►
Description
City of San José, California
Joint meeting of Rules and Open Government / Committee of the Whole of August 11, 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=879998&GUID=0C59457A-78E6-4D23-8577-23BF49CDD67E
A
B
C
E
E
C
A
A
So
I'm
at
a
disadvantage,
and
so
what
I'd
like
to
know
is
if
there's
any
way
to
correct
that
number.
One
number
two:
if,
if
it's
true
that
the
council
has
access
to
these
agendas
prior
to
these
meetings,
but
the
public
does
not
I'd
like
that
question
answered
and
also,
if
I
can
have
permission
to
speak
on
the
previous
item,
considering
that
was
just
a
couple
minutes
late.
Thank.
A
Ahead:
okay,
all
right,
it
won't
even
take
that
much.
But
with
regard
to
the
question
is
the
request
is
that
if
there's
going
to
be
a
time
sensitive
on
august
17th
for
the
item
that
district
six
is
bringing
up
with
respect
to
the
opposition
to
opportunity
housing,
I
got
like
20
people
that
want
to
come
in,
and
so
what
they
asked
for
is
if
I
can
get
a
a
time,
sensitive
request
met
in
order
to
accommodate
those
20
people
speaking
about
redlining.
C
D
Yes,
we
we
post
them
as
soon
as
they're
complete.
What
happened.
The
agenda
for
next
week
will
be,
is
posted
for
from
last
week's
agenda,
but
any
edits
that
are
made
this
morning
are
done.
We
try
to
get
them
done.
You
know
as
soon
as
we
can,
but
like
today,
the
agendas
went
out
at
noon.
So
that's
a
couple
hours
early.
D
Occasionally
the
edits
are
really
late
and
we
get
them
done
just
before
one
o'clock,
so
they
may
not
post
until
just
after
one
o'clock,
the
two-week
agenda
is
generated
yesterday
for
review
from
our
staff
attorney
staff
and
then
reviewed
again
this
morning
with
the
department
heads
in
the
city
manager's
office,
edits
are
often
made
at
that
time
to
move
things
around,
so
we
don't
have
them
done
until
just
before
this
meeting
in
other
cities,
they
don't
a
lot
of
them.
Don't
have
a
rules
committee
where
they're
reviewed
at
all.
They
just
get
posted.
C
G
G
When
you
first
put
on
an
agenda
maybe
a
week
or
two
ahead
of
time,
you
could
give
it
a
green
light
and
it
does
go
through
modifications
within
a
week
or
two
week
period
and
when
it
starts
to
go
through
modifications,
you
can
put
it
a
yellow
light
or
a
yellow
dot.
Next
to
it,
and
then,
when
in
the
last
72
hours,
if
changes
are
made,
you
can
put
a
red
light,
a
red
light.
G
D
D
C
A
A
Is
it
if
it
is
what
that
time
is
and
if
it's
not
I'm,
making
a
formal
request
now,
if
we
could,
please
have
that
time
sensitive
to
like
maybe
in
the
afternoon,
okay,
with
respect
to
the
public
record,
I'd
really
like
to
like
for
there
to
be
a
conversation
around
these.
These
memos
that
I
mean
these
letters
that
blair
beakman
is
submitting.
A
These
are
very
well
thought
out
letters
talking
about
surveillance
and
talking
about
the
collection
of
data,
to
think
that
google
is
just
gonna
come
in
and
no
we're
not
gonna
be
surveilling
the
area
we're
not
going
to
be
collecting
all
of
this
data.
We're
not
going
to
put
like
a
like
a
net
over
the
city
and
collect
as
much
as
we
can
on
people's
behaviors
thoughts.
What
time
they
go
to
the
bathroom
I
mean
the
phones
are
on
all
the
time
I
mean
haven't.
A
You
noticed
that
when
you
like,
say,
for
instance,
you're
just
having
a
conversation
with
somebody
right
and
then
all
of
a
sudden
you're
scrolling
through
facebook
or
you're,
going
here
all
of
a
sudden
things
that
are,
I
mean,
accurate,
accurately,
assessing
or
giving
like
a
judgment
on
what
it
is
that
you
were
just
talking
about.
They'll
start
coming
up,
so
that
means
the
mics
are
on
all
the
time
you
know,
and
so
we're
already
being
monitored
on
that
level.
A
G
All
right,
thank
you
thanks
a
lot
for
paul's
words,
you
know,
I
think,
we're
living
in
a
time
that
we're
really
supposed
to
be
apathetic
towards
what
our
surveillance
is,
and
I
know
what
our
technology
is
all
around
us.
I'm
keep
saying
we
are
at
a
time
that
we
can
be
active
with
our
surveillance
and
technology
in
our
community,
and
that
is
exciting,
and
that
is
hopeful,
and
I
just
wish.
I
feel
that
is
the
process
to
help
spark
the
future
of
the
democratic
process
for
local
communities,
and
I
think
it's.
G
I
think
it
can
do
some
really
really
important
work.
My
the
reason
of
my
letters
was
to
comment
that
the
measure
t
board
is
looking
for
ways
to
open
a
more.
I
don't
know
they
want
a
more
transparent
process
for
themselves
and
to
offer
clarity
and
offer
more
to
find
ways
to
invite
the
community
and
public
more
they've
been
working
on
this
for
a
few
months
now.
