►
Description
City of San José, California
Joint meeting of Rules and Open Government / Committee of the Whole of December 1, 2021
Pre-meeting citizen input on Agenda via eComment at https://sanjose.granicusideas.com/meetings.
This public meeting will be conducted via Zoom Webinar. For information on public participation via Zoom, please refer to the linked meeting agenda below.
Agenda https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=A&ID=907094&GUID=5F5E9EA1-635B-4736-B033-6CB3266C7F50
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
A
B
B
B
B
B
D
C
D
E
A
D
D
We
need
to
learn
that
and
that's
where
what
I
was
talking
about
yesterday
in
regards
to
you
know
supporting
our
small
business,
which
is
already
middle
books,
middlebrooks
herb
center
for
urban
sustainability,
and
I
know
she's
working
with
the
city.
You
know
parks
and
rec,
but
her
vision
is
to
feed
us
here
locally
and
she
says
we
can
do
it,
and
the
thing
is
is
we
need
to
be
looking
at
what
the
science
says
and
that
is
to
use
our
open
lands,
which
makes
sense
anything
that's
undeveloped
to
build.
D
You
know
like,
like
we're
spending
money
now
to
I'm,
not
against
it,
that
we're
giving
to
homeless
to
collect
trash,
but
wouldn't
it
be
beautiful
if
they
really
got
skills
which
was
to
grow
food,
and
that
is
such
a
that
is
actually
they
say
in
cuba
that
you
know
when
they
ran
out
of
fossil
fuels,
the
people
who
were
growing
food-
they
made
the
most
money.
You
know
you
could
know
that.
F
Hi,
thank
you
about
there's
a
few
consent.
Calendar
items
I
thought
were
interesting
to
myself.
One
is
about
the
future
of
data
collection
and
with
issues
of
transparency
around
it
forms
of
data
collection,
which
I
thought
was
a
really
interesting.
I
attended
a
really
important
city
council
meeting
in
berkeley
yesterday.
F
They
are
going
through
actually
a
very
similar
thing
as
yourselves,
with
aopr
technology
and
they've
been
having
working
out
contracts
with
motorola
for
emergency
services
needs
that
were
connected
to
alpr
use.
Channel
nbc
did
reports
on
aopr
things
that
yesterday
I
wasn't
quite
pleased
with
you
you're
having
issues
of
what
are
we
going
to
do
with
the
future
of
data
collection
for
all
this
aopr
stuff?
I
think
we're
really
bearing
down
on
you
know.
Aopr
can
be
minimal
practices
and
it
can
cover
just
as
much
territory.
F
Good
luck
on
how
you
work
on
that
with
19
seconds,
there's
a
affordable
impact,
affordable
housing
impact
fee
final
report,
a
reminder,
you
know
just
keep
on
trucking
and
doing
the
good
work
of
what
can
be
vli
and
eli
and
mixed
income.
It's
important.
We
learn
how
to
really
bring
those
things
in
in
the
next
few
years.
Thank
you.
G
It
is
very
irresponsible
for
you
not
to
post
those
agendas
in
a
timely
manner
to
where
I,
the
public,
because
everything
in
these
agendas,
the
context
in
which
I
function
and
live,
are
going
to
be
determined
by
the
powers
that
are
exercised
within
the
context
of
those
agendas.
I'm
sorry
that
you
don't
feel
that
I
have
a
right
to
that.
However,
I
don't
care
about
the
law
of
the
land.
I
care
about
the
moral
law.
G
I
care
about
the
ethical
law
and
if
that
doesn't
square
with
the
laws
of
the
land,
then
the
moral
law
takes
precedent
and
the
moral
law
dictates
that
I
have
a
right
to
be
able
to
examine,
to
be
able
to
process
and
then
to
be
able
to
formulate
a
position
based
on
what
it
is
that
I
received
from
the
city
in
which
I
live.
I
was
born
here.
I'm
gonna
die
here
my
peer.
In
fact
my
parents
met
in
san
jose.
I
was
conceived
in
san
jose.
G
G
A
A
B
B
I
So
it's
traditionally
heard
before
the
end
of
the
calendar
year.
I
don't
know
if
there's
a
legal
obligation
in
our
operating
and
management
agreement
with
team
san
jose.
That
requires
us
to
hear
it
during
or
before
the
end
of
the
year,
unless
nora
knows
otherwise.
But
this
is
something
that
could
go
to
the
first
meeting
in
january.
A
I
As
I
expressed
there,
we
would
be
moving
the
council
memorandum
from
council
members,
cohen
and
esparza
ford
with
our
early
consideration
form,
but
that's
a
policy
call
if
we
were
directed
to
put
it
on
an
agenda
before
the
end
of
the
year
based
off
of
the
conversation
last
week.
But
rules
could
move
that
to
january
if
they
so
wish.
I
I
B
B
B
D
I
think
that's
important
and
tony
says
that
you
know
well
she's
allowed
to
add
things
on
and
I'm
sure
she's
following
rules,
but
the
thing
is,
it
doesn't
really
work,
so
we
need
to
change
the
rules,
so
it
works
better
for
the
community
and
even
if
she
has
to
update
the
agenda,
you
know
that's
okay.
It
should
be
there
to
do
the
research
and
things
like
that.
So
we
need
to
have
feedback
from
you
guys,
which
we
don't
get,
and
I
even
wrote
to
our
attorney
and
and
asked
her
about
the
fact.
D
It
says
on
the
agenda
that
the
public
can
pull
items.
Excuse
me
from
the
agenda
that
are
on
consent,
and
I
never
heard
back
from
her
to
say
you
know
that
we're
supposed
to
be
able
to
do
it
says
it
right
there
we
could
and
we
could
address
things
and
even
paul
was
saying
that
a
lot
of
things
are
put
on
the
you
know
into
our.
You
know:
consent
calendar
that
need
to
be
addressed
so
anyway.
D
Getting
that's,
you
know
bookkeeping,
but
that
you
can
really
work
on
getting
back
to
the
public
would
be
great.
So,
in
addition
to
that,
in
regards
to
specifically
when
we're
talking
about
housing,
crises
and
homeless
crises-
and
you
know
having
to
take
care
of
warming
centers
things
like
that,
that's
why
you
know
the
issue
that
our
city
had
rezoned
the
property
at
615
stockton
avenue
to
be
commercial,
and
it's
all
about
jobs,
and
it's
even
in
our
general,
it's
even
in
our
in
our
you
know.
D
Whatever
our
bible,
our
constitution,
our
you
know,
charters
in
the
charter
that
we
have
to
have
jobs
and
employment
and
protect
employment
lands,
and
you
know
it's
just
like
we
are
doing.
You
know
we're
putting
cameras
on
the
you
know
for
the
protecting
businesses
and
their
theft,
but
we
have
no
cameras
about
the
killings
on
our
roads,
and
the
same
thing
is
happening
is
that
this
land
should
not
be
used
for
hotel,
and
you
know
when
we're
in
a
climate
crisis
and
even
having
disease
coming
to
our
our
city,
our
neighborhoods.
A
G
G
F
I
had
three
items
I
wanted
to
speak
on
today
about
the
covet
19
stuff
city
charter
and
the
there's
an
issue
of
you're
going
to
go
over
rate
plans
for
the
future
of
community
energy,
and
such
a
pg
e
is
like
they're
trying
to
be
raising
rates
on
the
future
of
solar.
Is
that
going
on
right?
Now?
I
don't
know
the
depth
of
the
issue.
I
hope
we
can
really
fight
it.
F
I
hope
we
can
take
them
on
in
the
same
good
ways
we
took
on
1139
and
and
make
some
strong
demands
that
this
is
the
time
to
really
start
working
on
renewable
energy,
its
local
procurement
and
just
our
better
selves
and
good
practices
and
pg
e
is
trying
to
get
away
with
something
weird.
What
are
they
doing?
They're
doing
the
same
thing
with
1139?
F
I
think
we
can
stop
it
again.
Let's,
let's
have
good
efforts
to
do
that,
the
with
the
with
the
covid
extension
to
mid-january.
I
think
that
is
about
the
time
you're
going
to
be
starting
to
talk
about
mandates
again
for
possibly
school
children
and
others.
That's
a
worrisome
thing.
I
think
we're
developing
a
more
flexible
system
in
this
country
compared
to
europe,
which
is
interesting.
I
hope
we
can
continue
to
respect
that.
F
I
hope
community
safety
issues
can
continue
to
respect
that,
and
with
that
I
I
think
there
can
be
room
for
everybody
and
everybody's
feelings
and
we
have
to
really
work
towards
those
good
ideals
and
to
speak
to
the
charter
commission
process.
I
can
go
on
all
day
about
that
boy.
I
I
guess
I
wanted
to
say
something.
I
don't
have
quite
enough
time.
Good
luck,
how
the
next
few
weeks
can
work
and
if
we
need
to
go
on.
J
Hi,
brian
dartmouth,
I
keep
forgetting
to
put
my
last
name
on
there.
Thanks
for
all
you
did,
it
was
late
last
night
it
was
really
actually
a
good
meeting.
I
thought
there
was
a
lot
of
emotions
involved,
which
is
true
with
a
lot
of
stuff
anyways.
What
would
really
be
helpful
to
me-
and
I
don't
know
how
you
put
it
on
the
agenda,
something
if
council
people
could
tell
us
how
they
want
information
presented?
J
I
K
I
think
that
would
be
wise
and
then
looking
at
the
other
opportunities
it
looked
like.
There
was
only
two
more
the
item:
3.7
the
project,
labor
agreement
and
then
item
10.2,
the
pd
rezoning,
actually
that
one's
in
in
my
district-
and
I
my
understanding
would
be
for
that
one.
I
think
that
would
be
fine.
I
I
imagine
obviously
the
the
applicant
is
going
to
want
to
get
that
as
soon
as
possible,
but
considering
our
agenda,
I
don't
think
that
would
be
impossible
to
to
defer.
K
I
Yeah
correct,
except
for
the
applicant
wanting
to
move,
there's
nothing
legally,
that
you
know
we
need
to
hear
it
before
the
end
of
the
year.
The
other
thing,
too,
is,
if
you
know
we'll
have
another
shot
at
this
agenda
next
week.
So
if
we
want
to
do
additional
work
with
planning
and
the
applicant
just
to
make
sure
about
that,
we
can
do
that
as
well.
Council
member.
K
Okay,
I
think
I'll
put
that
recommendation
in
there.
So
then
that
way
we
can.
We
can
take
that
recommendation
back
if
we
want
next
week,
but
that
will
give
an
indication
to
planning
and
the
applicant
on
what's
going
on
and
then
I'll
defer
to
my
colleague,
councilman
cohen,
because
it
was
his
memo
on
the
project
labor
agreements
if
there
was
any
reason
to
why
the
14th
was
the
date
that
we
had
here,
but
otherwise
I'd
be
comfortable
with
with
those
first
two.
H
H
Well,
first
I'll
start
with
3.7.
I
I
mean
it's
one
of
those
things
where
it'd
be
nice
to
get
it
done
before
the
holidays,
to
signal
to
people
that
we're
you
know
taking
this
seriously,
I
don't
know
that
it's
exact
that
time
sensitive,
that
it
couldn't
go
until
january.
I'm
getting
concerned
about
how
long
the
january
11th
meeting
is
going
to
end
up
being
after
we
defer
so
much
from
december.
H
So
maybe
lee
can
comment
on
that,
but
you
know
I
expect
january
11th
we're
going
to
be
catching
up
on
a
lot
of
stuff
too,
and
I
don't
I
we
don't
want
this
to
postpone
any
longer
than
that.
So
I'm
trying
to
I
was
been
trying
to
think
about
how
we
can
potentially
make
3.7
a
tentative
for
that
date
and
then
do
the
same
thing.
H
We
did
last
time
by
removing
it
if
it's
looking
like
the
meeting's
going
long,
maybe
putting
it
later
in
the
agenda
at
some
time
certain
and
then
deciding
sorry
about
that
and
then
deciding
at
if
how
things
are
going,
whether
we
can
get
it
in
or
not
or
leave
it
in
for
this
week,
and
we
can
think
about
that
for
next
week.
