Public Safety, Finance and Strategic Support Committee (psfss) - Regular Meeting

It is 01:30. We're gonna call the meeting to order. So today before we begin, I want to remind the public safety, finance and strategic support committee members and member of the public to follow our code of conduct at meetings. This include commenting on specific agenda item only and addressing the full body. Public speaker will not engage in a conversation with the chair, council member or staff, all members of the public safety, finance and strategic support committee, staff and the public are expected to refrain from abusive language, repeated failure to comply with the code of conduct, which will disturb, disrupt or impede the orderly conduct of this meeting may result in removal from the meeting.

This meeting of the Public Safety Finance and strategic support committee will now come to order. Can the clerk, office, please roll call?

Tordillos?

Here.

Casey? Here. Mulcahy?

Here.

Vice chair Kamay? Here. And Chair Duan? Here. You have a quorum.

Thank you very much. So I just want to welcome, Council Member Todias, on his first, PISVIS meeting. And hopefully he'll be here with us and contribute to our committee. So we'll go straight down to the work plan. There's nothing there, nothing on the consent calendar. We do have report from committee, item number one, fourth quarter financials report for fiscal year 2024 and 2025. Maria Oberg and Tian Yu Sun will be giving us a presentation.

Good afternoon, chair, members of the committee, members of the public. I am Maria Oberg. I am the director of finance. And before you today, you have our quarterly reports. We will, as always, only present the investment slides because that's the only ones that are required to be presented twice a year.

So let me get to those. So, council policy one dash 12 is the council's investment policy. It ensures that all our, investments meet the requirements of not just our policy, but also California government code sections fifty three six zero one and following. For those of you who are fairly new to this, it's important for you to keep in mind that the city can only invest in highly rated fixed income securities. So when you look at our yield, don't confuse it with the stock portfolio.

We are not investing in stocks. The investment policy is reviewed annually, was last adopted by the council on 03/11/2025, and it is also audited semiannually for compliance purposes. The goals of our investments is to meet the objectives of safety, liquidity, and yield. Safety means that we don't invest in anything that can significant value. Liquidity means we have money available to meet our obligations, and yield is to earn a market rate of return.

We provide quarterly reports to the public through a variety of formats online in these agenda packets and in the city council agenda packets. As of 06/30/2025, our portfolio was just shy of $3,000,000,000 at 2,980,000.00 or billion. We earned an interest yield over the year of 3.805%. So, again, we're not stocks, so don't compare to that. Weighted average maturity is five hundred and sixty days, which is about a year and a half.

We invest on the short end side of the curve up to five years, and the fiscal year to date net income recognized is significant. It's close to $96,000,000. We had no exceptions to the policy this quarter. This graph shows you a very high level overview of the type of investments we hold. As you can see, the majority are held in US agencies and US treasury securities.

And by fund, most of the monies, naturally are the general fund, but we also invest monies for the special revenue funds such as airport, clean energy, housing, and others. General fund balances increased by 275,000,000 as of June 30. That's due to the receipt of property taxes, and you will see in the next couple of slides that we have a very spiky cash flow pattern with bulk of property taxes being received in June and January, and then in the summer months is when we mainly spend money due to retirement prefunding and debt service. We have to have a statement in our policy, assuring that the projected investment maturities, cash, and revenues are sufficient to cover anticipated expenditures for the next six months, and we do. Here's that comparison of cash balances.

The red line is the general fund, and that's the one that spikes with receipt of property tax and outgoing expenditures. For benchmarks, we don't really match anything else out there, but we do benchmark ourselves against the Merrill Lynch one to three year corporate and government index. That's a

rolling two year effective yield. And also the LAEF, which is

the state of California's local agency investment pool. And those are a little shorter in maturities usually than us, which means that they take advantage of increasing interest yields in the short end much faster than we do. And consequently, when yields go down, they also take those losses quicker than we do. Or not losses, but the reduction in interest rate. The investment strategy for the next quarter, continued to match known expenditures with suitable investments, mainly in the twenty four month horizon.

We will also extend a portion of the portfolio beyond the two year term when appropriate to provide income and structure to the portfolio. We'll continue to be diversified, and of course, focus on the core objectives of safety, liquidity, and yield. And with that, that ends my presentation. Happy to answer any questions.

Well, thank you Maria for the presentation. Do we have any public comments?

Yes, we do. We have 10 speaker cards. Can the following speakers please sign up along the stairs in front of the podium? The first available speaker can walk up to the podium to speak. You'll each have two minutes. The timer is displayed on the projection. Drusi, Dina, Alex, Musa, Greg. This one has no name. Noble, Shana, Philip, and Serena. Thank you.

My name is Juicy Kasanova. I am with San Jose Against War. At a city council meeting in April council member Ortiz directed finance director Oberg to investigate the city's investment portfolio for ethical concerns after we mobilized to raise concerns about war profiteers Caterpillar, Alphabet and Microsoft. The city has over $50,000,000 invested in these corporations which are directly involved in in Israel's genocide against Gaza. We were directed to attend this City Council meeting as the follow-up from that.

I'm disappointed to hear that those investigations on the city's investment portfolio were not presented to the council members today but we are still here to mobilize and raise that concern and express our support for divestment in line with the city's ethical investment policy and also to push to divest from those corporations. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker?

Hello. My name is Ali. I along with nearly 2,000 other people have signed a petition demanding that the city council divest from Caterpillar, Alphabet and Microsoft. These three war profiteers make up just about 2% of our city's investment portfolio by divesting but divesting from them would be a meaningful act of socially responsible and ethical investing. San Jose has done this before.

In 1985 our city council voted to ban investments in any company doing business in apartheid South Africa and establish a quote South Africa free restriction on the city's investment portfolio. This directly counters any false notion of there being a bylaw that prohibits San Jose City Council from passing resolutions related to foreign policy matters. More recently in 2020, City Council passed a resolution to amend its to amend its investment policy so that our city would divest from fossil fuels and reallocate that money to prioritize investments in renewable energy, clean tech, and sustainable communities. This shows that you share our values, that money should be used to build societies and not destroy them. Our city has a proud history of being a leader in the struggle of justice and freedom for all people.

We invoke these precedents and urge you to to divest from apartheid Israel and its genocide against Palestine. Let's build upon our city's legacy and demonstrate how cities across the country can materially support the people of Palestine and put and pressure Israel to agree to a permanent ceasefire and end the genocide. Represent us by introducing and passing a divestment resolution when the city's investment portfolio comes up for your vote in March. Thank you.

Thank you. We have two more cards for I believe it says Anzu and Timothy. Thank you.

Thank you, committee members. My name is Dina Saba. I'm a Palestinian American and a long time resident of San Jose. I live in District 6. What Israel is doing in the occupied Palestinian territories, Gaza, West Bank, and East Jerusalem is genocide.

It's apartheid, war crimes, and crimes against humanity. You name it, they're doing it. It's time for the city of San Jose to take a bold step against these horrific criminal criminal activities of genocide, apartheid, and violations of international and US laws, and divest from war profiteers Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. Although investments in these companies is a small amount, about 2%, In the San Jose's investment portfolio, it is still investments supporting genocide, the mass slaughter of over 20,000 children, and intentional starvation by Israel, and that is a thousand percent unacceptable. I don't want my beloved city's investment supporting the mass slaughter of my family and my people.

We must be a city that upholds our values, cherishing human life, justice, and freedom for all. Why would we want to continue to associate with and investing in genocide? What is preventing the city? What is preventing the city council from by divesting from genocide? Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello. My name is Alex. I'm a laborer. I just come here to to say that our city has a proud history of being a leader in the struggle for justice and freedom for all people. And in 1985, San Jose City Council voted 10 to one to ban investments in any company doing business with apartheid apartheid South Africa.