I
think
the
charter
commission
process
should
be
giving
them
good
some
good
ideas
as
what
the
charter
commission
process
should
be.
G
It
should
be
a
community
process
to
build
our
future
practices
of
a
community
and
they're
doing
that
it
sounds
like
they're
putting
that
together
now
so
good
for
them.
I
hope
the
measure
key
board
can
look
at
what
they're
doing
and
I
try
to
suggest.
You
know
how
the
aclu
surveillance
and
technology
ordinance.
It
serves
a
lot
of
purposes
and
a
lot
of
functions.
It
can
help
in
a
lot
of
ways
with
the
measure
g
process.
It
can
help
with
the
reimagine
and
equity
board
right
now.
G
What
they're,
trying
to
create
for
all
sides
it
gives,
can
give
good
guidelines
and
legal
precedence
in
how
to
navigate.
You
know
community,
having
more
of
a
voice
in
the
future
of
our
of
our
day-to-day
affairs
and
not
just
dictates
of
government
we're
all
learning
those
practices
now:
surveillance
and
technology
ordinance
things
can
help
with
that.
Good
luck!
How
we
do
that!
Thank
you.
C
B
B
D
C
D
Good
afternoon,
everyone
vince
rocha
the
senior
director
of
housing
and
community
development.
With
the
silicon
valley
leadership
group,
we
have
endorsed
sb,
9
and
10
as
part
of
a
broader
housing
package
brought
forth
by
the
senate
leadership
to
make
sure
that
california
can
be
a
more
affordable
and
equitable
place
to
live.
D
D
C
D
Okay,
good,
yes,
I
live
in
district
three
and
it's
my
open
expectation
that
this
memo
will
have
unanimous
support
from
all
members
of
the
rules
and
governance
committee
today
and
for
mayor
le
cardo
and
every
member
of
the
city
council
next
week.
It's
inconceivable
that
any
elected
representative
of
san
jose
would
be
willing
to
passively
sit
by
and
allow
the
state
of
california
to
dictate
where
we
build
housing
and
what
types
of
housing
we
build
at
the
very
least
residents
deserve
to
know
where
their
council
members
stand
on
local
control.
Please
send.
C
D
Hello
thanks
for
letting
me
speak
for
the
record.
My
name
is
brian
prescott.
I
live
in
downtown
san
jose
and
I
respectfully
urge
you
to
vote
no
on
this
item
and
to
decline
to
take
a
position
on
sb9
and
10..
First
of
all,
I'd
point
out
that
the
democratic
party
of
santa
clara
county
has
endorsed
a
position
of
support
on
these
bills
and
we
should
not
break
with
them.
Affordable
housing
is
a
matter
of
statewide
concern
and
we
should
be
standing
with
our
colleagues
and
certainly
not
standing
against
them.
D
Also,
there's
misprint
information
in
the
memo
proposing
this
motion,
so
sp9
would
not
allow
eight
units
that
on
lots
that
currently
allow
one
at
most,
it
would
be
allowing
four
where
we
currently
allow
three
and
that
kind
of
fear,
uncertainty
and
doubt
should
not
be
the
business
of
this
committee.
Sp-10
is
actually
a
great
fit
for
our
current
general
plan
because
it
would
make
it
easier
for
us
to
op
zone
near
transit,
which
is
like
our
favorite
thing
to
do
so.
It's
pro
transit
urban
villages
as
a
resident
of
san
jose.
C
D
Hi,
thank
you.
This
is
kelly
snyder.
I
am
a
resident
and
a
homeowner
in
district
6..
I
agree
with
the
previous
speaker.
I
think
that
councilmember
davis's
memo
not
only
has
a
lot
of
wrong
aspects
to
it,
but
it
is
intentionally
using
alarmist
and
misleading
language.
Using
a
word
like
strangling
or
murky
in
a
policy
discussion
is
really
offensive.
D
Full
stop!
It's
our
moral
obligation
to
prioritize
responses
to
things
that
threaten
our
lives
like
police,
brutality
or
domestic
violence,
and
that's
totally
different
from
a
months
and
years
long
engagement
to
try
and
change
some
restrictive
zoning
policies.
So
I
think
that's
misleading.
I
strongly
support
sb9
and
sb10,
I'm
a
home
owner
in
san
jose,
and
I
encourage
the
council
not
to
take
this
up
and
to
deny
the
chance
for
this
to
go
to
council
for
a
full
discussion.
Thank
you.
D
Can
you
hear
me?
Yes,
okay,
I
unmuted
twice
and
I
guess
it
didn't
work.
My
name
is
suzanne
moroney.
I
live
in
district
three,
I'm
a
homeowner.
I've
lived
here
all
my
life
and
I
completely
support
this
memo.
I
am
so
opposed
to
sb,
9
and
10..
I
want
local
control.
What
decisions
we
make
about
our
housing
should
be
on
the
city
level,
not
on
the
state
level
and
100
percent
support
this
memo.
Thank
you.
D
D
I
implore
you
who
are
on
this
council
on
this
committee
to
vote
yes
and
share
that
view
as
a
san
jose
resident.
I
I
expect
my
my
elected
city
of
representatives
and
follow
residents
to
be
able
to
set
our
own
local
policies
for
our
city
as
elected
officials,
please
do
not
give
your
policy-making
responsibilities
to
reps
from
san
francisco,
los
angeles
orange
county
and
far
beyond,
who
have
no
knowledge
of
san
jose
and
its
unique
needs.
