
had
to
add
adequate
amount
of
time,
but
this
is
a
recommendation
and
or
commissioner
and
Ellis
wise
I'd
like
to
use,
make
sure
public
land
is
utilized
or
many
of
the
recommendation.
Commissioner
tordillos
made
that
be
an
amendment
and
so
we'd
have
a
housing
element
passed
with
a
bunch
of
amendments
and
we
can
vote
each
of
those
amendments
up
or
down.
D
B
Yeah
understood
yep,
so
I'm
gonna
go
commissioner
Rosario
just.
G
V
I
just
wanted
to
say
that
I'm
also
currently
inclined
to
vote
no
on
the
staff
recommendation.
I
feel
like
we
haven't
really
had
enough
time
to
address
a
lot
of
the
comments
and
especially
lacking
the
sort
of
document
that
was
described
kind
of
mapping
hcd
comments
to
edits.
It's
you
know
kind
of
coming
back
to
the
core
question
of
whether
this
housing
elementist
draft
is
actually
meeting
the
requirements
of
the
law.
V
I
feel
like
it's
very
difficult
for
us
to
really
ascertain
that
with
the
information
and
the
time
that
we
have
here
today
and
I
also
wanted
to
just
kind
of
push
back
a
little
bit
on
the
sense
of
urgency
around
you
know.
Getting
to
this
June
passage
correct
me.
If
I'm
wrong,
the
housing
elements
were
actually
due
back
in
January,
so
we're
already
five
months
late,
we'll
be
six
months
late
going
into
June
at
that
point
does?
B
K
Yeah
there
is
potential
of
not
being
able
to
go
after
grant
money
for
transportation
and
there's
potentially
Builders
remedy,
and
you
know
I
just
want
to
share
with
you
that
what
we're
seeing
is
is
unfortunate.
There
are
some
of
the
applications
we've
received
that
it's
high
density
and
while
the
general
employment
not
allowed
it
there,
but
you
know
it's
high
density,
that's
that's
what
we're
striving
for
in
many
of
our
air
growth
areas.
K
However,
there
are
developers
now
that
are
proposing
on
sites
that
would
be
great
for
high
density,
great
for
affordable
housing
projects,
they're
proposing
town
homes,
so
they're
dumbing.
It
down
town
homes
are
like
Big,
Macs
or
guaranteed
profit,
even
in
this
Marketplace,
so
I
think
we're
starting
to
see
an
unfortunate
Trend
with
some
of
these
Builders
remedies
and
the
longer
we
stay
you
know
keep
our
we
the
longer.
We
delay
the
approval
process,
the
the
you
know,
there's
more
opportunities
for
that
sort
of
thing
so
that
that's
the
downside
and.
F
Just
just
to
add
to
that
Builder's
remedy
comment:
yeah,
there's
just
no
guarantee
right
when
something's
not
consistent
with
the
general
plan
land.
Just
because
the
designation
or
the
zoning
ordinance
I
mean,
like
I,
said,
Builders
remedies
of
fiction.
We
don't
really
know
what
it
means
right,
but
that
also
is
no
guarantee
that
some
developer
is
going
to
sweep
in
and
just
build
the
perfect
high
density,
affordable
housing,
they're
going
to
make
money
I
mean
if
building
affordable,
housing,
we're
lucrative.
F
We
wouldn't
have
an
affordable
housing
crisis
so
that
I
just
I
think
if
we're
gonna,
if
we're
trending.
No,
let's
do
the
special
meeting
right,
because
if
you
need
more
time,
let's
do
the
special
meeting
right,
I,
don't
I
don't
want
to
leave
this
dice
with
you
guys
voting
no
on
this,
because
whatever
that
means
to
the
public,
no
matter
what
your
reasons
are
it's
going
to
be
the
Planning
Commission
voted
no
on
this,
so
I
think
you
either
vote
to
continue
this
or
you
vote
to
approve
tonight.
F
P
So,
first
of
all
chair,
thank
you
for
handling.
