[{"_1":2,"_134":-5,"_135":-5},"loaderData",{"_3":4,"_26":27},"root",{"_5":6,"_17":10,"_18":19,"_20":21,"_22":10,"_23":-5,"_24":-5,"_25":10},"user",{"_7":8,"_9":10,"_11":10,"_12":-5,"_13":-5,"_14":15,"_16":-5},"roles",[],"isAuthenticated",false,"isPremium","planName","subscriptionStatus","featureFlags",{},"insightsBudget","isDevelopmentHost","userPreferences",{},"recaptchaSiteKey","6LcvOJcUAAAAAHsB-gPGfGktcRlKpH7OTIU_dMTD","isImpersonating","impersonation","affiliateStatus","isFreedomPortal","routes/v2/article/layout",{"_28":29,"_30":31},"notFound",true,"relatedArticles",[32,75,87,98,110,122],{"_33":34,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":40,"_41":42,"_43":44,"_45":46,"_47":48,"_49":50,"_51":52,"_53":54,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":60,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":66,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},"mediaId",6514804,"mediaKeyId","5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3","parentId",5023831,"title","Votes at a glance: key San Jose City Council actions on June 17, 2025","audioSeconds",4282,"startMs",10140000,"endMs",14422000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=10140&end=14422","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_10140000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6514804/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Votes-at-a-glance-key-San-Jose-City-Council-actions-on-June-17-2025","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514804-54fb705ddc1636fa2333e31e402261c0/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=i3z5ZwFFNYeGm0Va77CP1-q-zmQP1SsyJNhXXQoMmqssTYB1a7vhaM97wVCEG5rATI8P~lUEMBzP1LSFoX7qeGHheU0T014FUA9UuStDYILtM8012p1eO5Wb5Z3AHzJZFAEYSP9YfAfrO3PpaMZC9bg9MlAc5ef07oTyd-J1veLCSNwJbnqUHOQoKU7rreXCVYqbiYxR4SZIn609gzYjKwpp3v7GxEGYfvKuNCDveohqtgsa9tks348evwuUuzP-Vm-aYe1D06WbwtSXoWi7kSJxGTNbjSCHMi2sp54XZWwRq1XIxo38hEIRf~KgzB-CxWmQFwDAR11UTi0~ipfBhg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","City of San Jose, CA","date","2025-06-18T06:03:16.597Z","article","Below is a concise listing of major motions and final outcomes recorded during the San Jose City Council meeting on June 17, 2025. Where available the vote tally or result is provided.

- Item 1 (City Financing Authority / Lease Revenue Bonds): Motion to authorize issuance of lease revenue bonds for the Muni Water Building project — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.5 (General Obligation Bonds series 2025): Authorization to issue GO bonds up to $209,570,000 — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.3 (Various budget actions FY24‑25): Approval — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.4 (Adoption of annual appropriation ordinance and funding sources FY25‑26): Approval — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 2.23 (Consent contract separate vote after recusal): Approval of contract with BrightView Landscape Services (councilor Mulcahy recused) — Motion passed unanimously among remaining members.

- Item 2.2 (Final adoption of ordinances relating to trespass/van‑lording): Substitute motion adopted 9–1 (Campos opposed); staff directed to return with implementation memo for trespass enforcement and to consider alternative van‑lording wording.

- Item 3.6 (Multifamily housing revenue notes for 525 North Capital Development): Approval — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.7 (Recording liens for unpaid sidewalk repairs): Resolution confirming report and directing recording of liens — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.8 (Reappointment of City Auditor): Reappointment of Joe Royce as City Auditor — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 3.9 (Settlement: Tovar v. City of San Jose et al.): Approved settlement agreement — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 4.1 (Independent Police Auditor 2024 year‑end report): Council accepted the IPA report and the majority of recommendations; motion passed unanimously.

- Item 8.1–8.4 (Renewal/approval of several Business Improvement District annual budgets: Japantown, Downtown, Monterey Corridor, Tully Road Eastridge): Resolutions approving budgets and levying assessments — Motions passed unanimously.

- Item 8.5 (Alameda CBID formation): Weighted property‑owner ballot tallied in favor (111,389.66 in favor vs 109,907.36 opposed); council adopted management plan and ordered assessment recorded — Motion approved.

- Item 8.7 (Freeway‑facing digital billboards on city property): Council authorized negotiation/execution of leases with Clear Channel Outdoor and Outfront Foster Interstate for three signs; certification of IS/MNDs and takedown obligations; Councilmember Mulcahy recused — Motion approved.

- Item 8.8 (Navigation hub and motel program contracts): Council authorized contract authority (~$9.26M) for HomeFirst to operate navigation hub and five motels — Motion passed unanimously.

- Item 8.9, 8.10 (Multifamily housing incentive tax/fee waivers — Santana Row Lot 12 and 0 Seeley): Council approved residential tax and fee waivers tied to multifamily incentives — Motions passed unanimously.

- Land Use Consent and other procedural consent calendar items: Approved (multiple items) — Most motions passed unanimously; specific pulled items were voted as noted above.