But
lee
do
you
have
a
comment
about
the
j
about
january
11th?.
I
So
january
11
is
shaping
up
to
be
a
long
meeting
as
well.
I
will
say
gloria
myself
and
others
are
working
on
the
horizon
report,
which
you'll
see
pretty
soon
so
we're
working
on
taking
some
of
the
stuff
on
the
11th
and
staggering
out
through
january
and
into
february,
but
right
now
the
11
does
have
quite
a
bit
on.
H
H
So
I
I
I
I'm
gonna-
do
that:
let's
wait
until
next
week
and
and
see
how
the
dust
settles
and
maybe
making
a
change
to
the
number
3.7
next
week.
I
also
want
to
comment
just
on
the
agenda
in
general.
Maybe
this
will
also
be
decided
next
week,
but
those
two
items
redistricting
and
charter,
say
charter-
says
to
be
heard.
Last
redistricting
says
to
be
heard
right
before
the
charter-
one.
H
We
don't
know
what
last
means,
because
if
the
meeting
runs
to
curfew-
and
we
have
to
continue
on
wednesday
morning,
does
that
mean
those
necessarily
have
to
be
the
ones
carried
over
to
wednesday?
Or
do
we
want
to
schedule
the
meeting
in
a
way
with
time
certainty
for
those
two
items
so
that
other
things
would
carry
over
to
wednesday?
H
I
Ask
tony
to
jump
in.
I
don't
know
if
there's
been
any
commitments
to
either
of
the
commissions,
quite
frankly
on
timing,
but
from
an
agenda
management
perspective.
As
as
the
setters
of
the
agenda,
you,
I
believe
you
do,
have
the
flexibility
to
to
provide.
You
know
that
kind
of
specificity
and
if
you
wanted
to
agenda
something
you
know
specific
to
wednesday
morning,
but
I
think
there
are
some
legal
issues
with
redistricting.
C
H
H
C
H
I
H
So
now
it
does,
but
I
said
we
would
revisit
that
next
week
we
have
one
more
crack
at
this
agenda.
Okay,
so
we'll
think
it
over
and
figure
out
if
we
need
to
move
it
or
not
or
maybe
make
it
somehow
schedule
it
so
that
it's
after
the
other
hearings,
but
I
don't
know
whether
that's
the
right
thing
to
do
either
if
we
can
try
to
get
it
in,
but
we'll
we'll
have
to
think
it
through
for
the
next
week
and
then
come
back
to
rules
next
week.
B
K
So,
in
regards
to
the
redistricting
is:
is
this
going
to
be
it'll,
be
a
public
hearing,
but
are
we
going
to
to
begin
to
chime
in
on
this
because,
obviously,
there's
a
a
difference
between
you
know
the
time
I
think
it
may
take
if
we're.
If
we're
just
hearing
public
comment
again
versus
if
we're
chiming
in.
A
K
A
A
B
D
D
But
you're
not
you
know
and
maybe
look
at
the
agendas
you
know,
and
then
we
don't
know
that
it's
11
a.m
start
like
the
last
time
meeting
everybody
or
you
know
dev
davis
and
raul,
and
I
think
matt
mahan
a
lot
of
the
people
and
maybe
sergio
jimenez,
were
you
know,
I'm
on
their
email
list
or
their
let
newsletters
and
talking
about
you
know,
go
about
the
redistricting,
but
no
mention
that
the
meeting
started
11am
and
so
you're
not
doing
it.
I
mean
you
used
to
send
us.
You
know
a
warning.
D
You
know
that
get
your
vaccine,
but
you
don't,
you
know,
send
us
any
information
about
that.
Your
meeting
starting
at
11
a.m,
so
that
needs
to
change
and
and
then
getting
back
to
budgetary
things
like
we
were
dealing
with
last
night.
You
know
yesterday
in
terms
of
the
american,
you
know
monies
that
we're
getting
the
millions
of
dollars.
I
want
three
million
dollars
to
buy
that
property
at
615
so
that
we
could
that's
what
you
know.
D
Maybe
we
can
get
it
for
3
million,
and
it's
here
on
stockton
avenue
at
chile
and
we
don't
need
a
hotel
and
the
neighbors
are
planning
on
moving,
because
you
know
they
say
that
the
hotels
like
we're
seeing
are
going
to
become
homeless
housing,
and
so
some
of
the
neighbors
are
saying
you
know
you
know
we're
thinking
about
noise
and
and
pollution
and
things
it's
gonna
be
a
lot
worse,
especially
with
the
hotel
and
then
even
with
homeless
housing.
And
we
have
pollution
problems
here
in
our
neighborhood.
D
And
so
we
really
need
a
fossil
fuel
free
operation.
Here,
that's
what
we
need
and
and
that's
what
we
need.
Overall,
we
need
that
in
all
of
our
businesses
and
then
to
grow
food
so
that
the
homeless
could
be
working,
the
lands
and
having
jobs.
And
you
know
we
could
provide
housing
there,
that
it
could
become
for
the
homeless
to
live
there
as
well
and
and
then
they
could
be
learned
to
live
sustainably
on
our
on
our
planet.
F
Hi
rob
beekman
here.
Thank
you
for
this
upcoming
meeting.
I
was
a
bit
disappointed
in
the
words
of
I
can't
think
of
his
name,
our
budget
director,
jim.
I
can't
think
of
his
last
name
right
now,
sorry,
but
he
you
know,
I
tessa
paul
and
myself
we're
all
trying
to
learn
to
ask.
You
know
that
city
staff,
you
know
presentations
during
council
sessions
and
committee
sessions.
F
It
takes
practice
to
learn
how
to
do
it
openly
and
accountably,
and
I
I
hope
this
can
be
a
time
we
can
learn
how
to
do
that.
And
with
that
I
mean
you're
going
to
be
talking
about
issues
of
2023,
and
you
know
I
I
can't
say
no
comments.
I
can
I.
I
would
like
to
apologize
if
I've
been
talking
about
these
issues
in
the
wrong
way
for
the
past
six
months,
but
we
may
have
some
serious
prep
work.
F
We
have
to
do
for
2023
and
learn
really
important
ways
how
to
talk
about
2023,
and
I
we
can't
be
hiding
around
things.
I
think
we
need
to
be
honest
with
ourselves.
It
creates
better
community
practices,
better
community
safety
and
and
just
a
better
future
for
ourselves.
It's
just
our
better
selves.
So
good
luck,
how
we
can
work
on
these
things
and
it
doesn't
have
to
be
hurtful.
I
hope
it
can
be
a
process
of
a
good
learning
and
friendship
and
growth
and
sharing
of
important
information
for
all
of
us.
Thank
you.
B
C
K
B
B
A
A
L
Okay,
thank
you,
hello.
My
name
is
catherine
reichenbach
and
I
am
a
san
jose
native
mother
of
four
children
under
12
and
a
survivor
of
domestic
violence.
I
am
here
to
appeal
the
decision
of
denying
me
access
to
public
records
of
my
engagement
with
san
jose
pd,
the
summer
of
2020
as
a
survivor
of
domestic
abuse.
L
There
are
many
stigmas
and
barriers
to
obtaining
access
and
help
I'm
a
very
private
person,
and
I
do
not
like
to
disclose
my
past
experiences
and
trauma
to
the
public,
especially
as
frequently
as
I'm
forced
to
do
to
gain
access
to
what
I
believe.
Every
law,
abiding
citizen
and
victim
of
crime
should
be
awarded.
L
On
this
day
in
question,
I
was
instructed
by
my
lawyer
and
my
advocate
at
next
door
amanda
to
report
one
of
my
many
dvro
violations.
My
husband
committed.
It
was
weeks
before
my
trial
and
my
husband
was
purchasing
thousands
of
dollars
of
guns
and
gun
parts
from
specialty,
police
and
military
stores.
L
I
was
in
complete
fear
of
my
life
and
my
children's
as
well
as
my
family
members.
I
fled
to
live
with
back
home
in
san
jose
the
body.
Cam
footage
shows
the
complete
disregard
and
safety
for
me
and
the
barriers
I've
encountered,
trying
to
keep
my
children
safe
from
my
husband
from
bad
policies
and
even
the
court
orders.
I
have
fought
so
hard
for
things
not
just
for
myself,
but
for
my
children
and
their
safety
and
for
the
safety
of
every
other
survivor
of
domestic
domestic
abuse
in
their
children.
L
L
My
hope
is
that
your
committee
will
grant
me
the
footage
for
my
ongoing
and
current
three-year
battle
in
the
sen
in
the
california
courts,
to
keep
my
children
safe
and
to
bring
awareness
to
a
need
of
one
of
the
most
equitable
places.
I've
lived
in
with
many
good
people
trying
to
do
good
things
for
the
communities
and
families
who
live
in
san
jose,
and
that
is
all.
C
B
E
Good
afternoon
my
name
is
molly
macleod.
I
am
speaking
only
as
a
resident
of
city
of
san
jose
and
also
as
a
person
who
is
a
survivor
of
abuse,
and
I
want
to
say
that
I
am
in
support
of
this
public
record
request
the
thought
that
the
city
would
deny
access
to
video
of
an
encounter
with
the
police
by
somebody
who
is
seeking
assistance
and
has
brought
the
city
supported
domestic
violence
survivors
resource
with
her.
For
me
to
hear
that
trembling
voice.
F
All
right,
thank
you,
boy,
pikmin
here.
Thank
you
very
much
for
the
the
plaintiff
or
the
person,
the
appeal
person
to
want
to
come
and
speak
today.
It's
it's
really
brave
of
her
to
do
it.
I
I
I
have
a
request
that
you
know
it's
kind
of
a
regular
standard
practice
that
city
government.
They
more
fully
explain
what
their
legal
reasoning
is.
F
Thank
you
for
bringing
this
to
the
public
process,
and
and
thank
you
to
to
the
person
who
is
willing
to
make
this
effort
to
to
do
this.
I
mean,
if
she's
willing,
to
make
this
sort
of
effort.
That's
obviously
difficult,
for.
I
hope
city
government
can
take
the
time
to
fully
explain
to
all
of
us
why
exactly
repeal
is
being
denied
today.
Thank
you
and
hopefully
we
can
work
on
it
and
something
can
change
today
as
well.
Thank
you.
G
Yes,
paul
soto
from
the
horseshoe.
I
don't
think
that
lieutenant
donahue
would
have
any
problem
articulating
explicitly
what
the
legal
premises
for
the
denial,
not
the
city,
not
the
city
manager.
I
want
it
from
his
mouth.
I
have
that
right.
He
puts
on
a
badge
every
single
day
representing
sjpd.
That's
the
city,
that's
my
home
city.
You
want
to
represent
somehow,
while
they're
representing,
but
you're,
only
representing
the
interest
of
the
poa.
That's
for
sure.
In
this
context,
that's
not
happening.
G
Both
blair
and
I
spoke
at
the
last
meeting
in
your
defense
because
the
city
clerk
started
opening
her
mouth
and
giving
an
opinion
as
to
why
for
her
absence,
I
challenge
anybody
review
the
tape
man,
the
last
meeting
when
she
wasn't
there
tony
opened
her
mouth
and
starts
yapping
and
starts
giving
a
rationalization
for
her
absence
and
wanted
to
close
the
close.
The
item
up
that
was
so
disrespectful
and
blatant
that
it
was
embarrassing.
G
I
had
to
be
embarrassed
for
her
because
she
doesn't
have
the
capacity
to
be
embarrassed
for
herself,
and
so
what
my
contention
is
is
that
everything
that
I
have
been
saying
is
coming
to
fruition
and
everything
that
the
city
has
been
saying
thus
far
has
been
fallacy
and,
following
this,
the
racial
equity.
We
already
know
that
next
door
is
silent
on
this
issue.
Esther
perales,
your
silence
is
deafening,
yet
you
want
to
get
in
the
ring
and
start
talking
smack
and
get
on
the
agenda
for
the
reimagine.
What
grant
money
getting
too
low
esther
perales?