This
is
really
difficult.
I
think
it's
difficult
for
all
of
us,
but
so
I'm,
reflecting
back
on
Coyote
Valley
and
those
of
us
who
are
on
the
on
the
commission
and
we
voted
no
and
I
voted
no
and
I
hated
to
vote.
No,
and
this
commission
took
a
lot
of
criticism
for
voting
no
because
we
were
accused
of
being
anti-environment
and
anti.
P
I
went
to
a
planning
commissioner's
Academy
that
Cal
cities
runs
and
the
housing
element
was
the
single
most
debated,
discussed
item
at
that
at
that
Workshop
was
a
multi-day
workshop
and
I
sat
through
the
first
day
of
literally
every
Cal
City
staff,
member
and
City
Representatives
talking
about
how
to
avoid
all
the
state
mandates
and
basically
build
as
little
housing
as
possible
and
finally,
on
the
second
morning
about
nine
o'clock,
I
got
up
and
I
said
how
about
if
we
talk
about
how
we
can
build
more
housing
rather
than
and
I
got
a
round
of
applause
from
half
the
room
and
around
a
booze
from
the
restroom.
P
But
my
point
is
that
the
staff
has
gone
through
a
long
long
process.
I
mean
if
you
look
at
the
community
engagement.
There's
been
a
lot
of
time
for
folks
to
engage
I.
Think
I
I
cannot
criticize
the
public
Outreach
process
at
all.
I
think
there's
been
a
lot
of
opportunities,
so
personally
I
don't
think
for
me.
That's
that
would
not
be
a
good
reason
to
vote.
No
I
think
there's
been
enough.
P
Yes,
it's
very
unfortunate
that
we
only
had
a
week
to
look
at
this
agreed,
but
considering
the
options
and
I
agree
with
our
attorney
I
think
we
should
either
vote
to
pass
or
continue
and
I'm
not
comfortable
continuing
only
because
there's
going
to
be
so
few
of
us
there
at
a
continued
meeting,
so
yeah
I
guess
what
I'm
going
to
do
at
this
point
is
make
a
substitute
motion.
I'm,
not
sure
this
is
correct.
The
attorney
can
tell
me
I
mean
make
a
substitute
motion
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation,
a.
A
B
R
And
Ellis
wise
I
mean
I,
do
like
to
emphasize
that
when
it
that
we,
we
would
obviously
like
to
have
more
time
and
give
the
public
more
time
when
it's
something
so
important
and
I
know
that
the
staff
has
done
the
best
that
they
could
and
I
really
appreciate
that,
and
it's
unfortunate
that
you
know,
there's
there's
all
these
time
constraints
I
mean
you
know,
having
grant
money
money
available
that
could
be
potentially
lost
for
transportation.
I
think
that's
really
huge,
because
I
don't
know
what
the
state's
going
to
do.
R
I
think
that
if
individually
we
take
the
time
to.
If
there's
something
that
speaks
to
us
enough,
that
we
would
go
to
the
city
council
meeting
or
write
a
letter
individually
and
then
say,
Hey
or
even
you
know,
tell
staff.
You
know,
write
staff
say
you
know:
I
noticed
this.
You
know
and
yeah
I
mean
you
know.
I
also
think
that
I
could
have
done
a
better
job.
I
I've
reviewed
housing
elements
for
the
county,
San
Francisco
I
mean
all
this
in
this
is
San
Jose.
R
P
Okay,
chair
could
I
indulge
me
one
more
comment.
Yes,
so
this
on
this
discussion,
I
think
the
reason
it's
hard
is
because
I
think
of
the
saying
I've
heard,
if
you
can't
do
the
right
thing,
do
the
next
best
thing
I
think
commissioner
Cantrell
was
very
eloquent
and
convincing
frankly
about
what
the
right
thing
is
to
do.
Unfortunately,
I,
don't
think
we
either
have
the
resources
or
the
ability
to
do
the
right
thing.