Thank
you.
So
much
for
listening.
C
G
Said
loney
and
I
live
in
district
2..
I'm
asking
you
to
vote
today
to
place
council
member
davis's
memo
on
the
city
of
council
agenda.
This
will
allow
our
city,
council
and
mayor
to
inform
the
state
of
california
not
to
dictate
where
san
jose
will
build
housing
and
what
types
of
housing
we
build
at
the
very
least
residents
deserve
to
know
where
their
council
member
stands
on
local
control.
Again,
I'm
urging
you
to
please
send
this
to
the
city
council.
We
deserve
to
know
what
our
council
members
are.
Thank
you
very
much.
A
Yeah
yeah
paul
soto
from
the
horseshoe.
I
grew
up
with
redlining,
I'm
a
victim
of
redline,
okay
and
that
needs
to
be
centered.
In
this
conversation,
if
this
city
is
serious
about
equity,
here's
your
chance,
I'm
looking
forward
to
this
conversation,
I'm
looking
forward
to
this
discussion-
and
I
would
reference
everybody
on
this
on
this
call
to
listen
to
what
councilwoman
arenas
the
way
she
checked,
dev
davis,
when
she
wanted
to
get
that
historical
landmark
status
for
those
houses
in
the
shield
district
check
that
video.
A
It's
only
a
couple
weeks
old
I've
used
it
in
groups
that
I've
held
I'm
going
to
have
20
students
that
are
going
to
come
here
from
two
different
universities,
because
they
understand
redlining.
I've
been
educating
people
about
redlining
and
now
they're
ready
and
now
they're
going
to
come
up
because
they're
educated
about
it,
they're
educated
about
chicano
history,
they're
educated
about
the
historical
injustices
that
flowed
from
that
particular
district.
It's
offensive
that
dev
davis
even
wants
to
has
the
audacity
to
run
for
mayor
from
her
red.
C
D
Hi,
I'm
brenda
san
jose
resident.
I'm
urging
you
to
send
this
memo
to
the
city
council.
So
please
vote.
Yes,
dozens
of
cities
throughout
the
state
are
asserting
their
rights
to
local
control
and
it's
important
that
san
jose
do
the
same.
Palo
alto
is
doing
it
los
gatos
los
altos.
Some
of
these
other
cities
around
the
bay
area
are
also
doing
it.
This
is
not
only
very
important.
It's
very
time.
Sensitive
sb9
and
ted
could
become
law
any
day
now.
D
D
D
Can
you
hear
me
loud
and
clear
hi?
My
name
is
bud
noren
and
I
live
in
district
3..
I
support
deb
davis
memorandum
in
opposition
to
senate
bills.
Nine
and
ten,
I'm
aware
of
san
jose's
acute
need
for
affordable
housing,
but
I
don't
believe
these
bills
will
result
in
additional
housing
that
will
be
affordable
developers
will
seize
the
lowest
hanging,
fruit,
meaning
the
least
expensive
housing
in
san
jose,
which
is
currently
occupied
by
low-income
occupants,
and
then
without
any
constraints.
D
I
think
what
they'll
build
will
be
a
complex
of
market
rate,
housing,
there's
nothing
in
these
bills
that
require
the
new
construction
to
be
affordable.
So
why
would
they
build
anything
other
than
high
rent
units
that
create
the
most
profit,
so
the
end
result
would
be
the
displacement
of
lower
income
people
with
more
housing
available
for
higher
income
tech
workers.
The
actual
outcome
of
these
bills
could
actually
be
the
opposite
of
what
is
intended,
and
the
city
of
vancouver
british
columbia
has
already
found
that
out.
D
Hi,
my
name
is
georgie
huff
and
I
live
in
district
3..
I
strongly
support
council
members
davis's
memo
and
because
I
am
strongly
opposed
to
sb,
9
and
10..
Both
bills
will
eliminate
local
land
use
decisions
and
put
those
decisions
in
the
hands
of
sacramento
politicians
who
don't
represent
me
nor
any
of
the
san
jose
residents.
C
D
Thank
you.
The
memo
in
question
is
to
support
local
control
of
land
use
issues
instead
of
deferring
to
the
state
government,
which
does
not
know
our
city
nor
our
city
needs
local
input
and
local
experts
should
be
addressing
the
unique
issues
associated
with
land
use,
including
infrastructure
parks,
transportation
and
even
soft
infrastructure
issues
like
police
and
fire.
D
This
is
not
an
affordable
housing
issue.
None
of
the
bills
noted
provide
true,
affordable
housing.
They
provide
only
market
rate,
housing
use
council
members
should
be
addressing
local
issues.
Land
use
is
a
local
issue.
I
expect
you
to
protect
your
responsibilities
and
our
rights
by
forwarding
this
memo
to
the
council
for
decision
please
send
to
the
council.
Thank
you.
G
Hi
blair
beekman
here
just
a
reminder
in
the
importance
of
mixed
income:
housing
ideas,
not
mixed
use
ideas,
but
mixed
income
housing.
These
are
ideas
that
the
mtc
is
working
on
for
this
next
decade.
I
feel
that
we
can
really
start
these
practices
now
towards
the
ideas
of
reimagine
and
equity.