B
J
Thank
you.
Excuse
me,
I
didn't
I'm
really
sorry.
I
did
not
get
a
chance
to
read
the
whole
memo,
so
I
don't
fully
know
the
reasons
for
denying
it
we'll
find
that
out
in
a
minute,
but
domestic
abuse,
it's
somebody's
stockpiling
weapons.
We
just
had
nine
well
now.
It's
four
people
passed
the
one
child
passed
away
this
morning
and
it
turns
out
on
this
person's.
You
know
the
the
young
man
that
is
accused
of
doing
this
in
michigan.
J
You
know,
there's
it's
all
over
the
place
where
he
this
was
planned
and
premeditated.
If
she
has
information
that
can
protect
her
and
her
family
and
is
making
a
public
records
request,
you
would
think
people
would
stand
on
their
head.
We
don't
want
another
one
of
these
things
going
on
here
I
mean
the
warning.
Signs
are
all
over
the
place
and
if
all
she
can
do
is
act
upon
a
public
records
request
to
get
information
to
protect
her
and
her
children,
we
should
all
be
standing
right.
J
Actually,
we
should
all
be
standing
in
front
of
her.
You
know
what
I
mean
protecting
her.
That's
what
we're
supposed
to
do
as
a
society
and
I'm
waiting
to
hear
what
the
reason
why,
but
I
I
mean
so
I
know
it's
somewhat
emotional
on
my
part,
but
it's
it
runs
deep
and
it
does
happen
and
people
do
get
hurt
and
I
can
tell
you
stories,
I
I've
known
personally
10
people
in
violence
and
that's
a
lot
and
I
and
a
lot
of
it
was
guns.
You
know
and
gosh
darn
it.
J
B
I'm
gonna
well
I'll,
give
everyone
a
chance
to
speak,
but
I'm
going
to
bring
it
back
to
the
committee
because
catherine
has
to
leave
shortly.
So
I
want
to
make
sure
that
we
don't
make
this
more
stressful
than
than
it
already
is
for
her.
So
I'm
gonna
go
back
to
the
committee
and
council
member
perlis
go
ahead.
K
L
K
Okay
and
just
having
that
consideration,
the
reason
why
was
I
actually
think
this
conversation
could
potentially
go
on
for
a
little
bit
if
we
actually,
you
know
dive
into
it,
to
try
to
understand
the
circumstances
of
of
both
the
incident
and
and
then
the
the
denial
on
the
the
body-worn
camera
footage,
and
I
think
it
would
be
important
to
to
have
you
obviously
right
available
for
that.
I
understand
that
we
already
missed
you
the
last
time
and
I
just
wanted
to
clarify
something.
K
If
we
don't
come
to
a
conclusion
today,
I
I
will
make
the
recommendation
that
we
would
we
deferred
action
on
it
to
to
be
able
to
actually
you
know
get
into.
It
is
as
detailed
as
we
have
to
so.
If
we
end
up
not
being
able
to
come
to
conclusion
within
the
next
few
minutes,
that'll
be
my
recommendation
ultimately,
but
I
will
start
with
asking
the
staff,
if
you
can
respond
in
regards
to
the
the
grounds
for
why
we
are.
N
A
K
A
O
Good
afternoon
vice
mayor
and
committee
members,
my
name
is
monique
villarreal
and
I
am
an
analyst
with
the
police
department's
research
and
development
unit.
Our
unit
is
responsible
for
reviewing
requests
for
body-worn
camera
footage,
such
as
the
request
received
by
miss
reichenbach,
also
known
as
miss
wieland
or
wyland,
in
considering
requests
for
worn
camera.
The
process
includes:
referencing
california,
government
code,
6254,
subsection
f,
which
details
the
entitled
parties
who
are
able
to
receive
records
of
investigation,
which
includes
body,
worn
camera
footage.
O
O
Further
investigative
follow-up
by
sworn
staff
here
within
our
department
determined
that
the
restraining
order
had
not
been
violated
and
that
the
purchases
had
occurred
before
the
time
that
the
restraining
order
was
in
place.
Therefore,
it
was
determined
that
a
crime
did
not
occur
and
therefore
the
request
was
denied.
O
Miss
reichenbach
wieland
had
requested
an
explanation
as
to
why
the
requests
had
been
denied
and
language
had
been
provided.
She
also
requested
to
speak
with
additional
personnel
for
follow-up
and
additionally
provided
other
event
numbers
for
consideration,
but
the
additional
event
numbers
were
reviewed.
They
were
tied
to
this
event
and
miss
reichenbach
had
provided
evidence
of
the
purchases,
so
those
were
reviewed
as
well.
A
N
N
N
Despite
how
we
may
feel
personally
about
this-
and
I
know
this
is
an
emotional
issue-
here's
the
thing:
if
we
give
her
the
body
worn
camera
footage,
just
in
this
meeting
alone,
there's
13
attendees-
they
would
be
just
as
entitled
to
that.
Bodyworm
camera
footage
just
because
they
decided
they
wanted
it
not
because
they
were
party
to
it
and
miss
fryman.
N
You
could
correct
me
if
I'm
wrong
here,
but
from
what
I
understand
if
we
change
the
what
we're
going
to
release
on
a
case,
we
can't
we
have
to
abide
by
that
for
that
entire
case.
So
if
we
release
this
footage
based
on
her
request,
because
she's
not
an
entitled
party,
we're
going
to
have
to
do
that
for
anybody
that
asks
for
that
footage
on
this
case,
if
they're
an
unentitled
party
we'd
still
have
to
release.
That
is
that
correct.
N
So
in
part
of
this
is
when
we
look
at
this,
we
we
from
the
research
and
development
line.
We
look
at
it
based
on
that
government
code.
For
us,
we
have
to
look
at.
Does
it
fit
the
criteria
and
if
it
doesn't,
we
don't
release
and
part
of
that
protects
ms
reichenbach
from
anybody
coming
off
the
street
and
deciding
they
want
to
find
out
what
happened
in
her
allegations
of
domestic
violence,
and
it
protects
her
as
a
survivor
of
this.
So
that's
where
we
are
now
is
we're
now
in
this
appeal
now.
N
I
wish
this
never
happened,
and
I
wish
that
we
never
found
ourselves
in
this
situation,
but
since
we're
here,
I
unfortunately
as
an
agency,
we
at
the
police
department
have
to
abide
by
the
government
code
and
ensure
that
her
her
rights
are
protected
and
the
rights
of
other
people
involved.
In
this
event,
so
thank.
K
K
I
am
sorry
as
well
that
that
we're
even
having
to
have
this
conversation,
as
you
pointed
out,
sort
of
very
publicly,
considering
the
nature
of
what
you've
been
going
through
and
and
that
doesn't
that
is
not
missed
on
on
on
any
of
us,
but
I
wanted
you
to
be
able
to.
I
saw
your
hand
go
up,
so
I
wanted
you
to
be
able
to
to
respond.
L
Thank
you
very
much
for
allowing
me
to
respond.
I
had
heard
some
things
that
I
do
not
agree
with
and
do
not
think
are
factual
in
this
case,
first
of
which
is
that
I
did
not
have
a
tro
or
dvro
at
the
time.
I
did
have
a
tro
for
almost
a
year
because
of
kovid
and
the
every
time
it
extended.
I
had
to
go
to
court
and
every
time
it
extended,
it
did
not
show
up
in
the
police
records.
L
I
provided
my
tro
at
the
time
and
I
was
in
preparation
for
my
dvro
hearing,
which
I
thought
possibly
like
many
other
women.
I
could
be
murdered
and
shot
at
while
I
attended
in
san
jose
in
the
courthouse,
so
that's
number
one
is.
I
did
have
a
valid
restraining
order
against
my
husband
number
two.
I
was
told
by
detective
donahoe
when
I
did
speak
with
him
he's
a
very
kind
man.
He
was
very
apologetic,
he's
doing
a
lot
of
great
things.
I
think
in
the
police
department
with
trainings
and
things
that
he
spoke
of.
L
I
was
told
by
him
that
the
victim
in
this
case
is
the
courts
and
not
me.
However,
I
would
be
the
one
dead
and
my
children
would
so
I
do
not
see
how,
when
I
have
a
violation,
I
am
not
the
victim
second
or
third.
At
this
point
you
know.
I
was
also
told
that
by
detective
donahue
that
he
believes
after
our
phone
call,
that
none
of
this
would
ever
happen
again
and
that
this
was
just
a
once-in-a-lifetime
thing.
Where
I
just
happened
to
be
that
unlucky,
I
am
very
unlucky
a
lot.
L
I
will
say
that
I've
had
a
lot
of
very
bad
experiences
and
a
lot
of
things
that
shouldn't
happen
to
anyone,
but
I
do
not
think
my
unluckiness
is
just
something
that
I've
encountered.
I
think
it
is
something
that
many
women
and
children
and
other
people
as
well,
men
as
well,
have
encountered-
and
I
do
not
think
that
we
have
moved
forward-
and
I
think
san
jose
is
very
progressive
and
I
have
complimented
a
lot
of
people
even
that
police
officer.
L
That
denied
me
my
report,
no
matter
how
many
times
I
appealed
to
him
and
begged
him
and
as
he
told
me
that
it
was
okay
for
my
husband
to
have
guns,
it's
okay.
For
my
husband
to
have
ammo
it's
okay
for
him
to
have
body
armor,
it's
not
okay!
For
me
to
defend
myself
and
children,
I
cannot
appeal
to
anyone,
and
so
that
is
why
I'm
continuing
to
ask
you
to
acknowledge
that
I
had
a
tro.
L
K
Kevin,
can
I
ask
you
a
question
in
regards
to
your
your
your
intended
goal
on
on
achieving
the
footage,
if
you
could,
what
is
is
the
goal
to
try
and
because
I,
what
I
recognize
here
is
that
it
looks
like
the
police
department
is
claiming
that
there
was
no
crime.
Is
your
goal
to
to
try
and
solidify
that
there
was
or
what
what
is?
Maybe
you
can
can
help
us
explain
with
that.
What
is
the
the
ultimate
goal
for
you.
L
L
I
believe
it
is
a
complete
violation
of
courtesy.
I
was
treated
worse
than
criminals
by
this
man,
even
though
I
still
respected
him
as
an
officer
I
still
identified
with
him
in
his
job.
He
did
not
care
to
know
me
as
a
person
and
treat
me
with
the
dignity
and
respect
any
person
deserves
and
so
number
one
that
was.
My
first
intent
was
to
appeal,
and
I
appealed-
and
I
talked
to
so
many
people
with
that
appeal.
I've
been
through
this
for
a
year.
L
L
J
L
One
of
them
was
founded
the
procedure.
He
was
required
to
take
my
report
and
refuse
the
second
one
for
courtesy
was
denied
and
I
appealed
that
and
it
still
was
denied
and
their
their
reasoning
was,
and
I
spoke
to
the
officer
in
charge
of
it
at
the
family
violence
unit.
The
fvu
told
me
because
he
didn't
yell
at
me
because
he
didn't
curse
at
me.
You
know
because
he
didn't
act
violently
towards
me.
K
L
K
K
End
goal
is,
but
I
think
you
you
feel
still
as
though
you're
entitled
to
the
video
and
for
the
moment
you
want
it,
and
obviously
the
police
department,
through
the
code
is
claiming
that
that
that
they
can't
release
that
to
you
that
that's
not
entitled
so
all
shift
gears,
and
I
recognize
you
may
have
to
leave
at
some
point
here.
So
I
and
your
advocate
is
stuck
on
past
as
well,
but
norah
question
for
you
is
there?
K
K
C
C
K
K
B
M
No
problem-
I
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
something
as
a
domestic
violence
advocate
is.
When
katherine
made
the
complaint
of
the
conduct
of
the
officer,
it
was
found
that
he
violated
policy,
which
he
did.
He
was
supposed
to
take
a
restraining
order
violation.
There
was
an
active,
temporary
restraining
order
at
the
time
the
crime
happens
and
an
extension
of
that
temporary
restraining
order.
At
the
time
she
made
the
report.