I would like for us to continue taking on that stance as a city. I know that we have a subcommittee made of very diverse group. Somebody who was from my mother was from Iran, somebody who was from The Philippines and Vietnam, and it's lovely to see. And I'd like to for you to all, think on your cultural background, your heritage, your family, your friends. And I want you to think of them as you choose which companies you'll invest in and which companies you'll work with.

And I urge you to not work with Caterpillar. Don't work with Microsoft. These people are funding this genocide in Gaza. Well, they're doing more than funding. They're adding their technology. They're adding their bulldozers. And so I urge you, divest divest from genocide. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello. My name is Noble Nuschak, and I'm here calling on San Jose to divest from world poverty with Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft, investments that amount to about 2% of San Jose's investment portfolio. Continuing to invest in these companies close the value of this city because all three of these companies are complicit in the genocide of the Palestinians. Caterpillar is complicit because they sell heavy machinery to the Israeli military, which the military uses to demolish Palestinian homes and build illegal settlements in the West Bank. Microsoft is complicit because they have a $107,000,000 contract with Elbit Systems, which uses Microsoft Azure to run one SIM, the training software Israeli occupation forces use to mimic battle scenarios, essentially training people to murder Palestinians.

Alphabet is complicit because they are one of the winners of a $1,200,000,000 contract called Project Nimbus, meaning they are one of the sole cloud providers to the Israeli government and military. And they use this technology to surveil Palestinians and target them for assassinations. By investing in all three of these companies, this city is complicit as the money this city invests into these companies is used to fund genocidal activities. Divestment from companies is not just a theory, but it's happened in the past. In the nineteen eighties, many American cities and schools, including San Jose, across the country divested from South Africa under a strict racial apartheid.

The Bay Area was a key part of this divestment with both UC Berkeley and San Jose divesting billions from companies doing business in South Africa in the late eighties. This divestment movement was a key contributor to the economic isolation that ultimately resulted in the end of apartheid. Today, we face a similar urgent crisis, the genocide of the Palestinians. San Jose must make the choice to be on the right side of history. Drop these investments in Caterpillar, Microsoft, and Alphabet, and drop this complicity in the ongoing genocide. Thank you.

Thank you. We have one more speaker card for Vicky.

K.

Hi. My name is Musa with CARE, the Council on American Islamic Relations, and we are here to echo our friends in urging the city of San Jose to divest from climate destruction and war profiteering. Last week, among the many documented atrocities of the Israeli occupation, there was a video of an 11 year old Palestinian girl in Jabaliyah walking by carrying water for her family. In a mere moment, an Israeli drone bomb was dropped on her, killing her instantly. This is one too many incidents of bombs intentionally and directly being dropped on the heads of Palestinian children.

Since October 2023, Israel has killed more than one child every hour. Israel has dropped over 10,000 tons of bombs on Gaza, the equivalent of seven nuclear bombs on a population trapped in an area the size of the city of San Jose. A recent report using internal Israeli intelligence data showed that eighty three percent of those killed in Gaza were civilians. This has overwhelmingly been a war on innocent men, women, and children. According to San Jose's quarterly investment report, over 50,000,000 of city funds are invested in companies linked to Israel's genocide against Palestinians.

Our money should build communities not fuel destruction and genocide. Yet Caterpillar, Alphabet and Microsoft provide the tools for Israel to commit these war crimes. And by keeping investments in these companies, the city of San Jose is complicit in the killing of children and the destruction of Gaza. So again, we urge you to ensure that San Jose taxpayer dollars and public funds are not used to fund war crimes, genocide, and climate destruction. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name is Shana, and I, along with nearly 2,000 other people, have signed a petition demanding that you divest all city funds from Israel's genocide against Palestine. All of you sitting up here are politicians, tell me what other issue can mobilize people like this? What other issue do you see 20 or so people who have jobs, who have families, decide to not take their paycheck for the day and instead show up here to our leaders and demand that you listen to us to divest only 2% of the budget. It can make a huge impact as my associates have mentioned.

And Maria, I am so glad that you are here today. It is so great to be able to speak with you. I know you have an incredible background and you've done a great job leading this city through our investments. Surely, you can find a way how we can divest our money from only 2%. Microsoft, Caterpillar, Google, we cannot allow ourselves to fund these war for war profiteers.

Over 50 community organizations, fifty, five zero, nonprofits and small businesses have also endorsed the petition. The diverse and multicultural communities of San Jose refuse to be complicit in genocide and demand that our city practice socially responsible and ethical investing, I urge you to exercise your leadership and stand with your constituents by introducing and passing a divestment resolution when the city's investment portfolio comes up for your approval in March, and you'll be sure to see us there in March as well. We are a strong group. We are mobilizing. Don't let our voices be silenced.

Thank you. Next speaker.

My name is Greg Miller. I'm a resident of San Jose and I'm know appalled every day when I see the destruction that's happening in Gaza. And I understand that the bullets and bombs and the caterpillar bulldozers that are destroying houses there are all provided or there with the help of the United States government. We fund this war, okay. We have to take responsibility for it.

And so I think San Jose has a role to play, all local governments. You know you can't say that just because this is a national issue that you can't take some kind of position on it. So I'm calling on San Jose to divest from the war profiteers Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. These investments amount to only about 2% of San Jose's investment portfolio, so the benefits of divesting 2% outweigh the inconvenience caused by being financially tied to these companies. Continuing to invest in these companies breaks public trust and corrodes the values of this city as a public service institution.

Other Bay Area cities like Hayward and Richmond have already taken the courageous step of divesting with Richmond voting to divest nearly 7% of its portfolio due to these companies ties with Israel's genocide. I urge you to demonstrate your leadership and moral fortitude by joining their lead. And I also have heard recently that there are studies have shown, you keep hearing sixty thousand people have been killed by Israel in Gaza over these past two years.

Thank you, your time is up. Next speaker.

Hello city council, council members and staff. My name is Philip. I am an alumni of San Jose State University. I also work in San Jose and I'm also an SEIU five two one steward. I'm also a member of San Jose Against War.

And I'm here to say according to the most recent city of San Jose's quarterly investment report, over $50,000,000 of our city funds are invested in corporations with direct ties to Israel's genocide against Palestine. That being Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. That $50,000,000 is just 2% of the city's investments. And with that investments we're enabling these companies to provide equipment and services and contracts that Israel has been used to commit war crimes against Palestinians. Divestment is an effective way to demonstrate how cities across the country can materially support the people of Palestine and pressure Israel to comply with international law.

I urge you to introduce and pass a divestment resolution when the city's investment portfolio comes up for your approval in March. We will be there. Thank you so much.

Thank you. We have one more card for Zaha.

Good afternoon committee. My name is Timothy Sampson and I live in San Jose District 3. I have been a resident of San Jose for about three years and I am a math tutor and radio frequency technician by trade. Therefore, as a conscious and tax paying resident of San Jose, I'm disappointed to learn that this council has upwards of $50,000,000 in investments in companies complicit in the ongoing genocide and ethnic cleansing of Palestinians which my tax dollars pay for. I'm calling on San Jose to divest from the company's Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft.

These investments amount to only about 2% of San Jose's investment portfolio. The Israeli military routinely uses Caterpillar bulldozers to demolish Palestinian homes, public buildings, roads, commercial properties, agricultural land, and other civilian infrastructure. Since December, caterpillar equipment has been systematically destroying civilian buildings and other property alongside the Gaza Strip border creating a half a mile wide buffer zone over roughly 16% of the Strip's area. In May 2021, Google and Amazon won the bid for project Nimbus, a shared $1,200,000,000 contract to be the sole cloud providers for the Israeli government and military. Israel uses these AI systems developed by Microsoft and Alphabet to assume the responsibility of targeting airstrikes on Palestinians and forgo all human accountability for targeting decisions and for Palestinian deaths.