They
allow
an
incredible
amount
of
flexibility
that
can
invite
all
parts
of
the
affordable
housing
process
to
the
process.
G
You
know
is
this
a
bill?
Is
it
going
to
be
able
to
make
mixed
income
ideas
easier
in
the
future,
or
is
mixed
income
going
to
make
this
bill
easier
to
work
with
in
the
future,
either
way
these
things
are
going
to
be
interchangeable
in
how
they
can
help
each
other,
and
I
just
hope,
we're
considering
how
much
mixed
income
can
help
all
ranges
of
income
in
our
future
and
decision
making
for
local
neighborhoods.
Thank
you.
G
D
Hi,
thank
you
very
much.
I'm
calling
to
support
council
member
davis's
memo
and
request
that
you
place
it
on
the
council
agenda
next
week.
A
year
ago,
the
city
council
voted
unanimously
to
establish
a
charter
review
commission
to
examine
potential
reforms
that
might
improve
accountability,
representation
and
inclusion
at
city
hall.
Now
this
memo
doesn't
require
charter
amendments,
but
very
much
conforms
to
the
spirit
and
the
intent
of
the
formation
of
the
charter
review
commission.
We
cannot
have
accountability,
representation
and
inclusion
in
san
jose
regarding
land
use
policies.
D
If
we
turn
those
decisions
over
to
politicians
in
sacramento
who
don't
represent
the
city
and
us
so
for
the
same
reasons
that
the
council
voted
unanimously
to
explore
reforms
of
the
city
charter,
they
should
have
the
opportunity
to
weigh
in
on
this
very
important
memo.
There's
no
reason
at
all
why
the
this
shouldn't
go
to
the
council
unanimously.
They
deserve
an
opportunity
to
go
on
the
record
on
this
matter.
Thank.
D
Thank
you,
I'm
roberta
moore.
Please
support
councilmember
davis's
member
for
those
who
seek
equity.
Please
be
very
careful.
What
you
ask
for
even
housing
is
a
human
right
who
supports
socialized.
Housing
is
against
sb9
and
sb10,
because
they
know
it
will
have
the
opposite
impact
of
what
the
rhetoric
promises.
D
Sb,
9
and
10
will
make
housing
less,
affordable
and
less
equitable.
In
ballard,
where
my
in-laws
lived,
there
was
upzoning
where
upzoning
was
first
implemented.
It
shows
the
cost
of
housing
skyrocketed,
as
did
homelessness.
My
in-laws
moved
out
of
ballard
because
of
upzoning.
It
wasn't
an
affordable
place
to
raise
kids.
Please
watch
the
ballard
video,
the
false
promise
of
residential
and
influence
rezoning,
and
also
please
read
the
color
vlog
pages
48,
52
and
53.
It
was
the
federal
government
that
created
the
inequity,
not
zoning,
and
it
will
happen
again
if
sb9
and
sb10
pass.
D
Hi
there
my
name
is
kelsey
baines.
I
am
the
regional
director
for
umb
action
and
we
advocate
for
welcoming
communities
where
everyone
can
thrive,
and
I
would
urge
you
to
please
not
move
forward
with
this
alarmist
and
factually
incorrect
memo,
which
I
think
would
honestly
be
an
embarrassment
for
san
jose.
D
If
you
sent
this
to
the
state
legislature,
because
it
is
so
disconnected
from
what
the
bills
actually
do
and
say,
we
need
urban
villages
and
I
think
what
san
jose
is
doing
with
urban
villages
is
great,
but
we
also
need
missing
middle
housing,
so
things
like
duplexes
triplexes
that
give
families
more
flexibility,
and
we
also
need
cities
like
palo,
alto
and
los
altos
to
be
on
board
san
jose
can't
carry
the
weight
of
all
the
change,
so
we
really
need
state
action.
Thank
you.
D
Hi,
I'm
adam
bookbinder
policy
lead
for
south
bay.
Yinby
councilmember
davis
statement
is
unfortunately
inaccurate,
both
in
the
details
and
in
its
general
outlook
sb9
does
not
allow
eight
flexes.
It
allows
at
most
four
plexes,
where
we
now
allow
three
plexes
since
adus
count
as
a
unit
in
the
law.
Sb10
does
not
force
cities
to
do
anything.
It
allows
cities
to
choose
to
bypass
expensive
review
processes
for
rezonings,
not
for
the
projects
themselves
in
order
to
comply
with
state
law.
D
More
personally,
I
grew
up
in
a
duplex
in
a
small
town
of
20
000.,
my
parents
were
small-time
landlords.
We
hosted
a
series
of
grad
students.
While
I
learned
to
raise
pipe
wire
switches
and
wheel
the
sawzall
when
we
ran
into
hard
times
the
rental
income
kept
a
roof
over.
My
family's
head,
our
home
didn't
destroy
our
neighborhood.
Our
home
was
part
of
our
neighborhood,
my
family
and
our
tenants
would
have
been
far
worse
off
if
our
city
had
banned
duplexes,
insisting
on
only
single-family
homes
which
require
no
level
of
affordability
and
no
environmental
review.
D
We
have
an
affordability,
crisis,
climate
crisis
and
homelessness
crisis,
continuing
to
enforce
a
shortage
of
homes
and
force
people
to
commute
from
the
fire
zone
instead
of
is
housing,
injustice
and
climate
arson.