P
So
I'm
saying
do
the
next
best
thing,
which
is
to
approve
this,
because
I
I
will
tell
you
just
another
feedback.
I've
gotten
the
city
of
San
Jose
has
done
very,
very
well
in
housing
compared
to
most
cities
in
the
state.
In
fact,
there
was
an
article
in
the
LA
Times
recently
commending
San
Jose
for
how
much
housing
we've
approved,
and
you
can
look
at
both
cities,
large
and
small,
throughout
the
state
that
have
very
different
meetings
than
this
I
mean
this
meeting
in
a
way
is
really
cool.
P
P
You
know
it's
a
framework,
that's
required
by
the
state.
I
I.
Just
think.
That's
right
at
this
point.
That's
the
right
thing
to
do.
B
This
is
what's
going
on
with
the
debt
ceiling
talks
right
now,
commissioner
Cantrell.
H
Actually
I
I
had
one
question:
I
was
concerned
whether
if
we
don't
approve
this
today,
it
does
move
still
continue
to
move
forward
to
the
city
council
correct
and
then
there
still
will
be
an
opportunity
for
the
public
to
okay.
So
our
approval
of
of
this
thing
and
moving
it
Forward
today
really
just
says
it's
substantially
done
in
terms
of
meeting
the
legal
requirement
correct.
F
H
It's
an
active
fiction,
but
okay,
but
we're
saying
it's
it's
in
terms
of
meeting
the
requirements
that
that,
let
that
that's
been
met
correct
and
then
the
public
does
have
time
to
respond.
Okay,
so
I'd
be
I
I'd
be
willing
to
just
to
move
this
forward
to
council
as
long
as
the
public
still
has
time
to
read
and
respond,
I
I
think
that's
fair
I
do
still
think
it
would
be
great
to
have
more
time
to
look
at
these
things
in
the
in
the
future,
and
my
comments
will
be
less
kind.
H
If
we
continue
to
have
this
problem
Staffing
problem
or
whatever
it
is
because
I've
I've
worked
in
business,
my
entire
career,
you
couldn't
do
this,
you
couldn't
do
this
to
a
board
they'd
fire,
you
I'm
just
being
frank,
so
I
say
we
can
go
ahead
and
move
this
forward,
and
hopefully
the
community
will
be
able
to
to
give
their
impassions
please
to
the
council.
D
It's
up
from
last
time,
so
yeah
I
just
wanted
to
clarify,
because
commissioner
ellis-wise
brought
up
grant
funding.
My
understanding
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
is
that
continuing
to
next
week
would
not
delay
City
council's
consideration
this
item,
and
so
would
not
jeopardize
grant
funding.
Is
that
correct.
K
D
D
There's
a
lot
more
legitimacy
to
us
speaking
collectively
as
a
body,
and
so
that's
why
I
think
it's
really
important
that
we
give
considered
feedback
on
the
housing
element
so
respectfully
I'm
going
to
vote
no
on
the
motion
to
approve
the
staff
recommendation,
as
is
because
I
think
continuing
would
be
a
much
better
thing
to
do.
B
U
S
U
D
U
U
B
Last
time
we
did
this
so
okay,
commissioner
tradio's.
V
Thank
you
very
sympathetic
to
a
lot
of
the
comments
that
have
been
raised
here.
I
think
all
of
you
have
raised
a
lot
of
compelling
points,
but
I
do
want
to
kind
of
bring
this
back
to
what
the
actual
you
know
vote
that
we
would
be
taking
here
today.
Our
vote
today
would
not
be
about
whether
San
Jose
has
historically
done
better
on
housing
than
other
municipalities
in
the
state.
It
wouldn't
be
about
whether
we
think
staff
has
done
hard
work
or
good
work.