To date, there are over sixty thousand confirmed killed, most of them women and children and countless more injured, missing, and displaced in as a result of Israel's unrelenting bombardment and invasion of the besieged Gaza Strip. Our city has a proud history of being a leader in the struggle for justice and freedom for all people. In 1985, San Jose City Council voted 10 to one to ban investments in any company doing business in apartheid South Africa and establish a South Africa free restriction on the city's investment portfolio. We invoke this precedent and urge you to divest from apartheid Israel and its genocide against Palestine. Thank you.

Thank you. We have more speaker cards for Lisa Allegra. Last name, Myers, and one with no name. Thank you.

Hello, council members. My name is Anzu, and I am calling to divest for more profiteers Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. In 2020, the city of San Jose passed a resolution to amend its investment policy so that our city would divest from fossil fuels and reallocate that money to prioritize ethical investments. This effort shows that our city shares its constituents' values. Money should be used to build societies, not destroy destroy them. Them. As our representatives, we urge you to follow this precedent and divest our city funds from war profiteers complicit in genocide. I urge you to demonstrate your leadership and moral fortitude by joining our lead. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Good afternoon. My name is Vicki and I'm from I live in South San Jose. I'm here today to call on you to show us some leadership on this. Yeah. I I'm here to ask that you divest from Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. And we need to call this what it is. It's a genocide, and we need to not be complicit in our actions, and history is gonna hold us accountable. Thank you.

Thank you. We have one more speaker card for Alana.

Hello. My name is Yung. Due to time limitations, I will speak only about Microsoft's particular role. In recent reporting by The Guardian, the commander of the Israeli military surveillance unit unit eight thousand two hundred met with Microsoft CEO. And as a result of the meeting, Microsoft created a customized and segregated area of their cloud storage platform to accommodate the storage of 1,000,000 phone calls per hour, surveilling the population of Gaza and the West Bank.

This is mass surveillance by the military of the Palestinian population by the Israeli military. This is apartheid, clear and simple. Microsoft and Microsoft employees and Google employees are risking their jobs, and some of them have already lost their jobs by speaking out against their employer's role in in the genocide. We surely have as much courage as they do. We need to wash our hands of this blood money. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi. My name is Zaha. I'm a pediatrician here in San Jose. I think I think we all know the numbers. I think we know who's which companies are involved, which companies need to divest, such as Microsoft. 50,050 children have been killed so far. It doesn't matter what your ethnicity is, what your religion is. It is right versus wrong. It is it is something that needs to be stopped. You know, if if enough people had done something, you know, in the nineteen forties during the holocaust, there wouldn't have been a holocaust.

This is our time to act. You know, we have the Internet. We we all see what's happening. We it's not that we don't know. You know, our our country is actively supporting and allowing this. And the Israelis themselves are are, you know, going against their government to stop this. You know, we we have to do something. If we don't if those of us don't know enough, read about what's going on. You know? If you're on the other side and you believe in the Israeli cause, I think I think, you know, wanting human rights and advocating that is more important than any any other issue, you know, because we are all human beings.

Beings. Thank Thank you you for for your your time. Time.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi. My name is Alana Wagner. I am a resident of Santa Clara County. I call on you to divest from the perspective as an American Jew whose family managed to escape the Holocaust, some being the only sole survivor of that. My own grandmother, who at 16 escaped Germany after being removed from their home, managed to find the will within her even though she refused to ever about it because it was so traumatizing of an experience to protest the Vietnam War.

And divesting is a very powerful message to everyone, to other cities around us, to the country itself. We are a big city of San Jose, of over 2,000,000 people, and that would send a very powerful message. I think over the past two years, I have seen much of the stories that I've been told by my family being reflected in what I have seen Palestinians saying is happening to them. And it is disturbing in its similarity of the ethnic cleansing of people being removed from their homes and now at a stage five famine, the starvation as well. So I call on you to divest, to send this powerful message to everyone, and thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker.

I apologize in advance if I stutter during this. Hello. My name is Cal Myers. I am a 17 year old constituent of council member Michael McKay. I'm sorry if I pronounced it incorrectly. As the observant of you may have noticed, that means I should probably be in school right now. And you're correct. I am missing my fifth period government class to do this at Willow Glen High School. The irony of missing a government class to participate in government is not lost on me. However, many students like me in Palestine do not have that right to simply attend their classes.

As per the Palestinian Ministry of Education, over 18,000 Palestinian students have been killed, and this number does not include those still lost underneath the rubble. So today now what does a city over 7,000 miles away from this conflict have to do with this? It is because our city has over $43,000,000 invested in companies providing arms and military technology to the Israeli military. Over $17,000,000 over 17,000,000 of our tax dollars are invested in Caterpillar Inc, a company which manufactures armored bulldozers for the IDF, which have been used to destroy homes in Gaza, kill American citizens like Rachel Corey, and enforce apartheid in the West Bank. An apartheid which has been considered such by numerous human rights groups, including MST International, including MST International, Human Rights Watch, multiple Israeli organizations, the ANC, and multiple UN reporters, and more.

As far as I'm aware, none of you are human rights lawyers, so I please ask you to take the opinions of those who are experts in this in their field on this issue and to believe them. Perhaps I am wrong on that issue, but as far as I'm aware, none of you are human rights lawyers. There it is. On top of this sorry. This is one I forgot. In 2024, the ICJ found that the Israeli occupation of Palestinian territories violated article three of the International Convention on the Elimination of All Forms of Racial Discrimination, meaning Israel legally under international law is either is either committing racial segregation, apartheid, or both both. And Caterpillar is helping with this. Along with Caterpillar, we also we also sorry.

Thank you. That's your time. Next speaker.

Hello. My name is Allegra Watson and I'm a constituent of District 9 in San Jose. I'm calling on city council members to divest $50,000,000 in San Jose's portfolio from corporations directly supporting an ongoing genocide in Palestine. Caterpillar, Alphabet, Microsoft, they all supported Israel's genocide with their services and products and by investing in these companies, you are also complicit in the genocide. People in Gaza are suffering a horrific reality due to Israel's horrific campaign of forced starvation, bombing, chemical weapons targeting children with snipers, torture targeting everyone even men, and destruction of all life sustaining infrastructure in Gaza.

San Jose has a moral standard to uphold and at this stage of the genocide, it is the bare minimum to divest from corporations who knowingly support Israel's genocide. By investing in these companies, the city of San Jose also has blood on its hands. Divest from companies that profit from death and pass a divestment resolution in March. Thank you.

Thank you. We have one more speaker Carr with no name.

Okay. Hello. Good afternoon, San Jose San Jose City Council members. My name is Lisa Adhikari from District 3. Hello. Congratulations, by the way. What happens in Palestine is directly connected to San Jose. It is our tax dollars that are funding Israel's genocide and occupation, and it is American companies helping carry out these war crimes. People in Gaza are pulling out bomb debris with made in USA written across it, and it is Israeli Americans who are stealing people's houses in the West Bank. My dear friend's sister's house was demolished a couple weeks ago.

They were a young family of six, and they were given ten minutes to evacuate. When you get home, set your timer for ten minutes and see what you can grab because literally they have the timer going on the family. We should not fund any company complicit in illegal activity here or abroad. Please divest from Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. I would also like to just show you here.

This is what it looks like to oh, sorry. This is what it looks like to have your house demolished. My friend just sent me these pictures two weeks ago. His family with their four small kids were outside watching everything that they owned, family heirlooms, everything they owned torn down. This is directly related to San Jose because these are my friends who I care deeply about. And for many of us here, we have friends and family who are dealing with this, and we see it every day. So this is related. Please divest. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Next speaker.