I
urge
the
committee
to
reject
this
resolution.
It's
factually
inaccurate,
morally
wrong.
Thank.
D
D
D
G
D
D
C
F
C
H
H
D
Yes,
matthew,
reid
silicon
valley
at
home.
I
want
to
start
by
acknowledging
the
council.
Member
davis
has
been
a
champion
of
affordable
housing
development
in
urban
villages.
In
her
district,
however,
we
do
not
need
to
choose.
The
ranger
needs
are
great.
The
range
of
solutions
need
to
reflect
this
complexity
and
we
need
more
than
one's
strategy,
and
they
don't
have
to
come
at
the
expense
of
each
other.
The
truth
is
single-family.
Neighborhoods
are
already
changing
throughout
the
city.
D
D
This
would
seem
to
indicate
a
decrease
in
the
strain
on
existing
infrastructure.
If
you
look
at
redfin
and
willow,
glen
single-family
homes
are
being
torn
down
and
rebuilt
much
larger.
There
were
75
sales
in
the
last
year
of
rebuild
homes.
The
turner
study
shows
very
clearly
that
the
sb9
would
mean
that
the
teardown
and
rebuilding
of
mcmansions
would
be
replaced
by
creating
more
affordable,
multi-unit
property.
Thank
you.
C
D
I
have
seen
san
jose
leaders,
make
many
mistakes
in
the
governance
of
our
great
city,
but
this,
I
believe,
is
the
most
egregious.
To
date.
I
expect
my
elected
representatives
and
fellow
residents
to
set
local
policies
affecting
my
city,
my
elected
officials
representing
san
jose.
Please
do
not
cede
your
policy
making
responsibilities
to
sacramento.
C
D
C
F
D
F
Okay,
so
sv9
is
atkins
bill.
It's
called
housing
development
approvals.
It's
currently
in
assembly
appropriations
according
to
ledge
info
today
it
allows
for
building
a
duplex
on
any
single
family
zoned
site,
and
it
also
allows
for
lot
splits
on
single-family
zoned
parcels
without
review,
so
that
means
buy
right
and
allowing
the
demolition
of
the
current
home
in.
In
most
cases,
it
prohibits
the
imposition
of
setback
requirements
other
than
setting
a
maximum
of
up
to
four
feet
from
the
side
and
rear
lot
lines.
F
F
I
think
it's
important
to
do
that
because
we
have
had
a
we've
had
a
task
force,
an
urban,
not
an
urban
village
task
force,
a
general
plan
task
force
that
came
up
with
this
plan
and
the
urban
village
areas
in
our
city,
where
we
knew
that
we
could
densify
in
a
smart
way
and
in
a
way
that
was
efficient
for
our
city.
So
I
just.
F
F
I
a
couple
of
other
points.
I
I
really
do.
I
have
a
concern
about
up
zoning
being
irreversible.
It
takes
away
our
local
control
if
the
impact
is
not
what
we
thought
it
would
be,
for
example,
if
there's
infrastructure
pressure
that
we're
not
anticipating
or
if
the
negatives
end
up
outweighing
the
positives.
F
So
I've
seen
it
in
my
own
in
my
own
on
my
own
street,
what
happens
and
it
doesn't
it's-
it
hasn't
created
more
affordable
housing
in
the
way
that
it's
happened
in
the
past.
The
other
thing
I
want
to
point
out
is
that
one
of
these
things,
one
of
the
things
that
this
does
is
it
takes
away
the
community
voice
in
the
process
and
some
people
will
say
that's
a
good
thing,
because
the
community
just
holds
up
the
process.
It's
time
consuming
and
it's
really
frustrating,
and
that
can
all
be
true.
F
I
also
want
to
point
out,
I
know,
there's
some
concern
about
dismantling
redlining
dismantling
redlining
has
already
been
done
at
the
federal
level.
Dismantling
the
impacts
of
redlining
and
building
wealth
for
people
of
color
is
something
that
definitely
has
not
been
done,
and
I
don't
have
any
confidence
that
these
bills
will
do
that.
I'm
concerned
about
that.
I
think
we
I've
talked
about
this
before
wanting
to
build
wealth
for
people
of
color
and
having
that
having
homeownership.
Be
part
of
that.
I
don't
see
that
this
is
something
that
is
going
to
accomplish
that.
F
So
what
I
would
say
to
my
colleagues,
regardless
of
what
you
think
about
our
local
opportunity,
housing
proposal
that
is
supposed
to
be
coming
to
us.
This
is
the
state
doing
something
that
we
haven't
had
a
chance
to
vet
or
talk
about
or
even
determine,
if
it's
right
for
our
city
or
how
we
might
do
it
better
in
our
own
city.
So
I
hope
that
you
will
someone
will
second,
my
motion
and
I'm
happy
to
set
a
time
certain
for
for
maybe
four
o'clock
in
the
afternoon.
Does
that
sound
good
lee.
F
C
E
Thank
you,
but
I
know
that
so
the
motion
will
fail
and
it
won't
make
it
forward,
but
I'll
make
some
remarks
just
in
in
regards
to
to
why
I
don't
necessarily
support
the
opposition
of
senate
bill
9
and
senate
bill
10
and
wanted
to
to
say
thank
you
as
well
to
the
speakers
for
coming
forward.
This
is
certainly
a
contentious
item
or
items.