V
You
know
in
some
of
my
earlier
public
comments,
I
laid
out
some
fairly
specific
areas
where
I
had
questions
as
to
density
calculations,
planning
pipeline
other
elements,
non-vacant
sites,
other
things
that
are
you
know
verbatim
in
state
law,
in
terms
of
what
is
required
of
the
housing
element
and
I'm,
just
not
at
a
place
today,
where
I
feel
like
we
can
overcome
those
concerns
in
lieu
of
you
know,
meeting
a
deadline
so
I'm
still,
you
know
a
tentative.
No.
On
this
motion.
B
Okay,
I,
don't
see
any
other
hands.
I'm
gonna
enter
some
comments
from
people
that
couldn't
be
here
tonight.
Comment
number
one
is
I
almost
feel
like
the
housing
element
is
an
exercise
in
futility.
Another
comment:
no
direction
on
how
to
generate
billions
a
year
to
fund
affordable
housing.
B
So
at
the
end
of
the
day,
there's
no
perfect
scenario
in
any
given
government
local
government
entity
when
dealing
with
this
law
of
the
state.
It's
just
what
the
state
does.
As
Cities
and
staff
has
done
their
work
and
so
I'm
inclined
to
accept
it.
Knowing
that
I
don't
necessarily
agree
with
it
all,
especially
before
I
just
laid
out
for
people
that
are
elected
officials
in
a
very
Progressive,
City
and
so
I
think,
ultimately,
I'll
be
supporting
the
motion
here.
B
Just
to
move
this
along
and
knowing
that
the
public
will
have
over
a
month
approximately
a
month
to
comment
on
this
item.
Continuing
so
thank
you.
So
now
we
will
vote
commissioner
lardon
law.
AB
B
B
That,
after
all
right,
yes,
yes
or
no
vote,
Yes,
okay,
commissioner
tortillos!
No
commissioner
young,
yes.
P
B
Myself,
yes,
so
that
will
display
the
vote
that
does
pass
I'm
happy
for
staff
to
you
know
as
staff
summarizes
and
has
the
video
to
take
our
comments,
I'm
happy
for
them
to
and
I'm
sure
those
aren't,
the
only
elected
officials
who
have
opined
as
they
have
voted
on
their
housing
element.
B
K
I
mean
I
think
the
vote
isn't
displaying,
but
it's
eight
yeses
and
two
no's.
B
Okay-
and
let's
see
here
so
now,
we're
on
to
that
part
of
the
agenda
where
the
plan
director
report
from
City
Council.
K
Yes,
the
only
thing
that
I
got
was
not
something
the
Planning
Commission
considered.
It
was
well.
It
was
the
city
initiatives,
roadmap,
beautify,
SJ
vehicle
blight
status
report,
so
I,
don't
I
mean
I
can
tell
you
what
happened,
but
they,
the
council,
approved,
accepting
the
status
report
as
recommended
by
the
transportation
environmental
Community
Committee.
So
this
is
not
something
that
you
heard,
but
this
is
what
I
was
given
other
than
that
I.
Don't
have
anything
else.
B
Okay,
commissioner,
Cantrell
I
see
your
hand
up
for
this
item.
B
H
I
I
think
I've
said
this
earlier
and
I
say
it
for
a
reason,
because
it
definitely
concerns
me
that
we
see
a
lot
of
language
in
these
meetings
about
Equity
diversity.
Inclusion
in
it's
it's
language,
it's
not
reflected
by
any
data
or
any
real
actual
lived
experience.
H
It's
not
a
lens
and
I
would
really
just
implore
our
city
staff
to
really
reflect
on
the
lives
of
the
people
in
this
city
that
that
that
they're
charged
to
to
try
and
work
for
and
to
actually
apply
a
lens
and
not
just
the
language
of
a
lens
real
Equity
will
be
felt
by
the
people
who
live
here
in
substantial
ways.
We
can't
just
speak
to
it
as
if
the
words
carry
the
meaning
and
the
purpose.
That's
all.
B
B
Have
a
great
Memorial
Day
weekend
and
thanks
for
everyone's
contributions
this
evening.
Thank
you
very
much.