Hi. Good afternoon. My name is Serena. I'm a resident of District 6. I'm also with San Jose against war.

I'm here with everyone who opposed the genocide and urge you to divest and I along with nearly 2,000 people have signed the divestment petition. Every day when I drive to work I listen to the radio and I hear about the purposeful starvation invasion into Gaza now and destruction of the West Bank, so I'll just read you some headlines from democracy now. Israel calls up to 6,000 reservationists as it begins Gaza City invasion. Israel approved settlements splitting West Bank in two and further dooming Palestinian state. State Department fires officer who expressed condolences for journalists killed by Israel and Gaza.

I just want to die, desperate med student in Gaza sends massacres. This is really horrific and we should divest so let's do it. Thank you. Thank you. Next speaker.

Hello. My name is Fu. I'm from District 7. I'm calling on San Jose to divest from more profiteers, Caterpillar, Alphabet, and Microsoft. These investments amount to only about 2% of San Jose's investment portfolio.

So the benefits of divesting 2% outweigh the inconvenience caused by being financially tied to these companies. Continuing to invest in these companies breaks public trust and corroses the values of the city as institution. Other Bay Area cities like Hayward and Richmond have already taken the courageous steps of divesting, which Richmond is voting to divest nearly 7% of its portfolio due to this company's ties to Israel's genocide. I urge you to demonstrate your leadership and moral fortitude by joining their lead. And I also wanted to talk about the, Columbus Park neighborhood this sweeps this week, that was starting this week.

I received an email from mayor Matt Mahan about how they were doing these sweeps because because the because the homeless people there, they homeless people there were causing fires and violence and that they were offering beds indoors for him. And I just wanna say that I don't think that should be the only solution for for the people that were living in Columbus Park as those people had personal items, their RVs, and that and and that they shouldn't have only the options of having beds indoors because because they might not find that living situation compatible with them. So I would want you to stop the sweeps and to and to cooperate with mayor Mahamahan on another solution for them. Thank you.

Thank you. Next speaker?

Next speaker?

Back to the committee.

Well, thank you to all the speakers. We're gonna go to our council member. Moment. We're gonna go to council member Rosemarie Kameh.

First, I'd like to thank all of the speakers who came out, who took time out of their day working or whatever you were doing to be here to give us your message. Today we are here as an update to the fourth quarter report. Some of you did mention the timeframe of March. And so I was gonna ask our director whether that is an appropriate time in terms of making any decisions. Today we don't sit as a full council and only the full council is able to make those kinds of decisions. So I was just wondering, there was reference to March as a time frame and wanted to see.

This is a council policy. So March is when we take it for the annual approval. So that would work as a timeline, but you also have the discretion to bring direction to us sooner than that. It is your policy.

Okay. But normally that is the the time when all of those investment policies come to us.

That is correct. It provides for a very orderly method of doing it. We'll need to do some research. It's not as easy as just selling whatever we hold because we have to be considerate that we don't lose money. Again, it's taxpayer money, and we need to make sure that we do it in a very methodical way. There are other considerations. If we start cherry pick certain corporations, how do we expand it to make sure that everyone's values are heard? It can be done. It's the council's prerogative. I also want to say that corporate notes are a good investment for our portfolio.

It does provide more income. This is one of the few areas for the city that we can make money for the public without levying a fee or charging them a tax. So if we move away completely from corporate notes, that would put our investment as a slight disadvantage. But again it's a counsel consideration as part of the policy. But those are some of the things we would want to really think through when we revise the policy.

Okay. So I would like to move acceptance of the fourth quarter report, cross reference it to the city council. But I also would like to add having staff take a look at at the appropriate time in the March time frame to be able to, well you'll have enough time to be able to see what the trade offs are and and allow us to as a full council make a decision.

Second. Thank you. We move the motion and we have a second. Let's vote.

That passes unanimously.

Thank you. Alright.

So so that will be coming back at the at the time frame that was specified, earlier in terms of, the sort of the March time frame.

I believe so. So we're going to go ahead and move forward to the item number two, procurement audit report that will be by Joe Royce, Allison Polley, Iwad Hayder, Maria Oberg, and Albi Udraum.

Good afternoon, council members. I'm Joe Royce, the city auditor. I'm here with Allison Polley and Awad Heider from my office to present the audit of procurement. The City should review its risk strategy, performance measurement and guidance to improve the procurement process. Also in the box are Maria Oberg and Alvi Udom from finance department. I'm going to turn it over to Allie to kind of walk through the background and the results of our work.

Hello, I'm Allison Polly. I'm a supervising auditor with the office of the city auditor. I'm going to start with a short background. Procurement is a critical city function for obtaining goods and services. The finance department's purchasing division oversees many types of procurements with the exception of consulting services and public works projects.

While there have been some changes in recent years, the timeliness of procurements remains a concern citywide. The objective of our audit was to assess the efficiency of the city's procurement process for goods and services excluding public works projects. Our audit had three findings. The first finding is that reassessing risk strategies in key areas could improve procurement timeliness. Every procurement comes with risks.

The city administration is responsible for balancing the risks of procurement with the business needs of departments. 45% of surveyed city fiscal officers and contract managers reported that their procurements were not completed in time to meet their department's business needs. Purchasing's expectation is that requests for proposals or RFPs take between six and nine months to complete. However, three quarters of RFPs handled by purchasing between 2019 and 2024 took longer than that. Nearly half took more than one year.

The administration should review five key areas to examine and reassess whether the current policies align with its desired risk strategy. These five areas are the competitive procurement threshold, minimum insurance requirements, software subscription approvals, delegations of authority to departments, and the city's standard terms and conditions. Additionally, there are two processes that we recommend should be defined and

is for the

The

in

second is the escalation process for management review of contracts that are stalled during negotiations, which can be informal and lengthy. Our second finding was that better tracking of strategic procurements would help measure progress and performance. We found that purchasing's current tool for tracking strategic procure procurements does not consistently capture key milestones. This limits insight into project timelines and areas for improvement. For example, purchasing's internal log contains inconsistent and incomplete data, making it difficult to use for performance measurement or for supervisory review.

We also noted that there are no formal performance measures for strategic procurements, primarily RFPs. Other jurisdictions use dashboards, cycle time metrics and workload tracking to manage procurements. To strengthen procurement operations and improve oversight, finance should implement a workflow tracking system to track procurement progress and develop performance measures for strategic procurement cycle times. Our third finding was that purchasing should consolidate and update procurement guidance for departments. Procurement related resources for city staff are spread out across over a 100 separate links documents.

This leaves city staff without a single easy to navigate reference for policies and procedures. More than half of surveyed city staff said they needed more guidance. In particular, scope development has been a persistent challenge for departments. To improve support to city departments, finance should develop a consolidated procurement handbook, guidance and templates for scope development. Lastly, the city policy manual is outdated in some procurement sections and may not reflect current thresholds or practices.

We recommend that finance review and update the city policy manual to align with current procurement practices. Overall, our audit has eight recommendations. That concludes our presentation. We ask that you accept the report and cross reference it to the city council meeting on September 9. We'll turn it over to Maria for the administration's response and then we are available to answer any questions.

Chair, committee members, members of the public, Maria Oberg, finance director. I wanna start by thanking Ali, Joe, Vlad, and their team for an incredibly productive and collaborative audit. I also want to thank the city attorney's office, the city manager's office, and of course my fantastic purchasing division for their thoughts and input into the responses to this audit. We are the first to agree that purchasing is long. I want to remind the committee and members of the public and staff that this is partially by design.