E
And
so
I
will
speak
to
that
in
my
comments
as
well,
because
I
would
agree
with
with
the
statements
that
this
is
not
specifically
neither
one
of
these
bills
specifically
building
any
more
affordable
housing.
But
I
do
want
to
to
point
out
a
couple
of
I
think
statements
that
definitely
were
not
factual
and
I
and
I
do
believe
there
were
some
misleading
statements
as
well
through
consumer
davis's.
E
I
would
agree
that
senate
bill
9
is
is,
is
not
necessarily
enhancing
local
control,
but
that's
not
the
case
for
senate
bill
10,
so
I
would
not
have
clumped
those
two
together,
as
as
councilmember
davis
did,
and
for
those
that
are,
I
think,
misunderstood,
on
what
the
abilities
of
senate
bill
10
are.
I
encourage
you
to
read
the
actual
language
within
the
bill
that
speaks
specifically
to
the
allowances
for
local
governments
like
our
own.
E
Senator
dave,
cortezzi,
dave
cortezzi
represents
a
vast
majority
of
the
city
of
san
jose
and
specifically
represents
the
neighborhoods
of
willow,
glen
and
nagley
park,
and-
and
so
this
is
our
representative,
your
representative,
for
a
number
of
speakers
that
spoke
today
at
the
state
that
is
co-authoring
senate
bill
nine.
And
so
it's
not
somehow.
You
know
somebody
from
la
or
something
like
that
or
sacramento.
That
is
proposing
some
of
these
changes.
E
So
I
think
those
are
those
were
sort
of
a
bit
of
misleading
information
in
regards
to
you
know
what
these
these
two
bills
are
or
how
they
were
constructed
and
how
they
may
be
being
brought
forward
and
then
to
dive
a
little
bit
into
into
them.
More
specifically,
I
would
agree.
Neither
one
of
these
bills
are
specifically
enhancing
affordable
housing,
there's,
that's
not
what
they
state
in
their
their
their
language,
and
I
think
we
know
the
reality
as
well
as
councilman
davis
points
out.
E
If
you
see
parcels
getting
split,
then
I
I
may
made
I'm
thinking
to
the
right
one
that
councilman
davis
was
pointing
out.
There's
been
some
that
we've
had
come
forward
to
council
on
split
parcels
and,
and
we
end
up
seeing
two
very
expensive
homes
in
certain
areas
and
not
necessarily
affordable
homes,
but
I
think
we
have
to
stop
and
pause
and
remember
that
we're
talking
about
areas
of
single-family
housing
with
you
know,
homes
that
are
are
likely
more
than
anywhere
else
in
the
country.
E
We
know
we
need
not
just
more
affordable
housing,
but
we
need
more
housing
in
general,
and
that
has
you
know,
come
across
the
board
from
all
affordable,
housing
and
and
market
rate
developers.
That
lobby
us
all
the
time
that
recognize
that
we
also
just
need
more
housing
and
if
the
best
that
we're
ever
going
to
get
out
of
some
of
these
single
family
lots
is
just
another
unit
or
two.
Then
then,
in
my
mind,
we
should
be
looking
to
support
that.
E
E
Maintaining
the
maintenance
of
of
the
local
zoning
and
specifically
design
standards,
so
that
we're
not
looking
at
something
that's
a
completely
sore
thumb
or
out
of
character
for
a
community.
Those
are
all
incorporated
into
that,
because
I
think
it
was
well
thought
out
and
again
it's
that's.
I
think,
a
big
reason
as
to
why
it's
supported
by
our
local
senator
as
well.
So
I
think
that
these
are
moving
forward,
as
you
heard
from
a
lot
of
our
public
speakers.
E
Irregardless
of
our
of
our
excuse
me,
regardless
of
our
our
opinion
here
at
the
council,
and
it
is
a
a
bit
late
as
well.
I
think
that
at
the
moment
we're
best
to
allow
the
state
to
make
that
decision.
I
I've
chimed
in
personally
here.
I'm
willing
to
do
so,
and
I
think
if
this
came
forward,
if
anything
I'd
be
asking
that
we
lend
our
support
on
both
of
these
bills.
But
at
the
moment
I'm
I'm
happy
as
the
the
motion
is,
is
not
gonna
move
forward
and
we
will.
H
D
H
For
me
there,
it's
just
an
extension
of
what
we've
been
doing
around
adus
and
you
know,
on
the
heels
of
a
conversation
that
we
had
around
housing.
The
housing
crisis
plan
that
we
just
had
last
night,
it
seemed
like
almost
everybody
on
council
spoke
favorably
of
adu
units,
and
I
actually
was
concerned
that
if
we
were
only
going
to
rely
on
80
units
to
create
affordable
housing.
Well,
that's
really
not.
H
One
of
my
district
is
the
the
largest
district
in
this
city,
and
I
would
imagine
that
it
would
impact
my
district
a
lot
more
than
it
would
some
of
the
folks
that
have
been
speaking
here,
because
our
locks
are
huge.
We
are
probably
three
times
as
large
as
the
downtown
or
district
six
or
district
five,
yet
the
people
who
are
coming
forward
speaking
about
this
are
concerned.
I
think
for
the
wrong
reasons
and
when
we
say
adus,
we
think
about
well
somebody
within
our
family.
H
H
This
is
the
new
idea
of
a
duplex
anyways.