She
was
never
not
protected
by
a
restraining
order.
She
was
so
he
did
violate
policy,
but
what
catherine
is
speaking
to
of
this
courtesy
piece?
M
So
I
just
wanted
to
highlight
that
as
a
domestic
violence
advocate
that
what
she's
doing
is
incredibly
brave
and
strong
for
her
and
for
all
domestic
violence
survivors
out
there,
because
this
can
go
on
to
impact
the
safety
of
future
domestic
minds.
Survivors
making
a
report-
and
hopefully
you
know
never
again,
will
a
police
officer
respond
in
a
way
so
discourteous
so
inappropriately
to
someone
trying
to
access
safety?
That
is
their
right.
K
Last
question
and
because
I
know
I
see
my
I
know
my
colleagues
want
to
ask
questions:
is
it
possible
that
the
council
can
review
the
footage
in
confidence
first
during
like
a
closed
session,
that
they
would
not
violate
any
of
the
the
other?
You
know
protections
or
ordinances
is
that
is
that
an
option
down
this
path?
If,
if
that's
something
that
the
council
wanted
to
review,.
C
K
I'm
talking
about
either
war-
I
guess
it's,
it
would
be
having
the
access
to
the
video
itself
right
to
try
and
determine
make
make
an
internal
determination
right
that
wouldn't
necessarily
expose
this
video
to
be
open
to
the
entire
public.
But
if
that's
something
that
is
reviewable
in
essence,
I
guess
the
question
right
is:
is
this
video
reviewable
by
the
city
council,
the
rules
committee
or
the
council.
C
Okay,
I
I
can
look
at
that-
certainly
council,
member
and
then
separately.
It
sounds
like
there's
some
confusion
as
to
whether
or
not
there
was
a
restraining
order
actually
either
a
temporary
restraining
order
or
a
domestic
violence
restraining
order
in
place.
It
sounds
as
though
pd
understood
that
there
wasn't
and
next
door,
amanda
and
and
catherine
are
both
indicating
that
there
was-
and
I
don't
know
if
next
door
was
involved
in
helping
her
obtain
the
restraining
order
if
they
have
records
of
that.
K
N
N
As
you
know,
council
members
that
if
it's
a
domestic
violence
call,
they
should
take
a
report
right,
so
it
looks
like
they
should
have
taken
one
that
doesn't
necessarily
mean
that
a
crime
was
committed,
and
I
think
that's
the
key
here
is
the
crime
whether
or
not
there
was
a
crime
determines
whether
or
not
we
can
give
out
this
case.
It's
there
wasn't
a
crime,
it's
not
a
matter
of
of
whether
or
not
the
officer
was
courteous,
discourteous
or
should
have
taken
a
report
shouldn't
have
taken
a
report.
N
What
we
have
to
abide
by
is
the
government
code
in
determining
whether
or
not
we
give
out
the
case,
and
and
since
there
was
no
crime,
ms
reichenbach,
as
is
not
a
victim
of
a
crime,
cannot
be
party
to
that
case
and
receive
that
information.
That's
that's
where
that
kind
of
the
crux
of
the
matter
lies.
K
Yeah-
and
I
I
you
know,
I
agree
with
you-
I
agree
with
that.
I
understand
in
my
reading
of
the
code
as
well.
It
sounds
like
there's
also
discrepancy,
though,
from
from
her
part
and
from
her
advocate
that
they
actually
feel
there
was
a
restraining
order
in
place
and
that
it
was
violated.
Pd
is
saying
it
wasn't
so
yeah,
I
don't.
I
don't
know
if
there's
another
again.
B
N
Thank
you,
sir.
Yes,
I
I'm
feverishly
texting
in
the
background
with
the
commander
of
internal
affairs
trying
to
find
that
out.
Here's.
What
I
know
is
that
all
cases
are
overseen
by
the
ipa's
office,
so
they're
party
to
all
the
cases.
I
don't
know
if
the
ipa
reviewed
the
video
I
won't
know
until
I
can
get
the
name
and
send
it
to
the
commander
of
ia
and
I'm
trying
to
get
that
now,
because
I
don't
have
the
name
in
front
of
me
where
I'm
at,
but
once
I
have
that
I'll.
N
Let
you
know
in
the
interim
whether
or
not
the
ipa
reviewed
the
video
itself.
They
actually
agreed
with
the
courtesy
decision
right
so
that
that
therein
lies
the
crux
of
if
we've
got
the
ipa
agreeing
on
the
case,
and
I
I
I
feel
like
I'm
getting
sidetracked
here
talking
about
the
ia
case
with
the
officer
because
there's
a
sustained
and
not
sustained
aspect
of
it.
I
think
the
issue
is
the
government
code
with
whether
or
not
we
can
release
it.
B
O
I
just
wanted
to
provide
some
further
clarification
in
reviewing
again
the
several
events
that
had
been
provided.
The
information
in
there
only
referred
to
a
restraining
order
being
served
after
the
purchases
had
been
made,
and
it
wasn't
made
clear,
as
was
stated
that
there
may
have
already
been
a
restraining
order
in
place.
L
Yes,
thank
you.
I
did
want
to
state.
You
know
the
body.
Cam
footage
was
one
of
the
other
reasons
I
wanted
it
to
know.
The
reason
they
denied
the
claim
is
it
wasn't
on
the
whole
time,
from
my
from
what
my
speaking
to
the
ipa
and
the
auditors
and
the
police
department,
when
the
officer
approached
my
home,
I
was
in
the
house
and
my
mom
and
brother
were
in
the
garage.
They
were
cleaning
it.
He
was
very
rude
and
abrupt
to
my
mother.
L
He
basically
barked
orders
at
her
that
she
needed
to
get
out
and
talk
to
him
right
then
and
she's
like
well.
I'm
not
the
person
that
you
need
to
talk
to
and
told
told
him
that
she
would
get
me
from
the
home.
They
witnessed
him
being
inappropriate
with
me,
and
I
don't
know
at
what
point
the
footage
was
turned
on,
which
is
also
one
of
the
questions
that
I
had
with,
why
you
know
they
denied
the
claim.
L
But
now
I'm
I'm
recalling
this
as
as
everyone
is
speaking
about
the
claim,
I
also
don't
I
mean
I
really
feel
uncomfortable
with
the
idea
that
other
people
would
be
viewing
my
footage
and
assessing
it
based
and
based
on.
You
know
whether
or
not
I
should
be
allowed
to
have
it.
I
think
that
just
being
a
law
abiding
citizen
from
you
know
here
I
am
I
lived
in
california.
L
I
asked
for
the
public
records
that
I
was
a
part
of
someone
recorded
me
and
I
feel
entitled
to
it
as
just
a
law-abiding
citizen
and
that's
the
reason.
I
think
I
should
have
it
not
because
I'm
a
domestic
violence
survivor
not
because
of
any
other
reason,
because
I
am
a
citizen,
and
I
think
that
should
be
given
to
me.
B
B
B
Hopefully
she
develops
a
comfort
level
in
terms
of
what
the
ipa
does
and
how
they're
an
advocate
for
for
our
residents
and-
and
we
can
address
it
that
way
and
again
continue
this,
and
if
it
doesn't
meet
your
satisfaction,
then
we
can
revisit
this.
So
that
would
be
my
recommendation,
but
obviously
I
want
to
hear
from
my
my
other
colleagues
so.
C
M
M
Something
which
is
that
next
door
solutions
actually
met
with
the
da's
office.
We
met
with
james
gibbons
shapiro
about
our
concerns
about
how
catherine's
restraining
order
was
not
enforced,
because
it
was
a
temporary
restraining
order
that
was
absolutely
active
and
had
been
served
and
had
been
extended
to
a
new
temporary
restraining
order.
That
was
absolutely
active
and
had
been
served
because
of
the
coven
19
pandemic.
She
was
always
protected
by
a
restraining
order.
We've
had
the
da's
office
independently
review
this,
and
they
said
she
was
always
respect
but
protected
by
the
restraining
order.
M
M
There
was
a
temporary
restraining
order
in
place
active
and
served
at
the
time
of
the
crime
and
the
time
that
she
reported
the
crime
with
no
gap
in
coverage
in
between
just
because
they
were
two
separate
orders,
because
it
had
been
extended
from
the
kova
19
pandemic
does
not
mean
that
she's
not
entitled
to
that
footage.
She's
still
a
victim
of
a
crime
and
a
crime
did
happen.
In
fact,
it's
being
investigated
now
the
da's
office
reached
out
to
the
police
department.
M
B
H
I
know
this
isn't
easy,
so
I
appreciate
that
it's
a
little
little
dismaying
for
me
that
this
kind
of
this
is
being
aired
in
this
public
way
and
having
this
debate,
it's
not
it
doesn't.
I'm
not
sure
I
mean
this
is
another
conversation
for
later
as
to
what
the
process
is
and
should
be.
I
understand
this
is
probably
what
the
code
says.
The
process
should
be,
but
it's
a
little
surprising
to
me.
So
let
me
I
have
a
few
questions.
H
I
guess
and
I
do
appreciate
the
direction
that
chair
jones
is
going
on.
This
I
mean
I
think
there
are
some
intermediate
steps
we
can
take
and
some
next
things
we
can
do
to
try
to
get
this
resolved
without
this
us
having
to
vote
or
not
on
an
appeal
at
this
point,
but
so
so
for
my
understanding
now
that
the
police
department
based
on
their
their
interpretation,
they
did,
they
decided
they
felt
a
crime
wasn't
committed.
H
H
No,
I'm
not
talking
about
even
this
care
of
the
specifics,
but
the
plea
in
any.
In
the
case,
the
police
department
has
made
a
determination
that
they
said
they
feel
a
crime
wasn't
committed.
Therefore,
this
doesn't
meet
the
criteria
to
release
the
footage
right.
So
in
that
case,
if
a
victim
still
still
believes
that
they,
you
know
that
that
was
an
erroneous
judgment
by
the
police
department.
H
C
Okay,
it
sounds
like
it
was,
and
I
don't
know
if
we've
sorted
out
whether
or
not
there
actually
was
a
restraining
order
in
place.
It
wasn't
in
the
system,
but
I
can
tell
you
through
covid.
Our
experience
is
the
delays
and
on
the
part
of
the
clerks
at
court,
at
least
on
the
civil
side,
but
also
we've
experienced
on
the
criminal
side
getting
information
into
the
system,
even
though
that
should
be
in.
C
I
think
it's
called
klutz,
but
it
should
be
in
a
in
a
different
system
and
that
should
be
more
reliable
than
the
normal
court
system
and
record
system
during
covet.
It
just
wasn't
working
very
well,
and
I
don't
know
the
time
frame
of
this.
So
I
don't
know
if
pd
was
able
to
confirm
based
on
paperwork
that
ms
reichenbach
or
or
miss
gold
had
at
next
door.
C
If,
in
fact,
there
was
a
temporary
restraining
order
or
if
they
were
relying
on
the
court
system,
which
is
where
they
would
usually
go
to
check,
because
you
know
when
we
obtain
those
things,
we
try
to
get
them
in
the
system
as
quickly
as
possible.
So
I
I
I'm
not
sure
we
have
the
answer
to
that.
We
may
from
the
police
department
and
then
in
terms
of
another
way,
to
get
this
information.
N
N
N
There's
question
on
whether
or
not
those
purchases,
even
if
they
were
made
after
that
date,
would
have
been
a
violation
right.
So
I
can't
tell
you
what
the
purchases
were,
because
I
don't
want
to
air
that
in
a
public
forum-
and
I
don't
want
to
right-
I
don't
want
to
explain
that
any
deeper,
but
I
can
tell
you
that
what
was
purchased
may
not
have
actually
violated
had
it
been
purchased
later.
Okay,
then,
once
those
once
that
tro
went
into
effect,
there
was
no
evidence
of
any
purchases
made.
N
But
despite
that,
the
miss
reichenbach
actually
still
wanted
this
case
brought
to
the
da's
office,
so
the
the
detective
did.
The
detective
took
it
to
the
da's
office,
which,
which
is
what
you're
asking
for
who's,
that
second
set
of
eyes.