We are spending the public's money, so we need to make sure that they get the best value for their money. And we do that by having an open, transparent, inclusive process so that there's plenty of transparency, no conflict of interest, we don't award to the same bidder over and over. However, all of that takes time. So we do share the frustration, and we are agreeing with all the recommendations that the auditors have proposed. And as you know, we started working on this already last spring and before, and some of the changes are in the amended Muni Code that had the second reading on August 12 and should take effect in September.

Well, you for the report. Do we have any public comments?

No public comment.

Fantastic. Where can I go to, council member Mulcahy?

Thank you, chair. Thanks for the report. So I've got a few questions and going from 10,000 to 15,000 doesn't seem like a huge leap. And I'm curious if you use the twenty four to twenty five calendar year that you or the fiscal year that you used for some of the kind of comparisons, so you had fourteen fifty procurements in 2425, that's for $325,000,000 it's an average of $225,000 ish per procurement. I can understand major processes around 225,000 But I'm curious of the range of 10,000 to 15,000, you're going from 10,000 to 15,000, how many of those fourteen fifty would fit in that box?

I don't know that we have that number I think

you might know what I'm trying to get at. Yes. Like what have we really done here by going from 10,000 to 15,000 in terms of if you talk about responsibility of the public's money, we're also spending a ton of the public's money on making sure that we're crossing every single t and every single I maybe seven or eight times by the time we're able spend the public's money. So to me the data that's been provided is a little lacking in terms of really putting into perspective the recommendation of going from 10 to 15,000. I'd also say that we have department or people in charge of say the airport for example.

It's a billion dollar plus enterprise and we're handcuffing those folks who are dealing with not, you know, procurements that are hundreds of dollars, but thousands and thousands of dollars, and yet we're limiting them to a $15,000 before they have to get permission to spend. Do I have that sort of right?

Thank you, council member. Al B. Udom, deputy director of finance. Yes. The move from 10,000 to 15,000 actually came after a whole lot of deliberation on our part.

We looked at we looked at the data, how much more will go I don't have that in front of me right now, but how much more procurement will be conducted if we went from 10,000 to 15,000, from 15,000 to 20,000, and from 20,000 to 25,000 without competition. And we figured out that above 15,000, there wasn't going to be much of a move, increase in number of procurements that will go through that. Secondly, we also tried to benchmark amongst the jurisdictions around the FI jurisdictions as to what they were doing, and we figured out that 15,000 was about the right level for us to be at. And lastly, there was also some implications with labor relations because when you have a public work project, and if it goes over 15,000, you have to register with DIR. So looking at what the result will be if if we we went went over 15,000, it may increase the number of procurements, but then on the other side of it, it will definitely increase the number of registrations that you have to do with DIR, because they become public work projects requiring registration.

I think finance department is open to revisiting certain services or commodities being at a level over 15,000 for noncompetitive, but at this point we felt 15,000 was the right level for it. I would also like to point out that above 15,000 and up all the way to 250,000, there is a far more simplified process of procurement, which is either by quote or a bid which happens really quickly. It's only after over 250,000 that we start talking about requests for proposals which is gonna take a little longer.

Albie Maria can you clarify though the 10 to 15,000 that was kind of a first step that we did and you are doing further analysis to look at whether we should go further than that?

That is correct on those contracts that don't require the state registration.

I mean we looked at a number of other cities and they're 20,000 to 25,000 which to me is still lower in order to get what really the whole idea was efficiency of San Jose's procurement process, right. I can understand trying to cut the time of how long our procurement processes are, but even getting down to a more expected six to nine months, there's still a cost to our community and to our taxpayers for that part of the deal, right. So I'm still interested in understanding what we're actually what progress we've actually made in the case of the four fifteen annual procurements, what difference have we made just by going from 10 to 15. I think that would be important information for this council to know what needle, what have we actually moved in terms of making that adjustment and other evidence that might support the recommendation because essentially all of the support for the recommendation doesn't sell me at all as to essentially why would we even move from 10? What difference are we making?

So I think that's part of what we're going to test out. So the second reading of the amended muni code happened on August 12, so it should go in effect in September. And then we will evaluate, and in our response we are committing to bringing back regular reports. And with any change in metrics, we need to look at the number and see what changes. I think a lot of relief will actually come.

It makes it easier for departments to use their P Cards. Having to go through a bid of any kind for 10,000 or less would be or 10,000 or above, there will be several that they can buy on their P Card without having to go. So we think there will be some, maybe not on the RFP side, but I think on the day to day purchases this should be easier.

But we're reacting to their report, right? So basically if we accept this report, then you go to your shop and figure out how to implement and then you come back to counsel to make those recommendations that we would approve, right?

Correct.

So I guess Joe, I'm asking really my fundamental question, you're the one who made the recommendation, validate the 10 to 15, you must have seen some value there somewhere and what is it and why?

Just to clarify, we didn't make a recommendation to move to 15. So what we had found and what we have in the report is that other jurisdictions, as you had noted, had competitive thresholds up to around 25,000 in Los Angeles, San Diego. And ours were sitting at the time of the audit was at 10. We were looked at how many fell between how many competitively procured purchase orders were within that range, 10 to 25, it was about 100 between May 2024 and May 2025, which is about two a week. So about a couple procurement procure purchase orders a week fell within that 10 to 25.

We did see that, like I said, we were among some of those larger cities, we were a little low. So we're just saying, hey, this is an area potentially to reassess what's the risk we're willing to take on. Is it $10,000 Is it going to be higher? Now that an organization looked at it and moved it up to 15,000 As Maria said, there's potentially room to move it further. I don't have the detail in terms of how many went from 10,000 to 15,000 I can't remember whether we have that I get that to you at some point. But I don't know where the line is, but it's about 100 that we saw or about two a week that if we didn't have to do that, that's some body work that some staff in organization has to take on.

So I guess the last thing I would say is reiterating the first point which is I understand protecting our taxpayer purse, but at the same time the way we spend it and how we evaluate how we're gonna spend it in some cases cost more. And I think that's an important evaluation to sort of understand. I think we have an incredible community of people that work in this building and it sort of feels like having a bit more trust in the people that we're putting on the ground to make things happen for the city. And I think that we need to consider that. And then secondly, or lastly around the issue of these larger enterprises like the airport, which again is not dealing in hundreds but they're dealing in multiple, multiple thousands of dollars and a RFP process that takes six to nine months can mean a huge difference in their ability to be effective in their jobs and in their work.

So thank you

very much.

Could I add one thing? So the competitive threshold is just one piece of a larger puzzle. The finding overall looks at a range of things whether it's a delegation of authority, so giving department heads like the airport additional flexibility in how they procure. What we were seeing is competitive other jurisdictions provided departments more authority to handle procurements on their own. For example, Long Beach departments handle procurements under $40,000 San Mateo is up to $50,000 Milpitas departments drive their own procurements up to 100,000 without direct control or not control, less input from their finance departments.

Now they may play an oversight role but they're not directly involved as much as well as we have recommendations about really clarifying the role of we can negotiate terms and conditions, how bottlenecks in the system get elevated up to the City Manager's Office to basically work through and waive certain conditions if it's in the City's interest. So that's one piece of kind of a web of recommendations that Maria, she said they agree with these and they're going to take a hard look at how they all kind of fit together because focusing on that is important. But as I said, it's about 100 procurements fit within that 10 to 25. It's one of a number of things that we're recommending.

So, sorry. So you're, Maria, open to taking a look at where our system is creating log jams that are just unnecessary that we can perhaps look at policy that will allow that to move forward in a more efficient way?

Absolutely. I think it becomes a risk tolerance discussion to have that finance can't lead on its own. It has to involve city attorney's office as well as the city manager's office. But yes, are committed to having those discussions.

Thank you. Well, thank you. Before I go to council member Kameh, I take privileges to ask some of the questions I have. I agree with council member Mookahi that 10,000 to 15,000, I think that policy might have been set, don't know how many years ago. We need to move on with the modern world, how do we be more efficient.