The
the
last
thing
I'll
say
is
that
sv10
also
has
a
superseding
if
the
ordinance
supersedes
any
zoning
restriction
established
by
a
local
voter
initiative,
the
ordinance
shall
only
take
effect,
if
adopted
by
a
two-thirds
vote
of
members
of
the
legislative
body.
I
believe
I
saw
the
same
in
sb9
and
so
really
it's
misconstrued
as
lack
of
or
taking
away
local
control,
because
this
is
absolutely
local
control
in
terms
of
whether
we
want
to
continue
to
have
this
in
our.
H
In
our
city
I'll
end
there,
and
I
just
hope
that
we
can
continue
to
have
a
lot
of
the
tools
in
our
toolbox
to
answer
the
call
of
this
housing
crisis
and
our
housing
crisis
plan.
Last
night
we
talked
about
effective
strategies
and
analyzing
those,
but
those
aren't,
but
we
are
we're
we're
in
kind
of
a
doom
gloom
stage.
We
saw
our
numbers
and
market
rate
housing
is
up
yet
affordable.
Housing,
construction
and
projects
that
are
in
the
pipeline
are
very
few.
H
So
I
think
what
we
need
to
do
is
really
focus
on
what's
important
and
that's
creating
more
affordable
housing
for
our
young
families,
for
our
struggling
teachers
and
our
struggling
police
officers
and
and
our
essential
service
workers,
everyone
so
I'm
I
would
have
if
this
memo
would
have
moved
forward
or
if
there
was
emotion
on
the
floor,
I
would
have
opposed
it.
I
guess
it's
obvious
within
my
my
speaking
points
that
that's
what
I
would
have
done.
H
I
think
that
some
of
the
voters
asked
for
transparency
and
I'm
been
absolutely
transparent
of
my
position
in
terms
of
this
housing
crisis.
So
we
should
take
all
solutions
and
make
sure
that
everybody
has
can
continue
to
live
in
san
jose
and
really
reduce
this
exclusivity
of
some
of
these
neighborhoods,
so
that
all
of
our
children
can
thrive
with
schools
that
are
award-winning
and
are
only
edible
eligible
eligible
to
some
of
the
homeowners
in
those
areas.
F
Thank
you.
I
just
want
to
set
the
record
straight
on
a
couple
of
things.
First
of
all,
I
wanted
to
point
out
to
everyone
that,
although
this
item
did
not
get
a
second,
the
assertion
that
this
will
not
build
more
affordable
housing
was
shared
by
all
of
my
colleagues
who
spoke
in
terms
of
how
you
get
to
eight
units.
F
I
think
it
could
actually
be
more
and
then,
in
terms
of
exclusivity,
I
just
want
to
point
out
that,
to
my
knowledge,
district
6
has
no
gated
communities,
but
I
believe
that
d8
has
two
gated
communities,
and
so
those
gated
communities,
I
don't
think
would
be-
would
be
impacted
by
this,
because
I
don't
think
they're
able
to
be
split
because
they
already
have
covenants
along
with
their
gated
communities.
So
that
might
be
why
you
didn't
hear
from
people
in
district
8..
Thank
you.
C
C
Second
pick
the
second
or
I'm
supporting
this,
because
I
want
to
go
through
that
that
process
and
it's
not
a
process
to
delay
anything
or
create
obstacles,
but
as
a
council,
as
a
elected
body,
we
make
make
much
better
decisions,
much
more
thoughtful
decisions
when
we
go
through
a
process
and
have
all
the
information,
have
all
the
facts
and
are
able
to
make
an
intelligent
decision.
So
that
was
my
my
rationale.
C
I
want
to
say
to
the
public,
though,
that
I'm
looking
forward
to
a
very
robust
and
engaged
community
process
to
really
bring
up
all
the
issues
around
opportunity
housing.
You
know.
I
know
that
for
a
fact
that
I'm
going
to
hear
from
my
community
and
be
one-
and
I'm
probably
going
to
hear
from
our
residents
from
other
council
districts
as
well,
and
I'm
looking
forward
to
that
process
so
that
when
the
item
comes
to
council,
that
we
again
can
make
a
thoughtful
and
well-informed
decision.
C
A
Thank
you
with
regard
to
the
neighborhood
work
plan,
I'm
not
sure
if
the
program
that
ricardo
instituted-
if
if
this
falls
under
that
this
purview,
but
what
I'd
like
to
suggest
is
that
the
type
of
work
that
the
youngsters
are
doing
did
if
we
could
please
like
not,
no
gardening,
no,
no
aggro,
you
know
no
cleaning
up
creeks.
You
know
I'm
trying
to
see
mexicans
with
room.
I
am
tired
of
seeing
mexicans
pushing
the
cart.
I
am
sick
and
tired
of
mexicans
with
a
shovel
in
their
head.
A
A
A
These
women
were
just,
and,
and
so
so
what
I'm
saying
is
that
there
is
a
rich
history
here
in
san
jose
of
the
mexicans
of
the
chicanos
that
started
putting
getting
their
education
using
the
education
to
inform
public
policy
and
challenge
public
policy,
and
that
is
that
is
what
chicano
means.
That
is
what
a
chicano
is,
is
somebody
that
educates
himself
in
order
to
challenge
and
inform
public
policy
in
order
to
demand
that
he
be
treated
like
a
human
being.