That
appeal
on
this
right,
because
we
as
an
agent
still
look
at
it
and
say:
is
there
enough
for
criminal
prosecution
and
if
there's
not
typically,
we
won't
send
it
to
the
da's.
But
in
this
we
said
no,
there's
not,
and
yet
she
still
wanted
it.
N
So
we
did
send
it
to
the
das
anyway,
for
her
and
the
da's
office
rejected
the
case.
So
the
dna's
office
then
said
no
we're
not
there's
nothing
here
to
prosecute
for
us.
So
having
both
our
agencies
say
that
this
didn't
occur
and
then
the
da's
office
they
can't
reject
the
case.
Is
that
second
appeal
process
for
that
criminal
aspect
of
it?
Does
that
make
sense?
H
I
fully
understand,
I
fully
understand
your
answer.
I
I
I
appreciate
you
explaining
the
process
it
went
through.
So
I
guess
my
question
is
we
have
this
appeal
process
right?
We
have
this
before
us
now.
That
implies
that
there's
some
oversight,
role
that
this
body
can
play
as
far
as
making
a
decision
that
can
would
it
be
over.
I
mean
in
some
sense
there's
a
government
code
that
we
have
to
follow.
H
N
A
great
question
councilmember,
so
if
you
think
of
it
this
way
there
are
three
kind
of
aspects
to
this
case.
One
is
going
to
be
the
legal
criminal
aspect
did:
was
there
a
crime
committed?
That's
where
you
get
the
police
department
and
the
da's
office.
The
da's
office
is
the
oversight
on
that.
Then
you
have
the
internal
affairs
complaint
that
you
mentioned
earlier:
that's
the
internal
affairs
unit
and
then
the
ipas,
which
is
the
oversight
of
that
right.
N
So
those
two
aspects
have
happened
now
she
wants
the
pra
and
that
comes
to
the
police
department
and
we
make
the
ruling
and
you,
the
committee
rules
and
government
committee
are
the
oversight
for
that
and
you
do
have
the
ability
to
say
no
we're
going
to
release
this.
We're
going.
You
know,
that's
fine,
we'll
give
it
to
her
right
and,
like
mrs
freiman
said,
that
means,
though,
that
we're
going
to
give
it
to
anybody.
H
N
H
H
That
might
be
a
next
step
and
then
bringing
it
back
to
this
committee.
At
that
point,
if
there's
not
a
satisfactory
resolution
for
all
parties
at
that
point
might
make
sense,
rather
than
having
to
make
a
determination
at
this
point,
but
I
guess
I'll
leave
it
there
and
see
what
others
might
have
to
say
about
it.
B
L
B
No,
I
just
wanted
to
do
a
check-in.
What
I,
what
I'd
like
to
do
is
actually
take.
You
know
comments
additional
comments
from
my
colleagues
but
try
to
keep
it
concise
because
we
can.
We
can
continue
this.
We
don't
have
to
have
it
resolved
so
that
catherine
can
get
back
to
taking
care
of
her
little
ones,
but
I'm
going
to
first
go
to
amanda
and
then
council
member
uranus
also
wanted
to
speak.
So
amanda
go
ahead.
M
I'm
concerned
that
there's
an
error
in
the
records
because
she
was
protected
by
a
tarot
at
the
time
the
crime
occurred,
she's
had
a
tarot
extended
repeatedly
since
2019
and
was
continued
to
be
protected
by
extended
heroes
up
into
2020
when
the
crime,
when
she
made
the
report
when
the
crime
commit
was
committed
and
even
passed,
then
until
it
was
finally
granted-
and
she
now
has
the
full
restraining
order.
We
even
checked
with
the
da's
office
I've
met
with
james
gibbons
shapiro.
M
He
said
she
was
protected
by
restraining
order
at
the
time
the
crime
was
committed
and
it's
now
been
passed
on
to
police
department
in
oregon,
where
they're
investigating
it.
So
I'm
concerned
there's
a
record
issue.
If
the
reason
for
denying
her
the
public
records
request
of
the
footage
is
happening
based
off
the
fact
that
a
restraining
order
violation
didn't
happen
when
it
did,
it
did
occur
during
the
trl.
So
I'm
wondering
if
there's
a
issue
with
access
to
the
previous
trl's
that
have
been
extended
or
something
like
that.
B
P
Thank
you
and
thank
you
amanda
and
catherine
for
not
letting
up
on
this
issue.
I
know
that
we
first
heard
it
in
our
office
july
of
last
year
in
2020,
so
this
has
been
going
on
long
enough
and
I
think
we
need
to
be
decisive
today
and
grant
catherine.
This
video,
I
think,
taking
her
down
another
path.
P
P
P
It
led
to
our
work
with
the
duty
manual
amendments
that
you
saw
from
our
office,
so
we
have
duty
manual,
amendments
that
say
that
you
will
now
take
a
an
official
report
on
every
call
that
you
respond
to
that
has
intimate
partner
violence
now,
whether
that
is
a
practice
out.
There
is
a
different
story
and
now
we're
seeing
kind
of
the
evidence
of
that
right.
P
Even
if
we
didn't
have
it
on
the
books,
it
might
be
understood
that
you
should
always
take
a
report,
especially
when
there's
a
past
history
of
domestic
violence,
I'm
going
to
make
a
motion
that
we
approve
her
appeal
and
if
I
and
catherine
I
understand
that
you
have
concerns
about
others
accessing
this
video,
this
video,
this
request
for
videos
needs
to
come
to
the
rules
committee,
correct,
nora,
yes,
okay,
so
then
we
can
deny
those
requests
as
they
come
in.
Oh,
oh.
C
C
M
P
Okay,
here
I
don't
know
if
ipa
made
the
decision
based
on
what
was
reflected
in
the
system
versus
what
was
actually
true
and
that
we
know
that
there's
a
difference
between
those
two.
So
I
would
ask
a
reconsideration
of
of
that
decision.
Maybe
going
back
to
ipa.
Is
that
something
that
we
can
ask
the
ipa
to
review
once
again.
P
C
P
So
you
know
I'm
going
to
leave
it
up
to
katherine
and
amanda
to
decide
which
path
you
want
to
take.
I
heard
from
catherine
that
she
does
not
want
this
publicly
accessed
this
video,
so
I'm
going
to
guess
that
she's
going
to
say
no
to
that,
but
I
don't
want
to
speak
for
her.
Catherine.
Is
that
something
that
you
are
you
willing
to
have
this
as
this
video
in
for
for
public
access.
L
F
L
L
P
C
Yes,
we
maybe
what
would
make
sen?
Okay,
I'm
getting
a
head
shake
from
lieutenant
donohue,
but
what
I
was
going
to
say
is
I
I
don't
know
if
what
that
I
don't
know
what
the
police
have
looked
at
and
whether
or
not
they've
looked
at
what
she
has
and
reached
their
conclusion.
That's
the
difficult
part
for
me.
I
just
don't.
I
don't
know
that.
N
So
I
I
personally
haven't,
but
I
reviewed
the
case
and
council
member.
What
I
can
tell
you
is
that
I
I
know
they
looked
at
the
tro.
They
actually
have
the
tro
number
its
issuance
and
all
that
in
the
case
file.
So
it's
not
a
question
of
whether
or
not
she
had
one
it's,
whether
or
not
it
was
active
at
that
time,
and
I
know
she's
saying
it.
P
Wasn't-
and
I
I
don't
interrupt
you
lieutenant
donahue,
because
I
heard
this
answer
already
and
I'm
already
very
impatient
about
the
treatment
to
this
particular
survivor
that
has
been
dragged
out
for
over
a
year.
So
I'm
going
to
interrupt
you
and
say
I
already
know
your
answer
and
you
heard
from
the
survivor
herself-
and
you
heard
from
the
advocate
that
there
is
this
continuous
tro
now
whether
the
pandemic
interrupted.
P
You
know,
the
digital
access
to
that
for
our
police
officers
is,
is
not
her
fault,
and
so
I
think
we
we
can
take
this
offline,
but
the
the
the
bottom
line
here
is
the
this
person.
In
my
view,
I'm
going
to
rely
on
advocates
who
come
forth
and
also
support
our
our
survivors
and
nurse,
and
I'm
going
to
believe
our
survivors
that
when
they
say
they
have
a
tro,
they
have
a
tro.
P
And
if
it's
continuous,
I
can't
understand
why
it
would
not
be
a
crime.
I
I
cannot
understand
what.
How
could
this
not
be
a
crime,
and
I
don't-
and
it
has
to
be
a
different
answer
on
whether
this
was
active
or
not,
because
it
was
active
with
the
assumption
that
it's
active,
let's
give
the
survivor.
The
benefit
of
the
doubt
is
what
I'm
asking
for,
and
what
she's
been
asking
for.
C
Councilmember
there
may
be
one
other
item
that
would
need
to
be
confirmed,
and
my
understanding
is
the
police
department
understood
that
what
there
may
have
been
some
purchases
that
were
prohibited
under
the
restraining
order,
but
that
they
occurred
before
the
restraining
order
was
in
place
and
they
may
have
been
purchases
that
may
not
have
been
outside
this
or
may
have
been
outside
the
scope
of
the
restraining
order.
I
I
don't
know
that
answer
either
right.
That
was
just
something
we
heard.
P
Somebody
could
correct
me
if
you
want
was
victim
of
a
crime
and
and
and
I
want
to
direct
our
city
manager
to
release
that
footage
to
catherine
as
the
affected
victim
of
that
crime
and
then
deny
the
appeal
for
any
public
release.
Although
I
I
understand
aura
that
you're
saying
that,
once
this
becomes
public
it,
it's
it's
just
pr
aid,
but
from
what
I
understand
we
can,
we
can
make
the
decision
on
whether
she
was
victim
of
a
crime
or
not.
Is
that
correct.
C
I
I
don't
think
that
the
rules
committee
can
make
that
decision
itself
that
that's
the
unfortunately
the
the
difficulty
and
you're
right
there.
A
lot
of
this
is
just
being
heard.
Now
it's
not
necessarily,
and
that's
the
nature
of
a
hearing
that
you
have
it's
not
necessarily
in
this
written
report.
Apparently.
P
Although
I
don't
know
what
what
exactly
needs
to
get
sorted
out
and
our
our
attorneys
can't
tell
us
either,
and
so
I'm
not
really
uncomfortable
with
that
kind
of
detail,
lieutenant
you
haven't
been
able
to
share
with
me
how
it
was
outside
of
of
the
tro
other
than
it
was
the
wrong
time
frame,
or
it
wasn't
within
the
time
frame.
Although
both
advocate
and
survivor
has
said
that
it
has,
it
was
so.
I'm
gonna
give
this
one
more
opportunity
for
for
us
to
sort
this
out.
P
We
have
had
a
as
you
all
may
know,
like
domestic
related
domestic
violence
related
homicides
in
the
recent
in
the
recent
days,
and
it
is
absolutely
upsetting
to
know
that
and
and
to
learn
that
that
this
survivor
has
been
trying
to
go
through
the
right
paths
and
still
not
able
to
have
what
she
needs
and
wants
and
and
deserves
so
I'll
make
the
motion
to
bring
back
this
appeal
process
and
I'm
going
to
ask
lee.
How
soon
can
we
get
this
back
on
the
books?
I
So
we
can
add
it
to
next
week's
calendar.
I'm
going
to
ask
lieutenant
donna
hugh
to
work
with
catherine
and
obtain
a
copy
and
work
with
the
attorney's
office
so
that
we
can
make
findings
that
would
allow
us
to
hopefully
release
the
video
to
her
and
not
have
this
be
open
to
the
public,
so
it
wishes
her
needs
so
lieutenant
donohue
and
nora,
and
I
will
check
in
offline,
but
that's
going
to
be
my
request
that
we
agenda
is
for
next
week
and
can
close
this
so
that
the
victim,
katherine
doesn't.
P
But-
and
I
want
to
make
it
really
clear-
I
know
that
I've
gone
on
a
little
bit
longer,
but
but
I
want
to
make
it
really
clear
that
and
thank
catherine
and
recognize
her
efforts.