I know that procurement above 10,000 become cumbersome because as a former fire captain working the facility and and response for company stores, sometimes this process is arduous and it it create more spending and more resource from our side versus being more efficient. But all said and done, I'm looking forward for your new recommendation come up on the council. So that way we can get a little more clarification and hopefully we can be more efficient. I do have a couple of question. What can we do to reduce that RFP?

You got your RFI, RFQ and then you go right to RFP And that's a long process, six to nine months. Are we using any new tools or we're using a new technology or do we reach out to other city or government agency where we can look at the procurement to a particular company that is trusted, that has been around and make it a lot easier and more efficient?

Yes to all. We have taken a look and we have made it easier for us to use the cooperative agreement which does exactly what you said, looking at what other jurisdictions have done for similar or projects of of similar scope. So it comes down to as long as the scope is more or less the same as we want, then absolutely that has been made easier.

Well, we'd written a note. Thank you for that answer. And the second question I have for you is that in our policy, it stated very clear that we we should support our local businesses prior to go on the outside. Now, the last couple of years there was problematic when we went to a company on the outside would cost us in a million dollars more less guarantee. How do we overcome that?

Because I know this, for example, from mattresses to equipments to smoke detectors, there are folks out there that find the loopholes. What they do is say, oh, got an office here. It's just their bedroom. And I go, okay, that's qualified for local businesses. I think we need to do a little more due diligent to make sure that it is a true businesses here in town, you know, and within our realm to support. So how, what are you doing to make sure that we truly support our small businesses here?

Councilmember Don, thank you for that question. Albie Udom, Deputy Director of Finance. The Munich Code states that if a local or small business applies, they get a preference or extra points in the evaluation, whether it's price based or evaluative. So they do get that. And that is how we make sure that small local businesses get a chance at being awarded a contract.

To make sure that there are small local businesses within our area, we obtain the first of all, they have to certify that there's more local business here, and we obtain their sector of state registration to make sure that they're actually headquartered here. Is every single one of them correct? I couldn't say. But we have to go with what they provide to us. It may be that we look at other ways to make sure that they are small local businesses within our area, within San Jose, within the county. But at this time, that's what we've been using, and that's been working for us.

Well, thank you. I'm hoping that Bill will use more data that they can be proven. The fact that they are small businesses that exist in San Jose not just opened up the last couple of months because they heard about our bid process, but they are true business that been established here in San Jose. Well, thank you very much for the report and keep up the good work. I'm gonna go to council member Kameh.

Thank you very much, chair. As always, I I really wanna thank the auditor and the audit team. Your reports are always very thorough and I really do appreciate it. I appreciate your reaching out and always being available to answer all of the questions, tons of questions that may arise. I also wanna thank the finance department for agreeing to all of it and having your timeline on there.

I always think that that's that's very good because I look forward to to having some some movement there. I wanna use council member Mulcahy's technical term saying that at the end of the day, we want to remove the logjam. It's technical terms. To create to create efficiencies. So I think that although the movement is incremental, it is movement and I think that that takes us in the right direction. So I really wanna thank you for that and with that I'd like to accept the audit report, and refer and cross reference this audit to be heard by the full city council on September 9.

Second. Alright. We got first, second, let's vote.

That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. Here we go on to our third item. Fireworks ordinance work plan status report. And, we have staff attending, which is, deputy chief, fire chief, James Dobson, police captain, Steve Donohue Deputy Director Rachel Roberts and Product and Project Manager Namrata Bhatra Agrawal and Program Manager, Kia O'Hara.

Good afternoon chair, committee members, colleagues. My name is James Dobson, deputy fire chief and fire marshal with the San Jose Fire Department. Today, have the pleasure of being accompanied by deputy director Rachel Roberts of code enforcement, captain Steve Donahue with the San Jose Police Department, product and project manager Namrata Patra Agrawal with the Information Technology Department and Project Manager Keohara with the Information Technology Department. We are pleased to present the 2025 fireworks ordinance work plan status up update report. This report reflects the collective efforts of a dedicated team of individuals from multiple city departments committed to supporting the city's ongoing work to mitigate the risks of illegal fireworks, protect public safety, and strengthen our enforcement strategies.

The city's fireworks ordinance work plan has several core components. Public education and outreach to inform the residents about the dangers and consequences of illegal fireworks, community reporting that allows the public to share information quickly and accurately, enforcement strategies designed to hold violators accountable and to deter use moving forward, and continuous evaluation and coordination across departments to refine our approach. For the 2025 campaign, our goals were to increase public awareness that all fireworks are illegal and can result in loss of life, property loss, and damage to the environment. To use hotspot data from the 2024 campaign to better target advertising and enforcement. To improve the refresh rate of our SJ-three 11 illegal fireworks dashboard for the near real time utilization for first responders, to reduce illegal fireworks activities, injuries, and fires, to explore and evaluate the UAV or drone use in conjunction with the social host ordinance for enforcement which during this year resulted in the initiation of our drone enforcement pilot and finally to complete a fine adjustment study with a particular focus on increasing the spectator fine amount.

These goals build on years of work and reflect feedback from our community, especially neighborhood associations who continue to tell us that illegal fireworks activity is among one of their top concerns. Working to combat San Jose's illegal fireworks is a year long process. Process. That starts in August when our team completes the process of issuing citations and warning and initiates debriefings to learn from the prior year's campaign. It extends to the following year's fourth of July holiday and then starts again.

This past year we saw enhancements in outreach, technology and enforcement. Our campaign expanded multi lingual messaging, deployed targeted ads in identified hotspots. We evaluated the use of the new state legislation AB fourteen oh three with increased fine amounts of up to $100,000 in incarceration for up to a year for the possession of dangerous fireworks. We completed the fine adjustment study and we initiated the drone pilot program. All of this while coordinating with regional partners and engaging with our neighborhood associations and council district representatives.

I want to emphasize that despite these efforts fireworks remain a significant threat. They are not simply a nuisance. They cause fires, medical emergencies, and disrupt the quality of life in our neighborhoods. Outreach continues to be the foundation of our prevention efforts. The outreach advertising campaign emphasized accessibility and inclusivity.

Advertising was translated from English into Spanish, Vietnamese, simplified Chinese and traditional Chinese. We deployed billboards, banners, bus shelter signage and even radio ads. We provided brochures and other printed materials at our community centers, libraries, and fire stations. Our Fed Up With Fireworks campaign toolkits were shared with city council offices, schools, and neighborhood groups. We held a news conference with our elected officials to advertise legal fireworks and drone shows to provide a safe, family friendly alternative to illegal fireworks use.

These efforts were targeted to provide consistent messaging across San Jose's diverse communities. This slide talks about fire department responses. During the twenty twenty five Lunar New Year, the San Jose Fire Department responded to 21 fireworks related incidents, including one structure fire, two rubbish fires, three medical emergencies, and 15 general complaints. During the July 4 period, we responded to 69 fireworks related incidents including three structure fires, 20 vegetation fires, 27 rubbish fires, 15 general complaints, and four medical emergencies. These responses illustrate the significant risk associated with illegal fireworks.

While fire related calls were up as compared to the previous year, many factors can influence the number of fires that do department also faced a high volume of fireworks related calls, including a 122 fireworks related calls during Lunar New Year and 586 fireworks related calls during the July 4. Enforcement efforts resulted in one arrest and the multiple investigations that were conducted led to the seizure of 3,300 pounds of illegal fireworks permanently preventing the distribution and use of those dangerous fireworks and improvised devices in our neighborhoods. Their support of the drone pilot program resulted in sufficient data to initiate seven administrative citations. For the hotline of 11, while we saw a steady decline in the 11 hotline for illegal fireworks over the last few years, the 11 hotline remains a critical tool to provide online reporting information and accessibility to reporting illegal fireworks over the phone for those people that may not have access to the app or to the Internet. During the July 4, a 132 fire works related hotline calls were received with 14 being routed to after hour service.