A
G
G
G
I
think
we
tend
to
feel
and
work
that
way
and
not
want
to
talk
about
open
public
policies
when
we
consider
the
future
of
technology
and
neighborhood
safety
we're
in
a
new
era
where
we
can-
and
that
is,
I
think,
how
to
develop
our
sustainability
practices,
our
open
community
practices
and
just
good
neighbor
practices.
It
builds
our
community
future.
It
doesn't
take
away
from
it.
We
need
to
learn
those
lessons
really
importantly,
they
can
do
a
lot
in
in
what
is
our
hopes
right
now?
How
do
we
work
towards
hope?
G
How
do
we
work
towards
sustainability
for
the
next
10
years?
It's
a
pretty
dire,
tough
time,
and
if
we
talk
about
our
open
democratic
practices,
that's
our
good.
That
is
our
whole
good
and
it
obviously
is
more
important
than
technology.
In
the
end,
the
two
things
should
learn
to
work
together
and
we
can
do
that.
Let's
do
it
now.
Thank
you.
D
E
D
H
G
Hi,
thank
you
to
once
again
comment
on
council
person.
Uranus's
words
about
the
future
of
affordable
housing.
She
did
so
incredible.
Thank
you
immensely.
I
just
learned
a
lot
today
and
what
we
can
be
working
towards.
I
really
hope
mixed
income
ideas
can
be
taken
seriously
and
it
just
simply
can
be
talked
about
openly.
G
So
thank
you.
I
forgot
to
mention
about
the
previous
the
mayor's
gang
task
force
report.
You
know
we're
working
really
well
in
oakland,
with
the
ideas
of
reimagining
equity,
we're
doing
some
good
practices
in
san
jose,
I
think
something's
growing
and
building.
These
are
the
sorts
of
things
that
you
can
share
with
the
task
force,
community
and
and
and
build
youth
and
build
good
practices.
I
think
to
invite
them
to
this
process.
It's
something
that
invites
everybody
to
the
process.
G
These
are
our
good
ideals,
and
these
are
our
hopes
and
our
sustainability
ideas
that
I
think
everyone's
invited
to,
and
that's
what's
interesting
and
hopeful
at
this
time.
Despite
of
what
we're
all
going
through,
I
think
it
can
address
violence
at
this
time,
as
well
with
19
seconds
left
to
talk
about
the
future
of
technology.
It
can
be
an
active
process.
G
A
A
I've
used
that
video
from
that
from
that
other
council
meeting,
where
you
checked
dev
davis,
that
I
have
used
that
to
educate
people
on
public
policy
on
redlining,
I
said
look.
This
is
how
power
is
used
for
people
that
have
none
look
at
what
she
look
at,
how
she
centers
the
argument:
oh
and
I'm
schooling
them,
and
these
young.
These
are
college
students
and
they're.
Just
like
I
mean
they're
catching
it
quickly
and
then
to
hear
a
college
student
get
what
they
did.
A
What
I
just
introduced
them
to
using
that
video
and
then
rooted
in
something
that
they
heard
in
their
family
history
that
now
it
makes
sense
now
they
understand
and
to
be
in
a
room
where
a
mind
is
being
open
like
that
and
see
it.
I
I
just
this
and
I'm
using
that
video
to
do
it,
because
people
don't
understand
really
what
has
happened
and
how
many
people's
lives
generationally
have
been
impacted
by
it,
and
so
I
just
thank
you.
Thank
you
very
much
for
that.
A
C
B
Thank
you
vice
mayor
and
a
council
I'd
like
to
follow
up
on
the
discussion
you
had
about
affordable
housing
yesterday,
unfortunately
had
a
conflict,
so
I
had
to
join
late
but
specifically
adu
and
how
you
can
actually,
as
a
council,
as
our
elected
officials,
help
this
moving
along
and
happening.
I
believe
most
of
you
must
be
familiar
with
boxable.
B
The
general
idea
is
that
it's
a
400
square
foot
house
that
includes
everything
the
kitchen,
the
bathroom.
It's
completely
furnished,
you
know,
with
the
exception
of
the
bed
and
it's
eight
feet
wide
and
the
reason
is
eight
feet
wide
is
that
you
can
track
it.
You
know
without
an
oversized
load
on
the
freeway
and
the
cost
of
that
thing.
B
It's
basically
moving
it's
fifty
thousand
dollars,
but
now
comes
the
problems.
Yes,
you
can
wheel
this
thing
into
your
backyard
if
you
happen
to
have
a
you
know
pad
on
the
side
of
the
house.
If
you've
got
ten
feet
of
clearance
or
you
can
use
a
crane,
but
now
that
you're
pumped
in
the
back
of
the
house,
you
need
to
connect
it
to
the
utilities
and
that
point
in
time,
that's
where
the
business
case
falls
flat
on
it
phase.
So
I
encourage
you,
as
our
elected
officials,
to
look
at
two
things.
B
It's
the
first
of
all
summer
expedites
this
business
of
connecting
to
sewage
electricity.
By
the
way
they
don't
use
gas
for
cooling
or
anything
else,
or
if
that
is
not
possible,
look
at
subsidies
that
are
going
to
make
it
people
for
to
plunk
these
things
in
their
backyard
and
for
new
families
to
come
in
and
moving.
Thank
you.