Any
other
survivor
would
have
already
dropped
this.
Can
you
imagine
having
this
dragged
out
for
over
a
year?
This
is
this
is
not
even
the
the
the
crux
of
her
issues.
P
This
is
just
a
side
effectives
of
the
process,
and
so
we
we
and
our
system
really
needs
to
do
better.
We
need
to
respond
better
to
our
survivors,
so
that
they're,
so
that
they
don't
have
to
tire
out
when
they're
advocating
for
themselves
and
so
that
they
can
also
be
safe,
and
you
know
I've
always
I've
shared
with
with
the
public.
P
H
It's
all
seconded,
but
with
a
request
to
amend
it,
to
say
that
if
the
determination
is
that
the
tro
was
in
effect
and
the
crime
was
committed,
that
we
don't
need
to
have
it
come
back
to
this
body,
because
the
video,
the
evidence
will
be
released
without
us
having
to
do
anything
as
a
rules
committee.
So
we'll
bring
it
back
in
the
in
the
case
that.
B
Just
just
for
a
clarification
lieutenant
well,
we
also
in
league,
but
we
also
have
catherine
meet
with
the
the
ipa
as
well,
because
her,
the
ultimate
goal
is
not
necessarily
for
her
to
just
see
the
video
but
she's,
looking
for
validation
and
confirmation
of
her
of
her
complaint
and
so
yeah.
What
what
vehicle
do
we
have?
You
know
once
she
sees
the
video
what
vehicle
do
we
have
to
have
an
additional
look
at
okay.
I
Now,
if
I
can
just
start,
I
think
on
council
member
randista's
point
I
would
I
would
defer
to
catherine
on
that.
Actually
I
I
want
to
respect
that.
She
would
like
to
see
the
video
and
not
have
that
be
released
to
the
general
public,
and
so
I
think
that's
our
first
hurdle.
You
know
if
we
can
close
that
gap,
I
would
like
lieutenant
donahue
to
be
able
to
chat
with
her
and
offer
to
connect
her
again
to
the
ipa.
So
she
has
that
service
and
she
can
go
from
there.
I
K
K
K
P
Well,
lieutenant
donahue,
that's
part
of
his
recommendation,
so
I'm
guessing
that
that
is
also
part
of
the
answer.
They
may
not
be
able
to
say
yes
or
no,
but
at
the
very
least
be
that
in
that
that
that
middle
person,
I
don't
know
who
else
could
be
that
middle
person
other
than
maybe
the
city
manager's
office
and
and
it
I
don't
know
that
I
don't
know
if
catherine
is
looking
for
that
evidence
to
submit
anywhere.
I
think
it's
from
what
I
heard
her
say.
P
It
was
for
her
own
validation
that
this
this,
what
you
know
this
report
should
have
been
taken.
It
wasn't
taken
and
that
she,
and
because
it
wasn't
taken
and-
and
you
know-
maybe
listen-
I
don't
know
all
the
details-
I'm
trying
to
make
the
best
kind
of
recommendation
based
on
what
I've
heard.
Catherine
say
and
lieutenant
donahue
also
said
that
this
was
the
path
that
he
would
take.
P
So
I'm
not
sure
what
other
path
that
we
could
allow
for
this
to
go
through,
so
that
catherine
could
also
view
that
video
I'm
guessing,
because
the
ipa
has
access
to
videos
that
she
could
view
it
and
sounds
like
a
third
person
could
be
in
the
room.
Viewing
that.
If
I,
if
I
heard
that
correctly-
and
I
think
that
would
that
may
be
enough-
I
don't
know
that's
up
to
catherine
to
decide.
K
K
We
now
think
that
that
you
need
to
go
back
and
you
know
and
file
on
that
crime,
and
then
that
way
we
can
come
back
and
say:
hey
good,
a
crime
was
committed,
we
can
release
the
video
and
catherine
can
look
at
it
and
the
rest
of
the
public
doesn't
have
to
see
it.
The
ipa
just
doesn't
have
that
authority,
and
so,
regardless
of
us
asking
them
to
do
it
or
not,
it
doesn't
matter,
they
don't
have
that
authority.
K
We
have
the
ability
here
today
to
say
you
know
what
we're
going
to
show
you,
the
video,
but
an
unfortunate
circumstance
that
that
would
would
mean
everybody
else
gets
to
watch
the
video
as
well,
and
we've
heard
that
from
her
and
I'll
ask
catherine
to
to
maybe
reiterate
that,
just
to
clarify
kathryn
you,
you
don't
want
anybody
else
to
see
this
video
correct
like.
If
we.
If
we
were
to
vote
today
and
say
we
will,
let
you
see
the
video
but
a
circumstance.
K
L
K
K
Thus,
the
direction
that
I
think
that
we
are
going,
which
I
can
support,
is
trying
the
only
other
best
opportunity,
then,
is
trying
to
determine
you
know:
can
we
re-look
at
this
and
see
if
a
crime
was
committed
and
if
it
was
then
catherine
can
get
the
right
to
see
the
video
and
nobody
else
has
to
see
it.
I'm
just
not
very
optimistic
about
that
outcome.
K
Based
on
what
I've
heard
from
lieutenant
donahue
is
that
the
the
family
violence
unit
has
looked
at
this
and
for
whatever
reason
deemed
that
that
a
crime
was
not
committed.
We
don't
know
this,
we're
not
right.
I
don't
know
what
either
is
to
their
determination
of
that,
but
the
district
attorney's
office
looked
at
it
as
well
and
they
deemed
there
wasn't
a
crime
committed.
So
I
am.
K
I
am
not
optimistic
that
re-looking
at
it
is
going
to
give
us
a
different
answer,
but
I'm
completely
comfortable
with
with
the
direction
and
saying
that
we
want
our
police
department
to
look
at
it
again
and
and
then
hopefully
we
get
a
different
answer.
If
not,
though,
I'm
I'm
concerned
that
we're
going
to
come
back
with
the
same
dilemma,
which
is
you
know
that
there's
a
deemed
no
crime
committed
and
then
we
have
to
make
a
decision.
K
L
L
That
is
one
of
the
things
that
I
brought
up
to
my
advocates
attention
prior
when
all
this
was
occurring.
Is
that
they're
saying
there
is
no
tro.
The
officer
says
I
have
no
tro.
I
have
evidence
in
my
hand
and
he's
denying
me
that
there
is
one
and
I'm
still
hearing
it
from
officer
donahoe,
that
there
is
no
tro
in
place.
However,
I
sent
just
a
screenshot
now
to
tony
and
I
think
it
was
forwarded
to
norma
that
there
I
have
had
this
tro
since
the
summer
of
2019..
L
It
has
been
extended
multiple
times
in
october
and
then
in
the
winter
and
then
in
the
spring,
and
then
I
had
my
hearing
finally
done
in
the
summer
of
2020..
The
event
that
took
place
prior
to
my
dvro
five-year
restraining
order
was
just
weeks
before
my
hearing
and
I
had
always
been
covered.
The
problem
is,
is
I've
had
so
many
extensions
to
this
tro?
It's
nauseating.
I
have
not
had
any
conclusion.
Even
to
my
court
case.
I've
been
in
the
courts
for
three
years.
L
I
have
paid
enormous
amounts
of
money
already
in
the
courts
and
do
not
want
to
have
to
access
me
sorry,
my
toddler.
He
saw
that
I
had
some
things
written
down,
so
it's
that
I
have
I'm
sorry.
I
lost
my
train
of
thought,
but
you
know
the
tros
are
in
place.
I
could
prove
it
right
now.
I
can
prove
the
purchases
right
now.
L
I
don't
know
how
I'm
supposed
to
prove
this,
especially
when
they
can't
access
the
information,
and
I
have
given
this
information
to
many
different
people
multiple
times
I've,
given
it
to
the
ipa
I've,
given
it
to
the
police
officers.
I
had
it
in
hand
with
the
police
officers
the
day
he
refused
my
report.
I
took
it
with
me
to
the
police
station
to
do
my
other
to
do
the
report
in
person
with
my
advocate.
My
advocate
has
copies
of
my
tros
and
it
has
been
given
to
the
d.a
multiple
times
for
multiple
violations.
K
Yeah,
I
thank
you.
I
just
you
know.
I
think
my
main
concerns
again
are
that
we
don't
have
any
authority
within
this
body,
as
the
rules
committee
to
determine
whether
or
not
a
crime
was
committed,
regardless
of
right.
The
evidence
we
just
we
don't
have
that
ability
to
determine
that
we
we
can
make
a
decision
as
whether
or
not
we
want
to
release
the
video
to
the
public
or
not,
but
we
don't.
K
We
don't
have
the
ability
to
determine
a
crime,
and
so
I
I
you
know,
I
understand,
and
I
hear
catherine's
plea
it's
just
not
within
our
our
ability
to
to
determine
that.
You
know
if
we
make
the
decision
today
or
whenever
to
release
the
video,
it's
gonna
be
releasing
it
to
everybody
or
or
nobody
unless
a
crime
is
determined,
but
we
just
we
don't
we
don't
get
that
ability
to
make
that
decision.
Unfor.
Unfortunately,
but
that's
that's
not
our
right,
that's
not
what
we
can
we
can
do.
We
don't
have
that
authority.
N
We're
going
to
look
at
whether
or
not
the
tro
was
in
effect,
which
I
believe
it
was
based
on
what
she's
saying
and
then
whether
or
not
what
was
purchased
at
the
time
falls
under
that
trm.
So
we
have
to
look
at
that
now.
This
does
take
time,
and
I
know
you
want
us
to
come
back
next
week
and
talk
about
this,
and
I
know
council
member
arenas.
You
mentioned
that
we
don't
want
to
extend
this
any
longer
than
we
have
to,
and
I
totally
agree
with
that,
but
I
want
to
do
a
thorough
investigation.
N
I
don't
want
to
be
time,
limited
we've
already
lost
wednesday
right
and
we've
got
maybe
thursday
friday
monday
tuesday.
So
that's
four
days
and
detectives,
you
know
the
detective
assigned
to
the
case
is
only
going
to
work
three
of
those
four
days,
so
I
want
to
make
sure
we
do
a
thorough
investigation.
N
If
we
put
it
on
the
calendar
for
next
week,
we
can
try
to
do
that,
but
would
we
be
able
to
communicate
and
say,
hey
we
weren't
able
to
get
it
through
the
da's
office
by
then
we're
subs,
we're
subject
to
their
calendar
and
their
ability
availability
as
well
they're.
Another
agency
that
we
can't
control
is
there
a
way
that
we're
able
to
make
sure
that
we
do
this
right
and
I'm
going
to
assume
that
the
committee
doesn't
want
to
just
hear
from
our
agency
and
say
yeah,
there's
not
enough
here
to
file.
N
P
P
What
went
wrong
and
in
in
hopes
that
if
there
was
something
that
we
could
do
to
improve
our
systems,
that
I
will
work
on
that
and-
and
I
just
want
to
thank
you
for
for
not
giving
up
and
and
standing
up
for
yourself
and
advocating
for
yourself.
Thank
you
for
for
doing
that.
It
shows
the
kind
of
strength
that
you
have
as
as
a
woman
and
as
a
survivor.
So
thank
you.
P
B
Okay,
well,
we
have
a
motion
and
a
second
on
the
and
again
catherine.
I
know
it's
been
stated,
but
first
of
all
we
apologize
for
putting
you
through
this
this
process.
I
know
it's
been
very
painful
but
work.
You
know
I
commit
to
you
that
we're
gonna
do
everything
in
our
power
to
see
that
your
your
desires
are
met.
So
thank
you
for
your
patience
and
understanding.
P
A
B
B
A
F
May
go
in
great
great
thank
you
that
was
incredibly
intense
and
good,
and
thanks
a
lot
for
everyone's
work
on
that
issue.
Maybe
may
not
be
legal
precedence
we'll
be
working
towards,
but
maybe
good
case
study
ideas
for
the
future
of
good
practices
around
how
to
deal
with
domestic
violence
issues
as
a
community.