This year IT improved the dashboard refresh rate to five minutes. This near real time visibility gave us a better picture of emerging hotspots and was available to first responders. The SJ three zero one online reporting tool saw 71 illegal fireworks reports during Lunar New Year and eight eighty nine illegal fireworks report during the July 4. Roughly 50% of the reports made on the July 4 were anonymous. These reports can be used for hotspot data collection but cannot be used for citations or warnings.

This year eight administrative citations were issued as a result of registered users reporting through the SJ-three 11 online reporting tool which is a significant increase from the two previous years. We continue to evaluate whether having anonymous reporting features reduces our ability to receive reports that can be used for citations and warnings. As I indicated earlier, seven administrative citations were directly related to data obtained from the drone pilot program, making a total of 15 illegal fireworks administrative citations issued by code enforcement so far this year. It is important to note that hotspot data generated during this year's campaign will be utilized for targeted enforcement and outreach during this coming year's illegal fireworks campaign. One of the significant developments this year was our fine adjustment study.

Currently spectators of illegal fireworks face a $25 fine which is less than the price of admission to many of our paid firework shows conducted in San Jose. Neighborhood associations, council members and enforcement partners agree that this amount is not a deterrent. Our review of peer jurisdictions throughout the state showed that some already imposed $500 fines for spectators. We recommend raising San Jose Spectator fine to $500 This will provide a stronger deterrence, better align San Jose with leading jurisdictions prioritizing public safety and support our broader goals of preventing loss of life, property damage, and environmental harm. City staff are now working with the city attorney's office to amend the fine schedule with their proposal to return to council for consideration.

Looking ahead, our team will continue to enhance enforcement strategies by evaluating the drone drone pilot and real time data integration. We will continue to seek state and federal grants to fund expanded outreach and enforcement. Recently, we applied for a $169,710 grant to assist with campaign enhancements and are awaiting hopeful approval. We are working to strengthen regional collaboration with neighboring jurisdictions. We will refresh campaign messaging to highlight our enhanced enforcement tools and continue to focus on the dangers of illegal fireworks.

And lastly, will continue enhancing community reporting tools and enforcement technologies. Our priority remains clear, protecting life, property, the environment while respecting community traditions and celebrations. In closing, we want to acknowledge that illegal fireworks are a persistent challenge. One that we are addressing through education, technology, and enforcement. We are proud of the progress we've made, but we also recognize that more work

is

needed. By increasing fines, using drones, improving SJ-three 11, and working with our community, we are taking concrete steps to protect lives property and the environment. Thank you for your time and we would be happy to answer any questions.

Thank you for the report. Do we have any public comments?

No public comment.

Alright. I'm gonna go to council member Kameh.

Thank you so much for the report. This is really important, when you think about, you know, all of the dry areas that there are and, you know, I I know that sometimes, you know, it's thought, oh, well, it's not gonna make a difference or whatever. And then all of a sudden, it's a it's a big deal. So thank you for all the work. I I do agree with the increasing in fines.

I think that that's the way to go. I also think that the use of drones is very helpful. I was just curious in terms of, I know this was a pilot, but will you continue to be using drones or how is it gonna work? Because it seems to me that that puts out sort of a broader area that you're able to look at.

Thank you council member. I'm gonna have captain captain Donahue help me with that question.

Hi, Captain Steve Donahue, SANS APD Support Services Division. Short answer is yes. We definitely want to continue to use drones. It is staffing limited. This year we did something kind of neat. We worked with our community emergency response team and brought in civilian personnel to help us with the drone program. They were licensed drone operators and using them we were able to partner them with San Jose Police Department personnel which allowed them to fly in certain areas that they normally wouldn't be allowed to fly. And using their drone footage that helped with some of our citations. So we hope to integrate that into the future and be able to use both our community members and our department personnel to do that.

Yeah. That sounds terrific. Know, I do know that there's increased interest in you know how we can use drones to augment or to assist. So I'm I'm delighted that you're you're thinking about you know using that in other ways. So thank you so much for that. I would like to go ahead and move acceptance of the status report.

Second.

Thank you council member Kamay. I wanna go to council member Mulcahy.

Thank you. Thanks for the report. Deputy chief, I'm curious and maybe captain Donahy, you have to weigh in too and maybe in Rachel. Like, on July 4, July, what does staffing look like and how are we deploying to kind of root out the issues before they happen. And I'll give you just an example, as a candidate, I had two different neighborhoods in District 6 that were sort of calling out their neighbors because they do it out the middle of their street and every all the neighbors show up and they're doing it in a city street out in public.

So what does it look like on July 4 to try to get ahead of it? And then I guess the second part is, if we know where these hotspots are, what do we do with that information?

So great, I'm going to start with the last part of that. When we have those hotspots, we actually target those areas for advertising, not only with social media, but with actually printed advertising to try and make sure that the community knows the hazards, but also what the affected populations are. That's part of it. For the targeted response, I'll let Captain Donahue speak to that, but one thing I will say that for the fire department, staffing is always a challenge during holidays. We tend to move to we have minimum staffing and we move to mandatory, so bringing people in to make sure that we have sufficient coverage throughout the department.

In addition, because fourth of July falls usually right in the middle of our wildland season, depending on whether at times we actually staff additional resources, which then can also be a challenge.

Thank you. Yes, from a police department perspective it's very similar challenges. As you can imagine fourth of July is a family holiday. People like to be home with their families. And so the personnel that we use for the drone enforcement is supplementary personnel to the division. Patrol is super busy that day. They are swamped with calls. And so we can't pull from the patrol structure to deal with the fourth of July fireworks. These are all volunteers that come in on their time off in secondary employment to do this. So that day we only had two people able to come in.

We were able to pair a CERT operator with one of those people so that they could go out and take drone footage. The other one was a drone operator on their own and they were able to take their own footage. So staffing was very, very tight. Now with those two different vehicles out there, they were able to write six citations total which is pretty good, all things considered with only two operational units. Now in the future we hope to increase that. We're trying to make it enticing for people to come in but really it's a volunteer assignment.

So did you say CERT? So it's CERT certified folks that are doing the drone program?

Yes, so the CERT, the Community Emergency Response Team, they're the ones that are coming in to help us.

Great, yeah I was going to say we have such a growing number of people that are getting certified. Look And we don't have many disasters in this town. They're always looking for something to apply themselves to. So it seems like a good opportunity

to engage Yeah, were with fantastic. They were very enthusiastic about coming out and helping us and spending Cool, time with

all right, thanks, thanks.

Lastly Councilman, one of the things that I would tell you is that for the fire department and the police department, especially fourth of July, that's one of our busiest days. The number of calls not just related to fireworks, but overall are some of the highest we have all year.

Thank you, Council Member Mulcahy. We're going to go to Council Member George Casey.

Thank you. Appreciate the report. I guess, I mean it's a tough deal all the way around, but I just tend to think folks that engage in this type of behavior, advertising that it's illegal to them is not gonna really modify or change their behavior. So I'm wondering if there's an opportunity to do something even more drastic to make an example of several people in order for it to really hit home. I know in Sacramento they have a situation where I guess it's $10,000 if you set off fireworks on city owned property or in critical infrastructure areas.

And I think someone got hit with $2,100,000 in fines this past July 4. I think something like that where you know there's a potential for you to be on the hook for a substantial amount of money if you engage in this type of behavior would break through some of the noise and register for some folks. Otherwise, I mean I applaud the effort and I understand there's limited resources and you're making attempting a to make an impact. But I just think we got to really hit somebody hard and make an example out of somebody. So if there were an opportunity for us to pursue or consider something along the lines of what Sacramento did in terms of the city owned properties.