Good
luck
to
ourselves.
Thank
you
for
redistricting
items,
I'm
very
interested
in
that
you
guys
that
can
really
facilitate.
F
I
mean
everyone's
really
just
a
bit
upset
about
how
to
talk
about
the
unity
and
community
maps,
and
I
hope
this
city
council,
you
can
know
how
to
facilitate
well
everyone's
point
of
view
and
feelings,
and-
and
it's
my
hope
that
the
people
the
community
map,
I
mean,
I
really
feel
the
community
map.
People
are
the
reason
part
of
the
reason
why
they're
calling
union
map
is
they're,
trying
to
honestly
reach
out
and
say
you
know,
we
we've
helped
held
these
positions
for
a
long
time.
F
We
don't
quite
know
how
to
connect
with
a
majority
of
a
portion
of
the
community
that
feels
differently.
That
has
always
felt
differently
than
we
do.
Let's
make
this
a
time
to
learn,
to
connect
with
each
other
and
really
talk
about
it
and
and
become
a
whole
community,
a
whole
community
process,
and
I
think
that's
why
they're
calling
the
unity
maps,
of
course,
from
that
they
have
their
very
own
personal,
deep
beliefs
about
what's
good,
and
you
know
good
luck,
how
we
can
do
that.
F
G
Paul
soto
from
the
horseshoe
for
three
years,
I've
been
on
this
topic.
I
can
teach
classes
on
redline
I
have
santa
rosa
contacting
public
defender's
office
from
santa
rosa
is
contacting
me
to
inform
members
of
their
commissions
on
redlining,
because
they've
seen
my
videos
on
facebook,
so
I'm
actually
being
consulted
for
growing
up
in
d11.
G
How
in
the
hell,
are
you
going
to
get
the
lowest
of
the
lowest
designation
adjacent
to
the
most
prominent?
How
because
willa
glenn
wanted
to
ensure
that
they
were
going
to
get
all
the
resources
that
they
wanted?
You
know
why,
because
they
annexed
into
city
of
san
jose
eight
months
prior
to
those
it's
in
the
documents.
I
want
on
record
every
single
council
member
to
be
able
to
state
explicitly
on
record
that
they
have
read
every
single
redlining
document.
G
First,
before
you
go
making
decisions
as
to
whether
or
not
you're
going
to
claim
the
legitimacy
of
these
maps,
all
these
maps
they're
not
legitimate.
I'm
telling
you
right
now.
You
guys
go
ahead
and
do
what
you're
going
to
do.
There's
going
to
be
those
they're
going
to
be
challenged
in
court.
I
can
tell
you
that
and
guarantee
that
right
now,
because
you
have
you-
have
willowband
d6
absorbing
the
horseshoe,
the
very
barrio
that
they
had
redlined
and
neglected
and
ignored,
which
I
was
forced
to
grow
up
in
now.
D
Okay,
good,
I
guess
it
says,
meeting
schedules
but
everybody's
talking
about
redlining,
okay,
well,
the
redlining
yeah,
so
yeah,
that's
what
I
noticed
when
I
went
through.
I
had
to
go
to
walmart
and
rode
my
bicycle
down
and
there's
280,
and
you
know
it's
where
we
put
the
freeways
you
know
it's.
We
know
that
there's
environmental
racism
and
that's
what's
happening
in
my
neighborhood.
You
know
we're
on
the
tracks.
You
know
I
always
say
I'm
on
the
thorn
side
of
the
rose
garden
and-
and
nobody
cares
about
this
part
of
of
the
rose
garden.
D
Even
my
neighborhood
association
has
been
rude,
shasta
hancher
park,
neighborhood
association
has
been
rude
to
me
and
you
know,
and
it's
like
you
know,
they
don't
care
about
this
side
of
the
town
and
you
know
and
I'm
keeping
on
trying
to
fix
this
side
of
the
town.
And
it's
it's
not
easy,
and
it's
you
know
that
this
has
been
the
problem,
the
whole
time
I've
been
here.
You
know
coming
into
this
part,
you
know
having
a
a
diesel
bus
depot.
D
You
know,
because
I've
been
a
stay-at-home
mother,
we
only
had
one
salary
and
we,
you
know,
bought
a
property
in
like
the
thorn
side
of
the
rose
garden,
and
you
know
it's
been,
it
was
hell,
you
know
dealing
with
the
corporation
and
then
you
know
that's
where
the
corporations
and
then
you're
putting
a
corporation
on
our
side
of
the
block.
You
know
it's
bad
enough.
It
was
on
the
east
side
of
stockton.
Avenue
was
all
the
commercial
and
our
side
was
rezoned
to
go
residential,
and
so
we
were
able
to
buy
this
old
bar.
D
You
know
as
a
real
fixer-upper,
but
you
know
we
had
to
deal
with
the
royal
coach
tours
harassing
us,
because
I
was
dealing
with
their
idling
of
their
diesel
engine
diesel
toxic
air
contaminant,
which
our
mayor
mayor
le
carter
when
he
was
running
first
told
him
about
diesel.
He
didn't
even
know
about
diesel.
The
diesel
was
a
toxic
air
contaminant.
So
this
is
the
you
know.
D
A
B
K
B
G
She
has
a
letter
in
there
regarding
heights
and
the
kind
of
the
kind
of
zoning
laws
that
she
would
like
to
see
installed
within
on
lincoln
avenue,
and
I
I
cannot
express
enough
gratitude
for
her
advocacy
and
her
participation
in
civic
matters
when
she
showed
up
to
the
december
13
2019
meeting
with
steve,
dr
stephen
petey,
and
with
respect
to
to
the
devil
in
silicon
valley
she
came
in
and
she
this
is.
This
is
a
senora.
G
This
is
this
is
an
elder
white
woman
coming
in
there
and
speaking
respectfully
about
the
barrio
called
the
horseshoe
in
that
meeting,
and
so
when
I
saw
that-
and
I
heard
her
do
that-
I
was
like
you
know
what
this
this
lady.
She
she
knows
what
time
it
is.
It
doesn't
matter
what
her
opinion
is
of
this
particular
area.
She
knows
what
it
means
to
the
people
that
actually
live
in
it
and
she
deferred
to
that.
F
The
goal
of
all
this
is
how
it
can
really
help
people
who
really
need
the
help
and
that's
low-income
people,
and
I
really
hope,
that's
that's
our
future
plans
of
how
we
talk
about
equity.
We
all
we
all
can
be
have
benefits
from
equity,
but
it
to
serve
low-income
people
with
equity
concerns
and
needs
that,
hopefully,
can
be
a
goal
that
we
always
try
to
consider
and
focus
on
how
we
talk
about
equity
for
our
future.
F
D
Thank
you
for
being
so
honest
right
anyway,
yeah.
So
here's
my
my
two
minutes.
Well,
I
was
thinking
about
gene
dresden's
letter
that
paul
was
referencing
and
that
she
was
talking
about
heights
and
willow
glenn,
and
here
you
know
we
have
here
and
on
stockton
and
sheila
a
proposed
five-story
build.
You
know,
hotel
with
an
underground
garage
is
what's
proposed
that
meets
the
requirements
of
the
the
general
plan
and
that's
the
problem.
It
is
the
general
plan
that
was
changed
without
letting
us
know,
but
getting
back
to
the
height
issue.
D
Staying
on
topic
was
that
you
know
even
the
what
is
it
called
the
the
well.
It
was
looked
at
by
the
historic,
the
historic,
whatever
the
committee,
and
said
that
it
was
too
massive
and
they
said
it
was
too
massive.
So
you
know
whether
or
not
that
holds
any
power.
You
know
the
commission,
the
historic
landmark
commission
said
it
was
too
massive.
Will
it
be
changed?
D
You
know
that's
a
question
and
the
thing
is
like
you
know:
deb
davis
is
is
complaining
right
now
about
you,
know,
ssb9
and
and
that
we
need
to
have
local
control
of
what
goes
into
our
neighborhood
and
the
problem
that
she
sees
is
noise
and
pollution
coming
into
our
neighborhoods
from
having
more
density.
But
those
issues
can
be
addressed,
our
noise
and
pollution
and
that's
what
we
haven't
been
addressing
and
and
when
we
have
this
hotel
with
its
noise
and
pollution.
You
know
which
is
definitely
going
to
be
there.
D
You
know,
there's
no
concern
about
that.
You
know
and
that
that's
been
the
problem.
There
is
noise
and
pollution.
That's
going
to
come
from
a
five-story
hotel,
you
know
with
80
rooms
and
60
parking
spots
and
doordash
and
all
the
things
back
up,
beepers
everything
noise.
You
know
that's
going
to
be
there,
and
so
you
know
we
don't
have
a
comprehensive
noise
ordinance
and
those
things
can
be
fixed.
You
know
we
could
have
quality
of
life
as
a
priority
in
our
city
and
instead
of
saying
we
don't
want
density.
K
B
K
K
Okay,
looking
on
on
on
the
what's
attached,
what
was
provided
to
us
it,
I
I
I
didn't
see
one
from
gene
dress
and
I
know
that
both
paul
and
tessa
referenced
one,
and
so
I
was
just
curious.
If
maybe
I
was
missing
something
from
from
the
public
record,
and
if
I
was
I
was
hoping
I
could
see
it,
but
in
this
case
I
guess
what
we
have
available
to
us.
K
B
A
B
F
Hi
claire
here
we're
here,
can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
boy,
you
know
I'm
in
a
weird
place
and
it's
doing
something
weird
to
my
phone.
So
hopefully
you
can
hear
me.
I
have
got
a
question.
I
want
to
respect
what
council
person
for
alice
just
asked,
and
then
we
try
to
stick
to
the
topic
point
so
ask
yourselves:
you
have
a
whole
bun
on
the
consent.
You
have
kind
of
your
explanations
of
how
you've
been
working,
the
the
the
agenda
calendars
according
to
good
sunshine,
ordinance,
ideas.
F
F
If
there's,
if
so
desired,
you
know
something
like
that.
A
little
preface
that,
because
there's
a
consistent
pattern
that
you're
not
allowing
public
comment
for
items
that
should
be
allowed
public
comment.
You
know
the
city
manager's
report,
the
closed
session
report
and
even
orders
of
the
day
that
could
have
a
small
amount
of
time
for
the
public
that
the
mayor
only
does
that
as
at
his
discretion,
rather
than
make
it
a
regular
process.
So
this
stuff
we're
all
trying
to
work
on,
and
hopefully
we
can
talk
about
this
more
in
the
following
months.
Thanks.
G
Yeah
paul
from
the
horseshoe
I
agree
with
I
mean
we've
been
doing
this
blair,
both
blair
and
I
have
been
constantly
on
the
process
itself,
because
we
know
what
democracy
is:
okay,
you're,
the
ones
legislating,
because
you
exercise
power
that
is
endowed
in
you
by
the
consent
of
the
government,
we're
the
government.
So
we
give
you
consent,
you
don't
tell
us
what
is
acceptable,
what's
not
acceptable.
What's
out
of
order,
what's
not
out
of
order,
you
don't
dictate
that
to
us.
G
We
tell
you
what
we
want
in
our
communities,
especially,
I
would
listen
most
to
the
people
that
are
most
active
and
consistent
three
years
unless
I'm
being
locked
up
by
some
police
department
or
somebody
calling
probation
unless
that's
happening.
I
ain't
going
nowhere
and
so
that
that
has
happened
a
couple
of
times
with
respect
to
my
participation
in
these
meetings,
I've
been
locked
up
twice.
G
My
freedom
has
been
taken
from
me
because
of
my
participation
in
these
meetings,
because
people
just
don't
like
what
I
have
to
say
or
they
don't
like
the
way
I
say
it
or
they
don't
like
the
way.
I
approach
it
honestly,
I
don't
care
about
paul,
cyrus,
rap
davis.
It
has
everything
to
do
with
it,
because
the
open
government
document
that
was
produced
by
sarah
zarate,
that
is,
that
is
the
topic.
It
may
be.
Tangi
gentle,
but
I'll
bring
it
to
the
center.
G
G
There
are
people
on
record
right
now
that
stated
that
five
years
ago-
and
these
are
heads
of
nonprofits
five
years
ago-
they
knew
and
they
were
already
advocating
for
the
facilitation
of
that
150
million
google
deal.
I
have
on
record
that
they
did
that,
but
it's
not
showing
up
and
that's
what
sarah
zarat
is
trying
to
correct
she's,
trying
to
correct
the
fact
that
there
is
deficiencies
and
who
has
access
to
power,
and
it's
these
non-profits
that
have
access.
A
B
I
Yes,
thank
you
chair
lee
wilcox
assistant
city
manager.
We
did
two
early
consideration
forms
because
of
the
holiday
break.
We
marked
both
of
those
as
we
needed
additional
time,
given
the
interdepartmental
nature
of
both
of
those
requests.
So
we
respectfully
request
the
rules
committee
defer
both
of
those
items
to
next
week
and
we
will
have
new
early
consideration
forms
done
by
them.
B
N
B
F
Hi
thanks
claire
here
it
was
a
really
interesting
council
meeting
yesterday,
I
think
you
know
I
was
walking
around
berkeley
actually
and
just
listening
to
a
san
jose
council
meeting
and
I
it
dawned
on
me.
You
know
what
I
tried
to
say
earlier.
I
think
a
really
important
important
way
to
look
at
it.
I
don't
know
how
accurate
it
is,
but
it
feels
good
to
figure
out
saying.
Is
that
equity,
the
concepts
of
equity?
F
F
F
G
Thank
you
from
the
horseshoe.
It
explicitly
states
racial
equity,
yes
on
the
agenda
items,
so
if
you
can
check
and
maybe
pull
pull
up,
pull
the
homeboy
back,
so
we
can
speak
on
those
issues
so
from
the
horseshoe
look,
I
was
in
the
room
when
the
racial
equity
study
session
occurred
after
stephen
petey's
delivery
on
what
happened
here
in
his
articulation
of
devil
and
silicon
valley.
G
So
I
was
there
when
the
topic
when
it
was
an
idea
when
the
office
of
racial
equity
was
just
an
idea
in
people's
minds.
I
was
there
when
the
when
the,
when
the
budget
of
it
was
being
spoken
up.
I
was
there
contributing
to
the
conversation
when
its
implementation
was
there.
I
was
at
every
single
one
of
these
meetings,
demanding
not
asking
but
demanding
that
a
racial
equity
definition
be
placed
so
that
there
is
an
objective
way
by
which
to
allocate
budgets
and
I
have
been
denied
for
two
years.
G
Two
years
I
have
been
denied
and
if
there
is
anybody
that
is
worthy
of
being
answered
to
as
a
citizen
in
this
city,
it
is
a
human
being
that
experienced
being
relegated
to
a
red
line
district,
the
lowest
classification
that
you
can
find.
Why
is
it
that
the
person
that
was
experiencing
the
lowest
classification
d11
was
nowhere
sought
out
by
any
of
these
organizations
la
rasa,
historical
society?
Those
bottles
didn't
want
to
get
nowhere
near
me.
Why?
G
G
D
Yes,
yes,
blair
should
be
able
to
speak
again
because
there
was
a
racial
equity
on
that
agenda.
Vice
mayor
so
anyway,
getting
back
to
neighborhood
services
and
education
is
a
very
important
topic
in
that
you
know
what
is
the
work
plan
for
our
neighborhood
services
and
education
is
very
critical
as
we
go
forward
to
save
the
people.
Like
my
husband
says.
As
a
scientist,
we
have
to
work
on
saving
as
many
people
as
we
can
and
we're
not
doing
that.
We're
not
talking
about
it.
D
That's
how
you
know
when
you
have
an
emergency
like
the
climate
emergency
we
do
have,
then
we
should
be
talking
about
it
all
the
time
and
addressing
it
and
and
you're
not
doing
that.
You're
you're
entertaining
us
you're.
You
know
even
that
whole
how
much
money
we
spent
downtown
for
those
rings
of
of
lights
and
on
and
off,
and
it's
it's
really
actually
very
disturbing
and
distracting,
but
we
spend
millions
on
it
and
what
is
it
called?
It's
called
you
know
bread
and
circuses.
You
know
that.
D
I
forgot
her
name,
she
has
a
funny
name
and
I
wrote
her
an
email,
nothing
back,
because
I
I
was
talking
to
my
farmers
markets,
the
the
people
who
run
their
you
know
their
their
shops
that
have
you
know
food
in
it.
You
know
the
food
trucks
and
how
we
can
green
the
food
trucks,
and
I
wanted
to
get
money
for
them.
We
need
to
get
money
to
green,
our
you
know
green,
our
small
businesses
and
that's
where
I've
been
supporting
already
middlebrooks
eat,
grow.
D
F
Oh
my
gosh,
thank
you
very
much
chappie.
You
know
I
did
not
have
quite
the
focus
that
you
asked
and
I
can.
I
can
provide
that
now.
As
these
are
library
issues
about
equity,
mainly,
I
think
it
can
be
interesting
to
consider
you
know
the
the
good
digital
equity
practices
involved
and
being
worked
on
to
bridge
the
buy
dishes
at
this
time.
If
we
can
practice,
as
always
as
the
ideas
of
open
public
policies
with
the
future
of
digital
equity,.
P
Motion
to
approve
and
chair,
I
just
wanted
to
mention
that
this
is
this:
deferral
is
typically,
we
don't
have
a
meeting
in
january,
but
because
our
our
agendas
were
really
impacted
and
just
full.
We
had
to
create
an
opportunity
for
us
to
really
talk
about
equity
and
give
it
the
attention
that
it
needs
and
the
focus
that
it
needs.
So
that's
will
be
happening
at
nsc
in
january.
G
G
G
The
women
were
sitting
there
vulnerable
and
we
had
to
sit
there
and
watch
our
mother
being
treated
like
that,
and
it
wasn't
on
the
mend
either
because
the
growers,
the
growers,
were
showing
the
husbands
and
the
fathers
that
they
were
impotent
even
in
their
country
to
their
own
families.
Why?
Because
the
schools
were
allowed
to
beat
the
children,
they
were
allowed
to
slap
them
and
shame
them
for
being
mexican
and
the
fathers
were
impotent
to
do
anything
about
it,
anything
about
it.
G
B
D
Okay,
thank
you
yeah.
I
was
just
you
know,
noticing
that
you're
thinking
about
like
stopping
the
the
remote
zoom
meetings,
the
hybrid
meetings
I
didn't.
I
didn't
follow
the
whole
meeting
if
you
discussed
it,
but
I
I'm
really
up
against
I'm
really
against
that
and
I've
been
fighting
for
digital
meetings
to
go
on
forever,
and
I
I
think
that
there
was
a
state
mandate
from
our
wonderful
assemblyman
alex
lee,
who
you
know
required
that
we
keep
on
doing
this,
so
I
hope
we're
going
to
keep
on
doing
our
digital.
D
You
know
democracy,
our
virtual
meetings
and
actually
there's
a
lot
of
problems
in
the
this
hybrid
that
you're
doing
is
not
working
out
for
the
community.
There's,
not
full
disclosure.
You
can't
see
the
faces
of
the
people.
You
can't
go
to
the
even
to
the.
What
is
it
called
when
you
go
to
see
the
transcription?
It
just
says:
county
chamber,
city
chambers,
so
you
don't
know
who's
talking,
and
I
love
that
you
know.
Even
you
know
like
in
this
meeting.
D
You
know,
maybe
more
so
with
the
hybrid,
because
we
can't
see
each
other,
and
you
know
we
can't
see
the
faces
of
the
people.
We
don't
even
know
who's
talking.
I
recognize
some
of
the
voices,
but
that's
just
because
I've
been
listening
for
a
long
time.
Most
people
won't-
and
you
know
so
in
it,
even
in
this
meeting
that
we
just
had
with
catherine,
I
mean
it
was
just
interesting
that
even
it
was
brought
to
having
to
be
brought
to
rules.
How
did
it
even
get
to
rules?
D
F
Hi,
thank
you
blair
here.
Thanks
for
the
meeting
today
it
was
a
hopeful
meeting.
It
was
also
hopeful
that
I
felt
yesterday
mayor
licardo,
he's
kind
of
he's
he's
softened
his
tough
guy
position
on
the
future
of
the
alpr
stuff.
He
wants
it
to
be
more
nuanced.
It
sounds
like
that's
important.
You
know
I
mean
there
is
with
all
the
new
foreign
5g
going
in
and
the
street
light
technology.
There
is
a
ton
of
new
surveillance
and
technology
we
have
in
our
city
growing
right
now.
F
Aopr
use
may
not
really
be
that
needed.
I
like
this
mobile
ideas
and
it
it's
it's.
It's
a
very
minimal
soft
process
that
we
have
to
consider
for
our
future
and
working
in
tandem
with
other
things.
It
isn't
just
dump
a
ton
of
alpr
stuff
that
doesn't
solve
issues.
It's
a
it's
a
combination
of
things
and
it's
open
public
policies
and
accountability.
F
If
we
talk
about
accountability
and
be
open
about
how
this
is
for
our
you
know,
we
can
apply
to
division,
zero
things.
That's
that's
the
way
we
got
to
be
considering
these
things
more
openly
in
our
future
for
the
city
charter
process.
It
you
know,
if
it's
any
relief,
that
we
could
possibly
go
past
the
december
3rd
deadline
coming
up
because
of
sunshine
audiences
ideas
and
try
to
respect
instead,
brown
act,
ideas
of
december
10th
and
and
and
have
final
papers
come
in
at
that
time.
F
I
think
that
would
be
a
stress
relief
for
all
of
us
and,
of
course,
I
feel
that
we
can
may
need
to
extend
things
passed
into
january
and
into
march
2022
because
of
legal
language
issues
for
the
charter
and
how
that's
going
to
be
on
the
ballot
election
process,
if
that's
applicable.
Hopefully
it
can
help
here,
make
things
easier
to
decide
at
this
time
with
15
seconds
again
through
distancing
issues,
I'm
really
really
for
district
7
being
a
part
of
the
google
village
feature
and
how
we
can
talk
about.
Q
Hi
guys
wow
what
a
meeting
I
just,
I
hope
you
all
are
still
awake,
wow
very
emotional
for
me,
but
I
wanted
to
first
of
all
start
off
thanking
councilwoman
arenas.
Thank
you
so
much.
She
was
the
only
council
person
that
reached
out
to
me
regarding
the
end
house,
family
that
live
at
phase
three
under
the
faa,
and
I
want
to
thank
you
so
much
for
that
sylvia.
It
was
really
wonderful
and
I'm
going
to
be
meeting
with
your
staff
and
bringing
her
out
there.
Q
I
brought
raul's
aid,
their
councilman
paralyse
aid,
everybody
I
brought
there
agrees
some
of
the
porta-potties
need
to
be
moved.
I
I'm
not
understanding
how
people
are
being
treated,
how
I'm
being
treated
being
ignored
every
time.
I
speak
on
this
issue
or
send
an
email
to
rosalind.
I'm
sorry
and
nobody
is-
is
showing
me
any
kind
of
decency
or
respect
on
getting
back
to
me.
Q
Q
A
A
I
I'm
running
out
of
time
in
a
way
of
being
able
to
stay
here,
more
opportunities
have
come
forward
for
a
place
for
me
to
go
stay.
Part
of
me
does
not
want
to
leave
people
out
here
because
I'm
I'm
just
so
concerned
that
the
city
and
the
county
has
abandoned
everyone
out
here.
These
barriers
are
ridiculous.
A
A
It
it
truly
is,
I
I
think,
I'm
doing
my
part
by
bringing
out
more,
not
necessarily
just
the
news
media
there's
a
lot
of
different
film
crews
that
are
doing
documentaries
about
poverty
in
silicon
valley,
and
I
think,
if
they
can
do
the
right
thing
to
get
this
out
to
the
world.
I
I
feel
that
I've
done
my
part.
I
I
just
literally
beat
pavement
how
people
could
be
left
to
die
in
a
field.