I have for example Cahalan, I know Captain Donahue knows the area well, it was like bombs over Baghdad this past July 4. Mean it was really, really bad and they actually burned down some trees and we went afterwards, after Parks cleaned up we had to go and clean up as well. So the amount of damage it does to our area and just the neighbors, I it's I don't see us putting a dent in this unless we do something really drastic. So I would hope you would consider coming back to us with something like that asking us to impose something like that.

Thank you for that. I agree with you. Like I indicated these are not nuisances. This really disrupts our communities. And yes, think we're looking for tools. We're engaging not only with other jurisdictions, but locally with our neighborhood associations to gather information to try and further that and to come up with some of these items that really can be impactful. I wanted to invite Rachel to comment. Rachel comment.

We Roberts, deputy director of code enforcement. So as chief Dobson said, there has been ongoing discussion around that. One of the challenges we have currently in the city is that in order for someone to have their due process when they've been issued a fine as regarding citations, is they're required to pay that citation before they can have their appeal hearing. And so there is some concerns around if the fines are so steep that makes it impossible for someone to actually have their due process by having to pay that first. We could put ourselves in kind of a predicament.

So that's definitely been part of the conversation. As far as city properties, we haven't really explored specifically, but I think that that conversation is going to continue. And we'll do our best to provide more information and update when we bring back the fines for the spectators.

Thank you. I would suggest we follow what's going on in Sacramento as far as that case as it goes to. I would imagine this guy's gonna appeal or do something. So if they're able to make that stick, it's good news for us. Thank you.

Thank you council member Casey. We're gonna go to council member Tordios.

Thank you chair and thank you staff for the presentation. This is an issue that's been top of mind for me since one of the hotspots hotspots in our neighborhood was about 100 feet from our front door this past year. So we spent many days seeing the illegal fireworks going off very close to home. I had two quick questions here and apologies if I missed this in the staff report, but do we know why 2023 was such a hotspot for both citations and arrests?

So are you talking about this last year or the prior year?

Just looking at the chart on Slide six of the police call volume and enforcement, it looks like 2023 was far and away the largest year for citations and arrests even though it was pretty flat in terms of calls for service.

I think they're pulling it up right now. Okay. So I'm going to ask that Rachel Roberts comment and then we'll also have Captain Donahue have an opportunity because there there's two different types of citations. We have administrative citation and criminal citations. So we'll start with Rachel.

Thank you. I know that around that time as when we made a change, there was a decision made to allow the anonymous complaints. So we have seen a decline in the amount of administrative citations that we can issue without having an actual reporting party that we can circle back with, either provide testimony or ask additional questions, so on and so forth. I do also know that year over year we've been trying different strategies on the police department side, which I know Donahue will speak to in just a moment. But it is a lot of times dependent on what staffing we have available and what funding and resources we have each year and what we can deploy for the July 4.

Thank you for your question. Yes, as she referenced, it's really about the techniques that we used prior to the July 4 that year where we were able to get a couple of really good cases on some people who were selling fireworks and storing them. We also had some fire incidents that led us to have some information on who had what and where. So without giving away the investigative secrets, that's what it was. And then you saw this year we were able to put two good cases together for a large quantity of storage of fireworks.

Thank you. And then my only other comment would be echoing the concerns raised by some of my colleagues. We'd love to see a report back on increasing the fines for use and possession, not just the spectator fines. Since it's a little strange to me that the spectator fines, if this goes forward, would be only 50% or would be 50% of the first violation for use and possession. So it feels like there may be room to increase there as well.

Thank you council member Torrios. Well, thank you. I, My office work with our fire department, police department, code enforcement and our neighborhood association in order to came up with this pilot program. I see there's a lot of value. It's it's a it's in an infant stage.

It'll take time to to make it better. I was up on Sierra Road looking down the the city of San Jose and boy I'll tell you it did. And I'll go to council member Casey, it is like bombing out there. And my question to you is, is the people who got caught with 3,300 pounds of fireworks, did we did both administrative citation and criminal citation?

To my knowledge, they're just criminal because of the charges. If If you give me the latitude, have with us Josh Schwitters. He's an officer in our bomb squad, and he is our expert on fireworks and explosive devices. He might be able to speak to that.

Okay.

Good afternoon. My name is, Josh Whitters. I'm currently assigned to the bomb squad, and, I actually run the department's drone program as well. To answer your question, the cases that you're referring to, they were charged criminally. They were felony cases, and so they're currently in the hands of the district attorney's office, and they're working that direction. Because possession of dangerous fireworks over a 100 pounds is actually a felony. So the threshold to get a felony case on someone for possession of dangerous fireworks is actually pretty low.

And did we use the a b 14 o three in order to on top of the criminal, we could have fined him a $100,000 where it hits the pocket, that's what counts?

I believe that would be determined after sentencing. So they would have to be convicted and then sentenced, and then that's when the disciplinary action would happen, including any fines or anything associated with that.

Yes.

Well thank you, thank you for the answer. The other question I have for you is this, why we can't use the hot zone and site them, you know, the the drone identify the hot zone. Right? And I would imagine the the drones now with the four k ability to observe the people who are in violation of fireworks, why can't we use that footage to narrow down the citizen or the vehicle or even the address and cite them?

So let me clarify what you're asking. Are you asking if we can use the drones to identify the individuals in the footage?

Yes, individual, the address or even the vehicle, right, which Our lies in

muni code is written such that it's a liability on the residents that is using the fireworks. So what we do is we capture individuals related to that residence. So we did this year have a citation, for example, in a park. That citation can't be filed, it can't be used, because it doesn't associate them to the residents for the strict liability of using those fireworks. So the owner of the residence gets fined, not the individual firing it.

If, however, we were to send officers out, detain the individual, they then could be arrested or cited or fined for using the fireworks. But that's staffing intensive. Imagine sending officers out to every location where fireworks are and then detaining all the people there. So using the drones, it was very staffing allowance. It allowed us the opportunity to hit multiple locations in brief periods of time to capture the information we need to provide that to code enforcement for that citation.

And thank you for that answer. Regarding the Spectator, if we were to go to the $500 fine, what is considered within that geographical area? Is it within a thousand feet the spectator? Is it within a 500 feet or couple 100 feet?

So per the municipal code, a spectator is defined as someone who is, like, viewing, observing, you know, part of the the crowd within 200 feet of an unpermitted fireworks event display, so forth.

Well, thank you. And I know that it's difficult with the resource that we have, but I think as you're looking toward into the future as we hire more police officer perhaps even then use the combination of police officer code enforcement and public safety officer to come out and cite these violators. And again, I just wanna say thank you for the first time that we we take some type of action within the city of San Jose and I appreciate all your hard work both of police and fire and I'm very proud of you. Now I'm gonna go to oh, I saw council member Casey.

So captain Donahue, you could I mean, there's some practical realities too. Right? For example, at Cahalan, we'd have a hundred, two hundred people out there shooting off fireworks and that's difficult situation to send our officers into. I mean how many would you have to have to be safely, orderly, go in there and cite folks? So there are some logistical and practical challenges to enforcing some of these laws, right?

Very much so. I mean, if you imagine you've got 150, 200 people, how are we going to detain that many people and keep them there for the time period necessary to cite every one of them for the $500 incredibly time and manpower intensive.

That's why we got to get one of them and hit them with $2,000,000

and make an example out of them. Thank you. Appreciate it.

Thank you, Kevin.

Thank you, sir.

All right, we have our motion and our seconds, let's vote.

That motion passes unanimously.

Thank you. And we have open forum.

No public comment.

Meeting adjourned.