Context: Most adopted motions were unanimous or near‑unanimous; a handful of items (van‑lording/trepass ordinance and the Alameda CBID ballot) recorded notable opposition or close results. Several actions require follow‑up implementation memos, contract finalizations, or county filings.","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","JUN 17, 2025 | City Council","oneSentenceSummary","Summary of recorded motions and final outcomes from the June 17 City Council meeting, including budget approvals, bond authorizations, and zoning and contract votes.","taxTitle","San Jose , Santa Clara County, California","taxId",2857,"location","headline","","shortSummary",{"_33":76,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":77,"_41":78,"_43":79,"_45":80,"_47":81,"_49":82,"_51":83,"_53":84,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":85,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":86,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514808,"Independent Police Auditor’s 2024 year‑end report urges faster access to officer‑involved shooting materials",1379,11187000,12566000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=11187&end=12566","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_11187000.jpg","/articles/6514808/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Independent-Police-Auditors-2024-yearend-report-urges-faster-access-to-officerinvolved-shooting-materials","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514808-94a6dc7c84587088743df608178687d1/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=TfwgKopRIpfaEioswhjFdeCW4IX~r0w69DlfqUvv44amM8h--aLsGXZxG4HCC2efPnyjdzWBhWI13gTS7Ool75C8ih5XgGCvOEB58eEU1J2njQG2exMiLBjSlyOSDYxcIJ~fww7aneJ-blH8bu7en~Lxr~2DWW-1fdoMO-WpCePZkMF7GsSZKLHMbprTb5VcWkntBmk4D2U2C5mlfFF~2KOEoRsK-ZQdiMw7bhdLPsyjU1~71G1p6j9S8pO37NUn~g~lxth1~~KpYNK4DSg2Y5cm3wRSoc49hVvYpPEt0rIeePxVU6uWWaq0FWB-sgU1hI67~n-XeZzjuRIkq~I7kA__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Independent Police Auditor Eddie Aubrey presented the office’s 2024 year‑end report to the San Jose City Council on June 17, urging expanded access for the auditor’s office to officer‑involved shooting investigations and recommending a formal Memorandum of Agreement (MOA) with Internal Affairs to clarify roles and speed oversight.

Key findings: The IPA’s office audited 282 cases in 2024 and reviewed allegations from 373 complaints — a 17% increase over 2023 — with 157 sustained allegations (a 14% sustain rate). \"There were 373 complaints, which was a 17% increase from 2023,\" Aubrey told the council. He said 69% of findings concluded no misconduct, and that department‑initiated complaints had a higher sustained rate than community complaints.

Major recommendations: Aubrey recommended 12 reforms grouped under oversight and access, operations and policy, and accountability and transparency. Among the highest‑priority recommendations were: (1) a formal MOA between the IPA and Internal Affairs; (2) earlier and broader access to officer‑involved shooting scene briefings, body‑worn camera footage and interviews; and (3) classification of critical incidents (officer‑involved shootings, custody deaths, civil suits) as department‑initiated investigations to ensure consistent auditing.

Council response: Councilmembers praised Aubrey’s outreach and the new office’s strategic plan. Some council members requested continued discussions with the police chief about the second recommendation — timely access to OIS materials — because of concerns about criminal investigations and DA coordination. Chief Paul Joseph said officer‑involved‑shooting investigations are criminal investigations from the outset and noted collaboration with the district attorney; Aubrey responded that other Northern California jurisdictions provide contemporaneous oversight access without jeopardizing criminal probes.

Other findings: The IPA reported 569 total use‑of‑force incidents in 2024, including 13 great‑bodily‑injury cases and five officer‑involved shootings. Aubrey noted patterns including canine deployments as a frequent factor in serious injuries and recommended reviewing canine procedures and reducing head/face strikes where possible.

Action: Council approved a motion supporting a staff memo accepting ten of the IPA’s 12 recommendations and requested continued collaborative discussions about the OIS access recommendation. The motion passed unanimously.

Ending note: The IPA said real‑time auditing and improved access would strengthen public trust and oversight while preserving criminal investigative integrity; council and police leaders agreed to continue working together on implementation details.","The city’s independent police auditor presented a first year report recommending expanded oversight access to officer‑involved shooting investigations, broader review of use‑of‑force incidents, and a formal memorandum of agreement with Internal Affairs.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":46,"_47":92,"_49":93,"_51":94,"_53":95,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":96,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":97,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514812,"Property owners vote narrowly to form Alameda Community Benefit Improvement District",3601,10821000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=10821&end=14422","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_10821000.jpg","/articles/6514812/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Property-owners-vote-narrowly-to-form-Alameda-Community-Benefit-Improvement-District","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514812-f5a17c06b0aa2aae55a6d18f22e7cbee/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=L35Cp~G~5E2fJntmV8x69bFbIGCCxKa3uH0xFfbxq2SxhYaO7nLJjsFYg7s0Q0krKrwOxgBJ-ras8qiPrfquvUFEU9ibqOZlxDy7engmcarZtzvd2KOcwJk2BiBWdXQXQbcgSa4T8DmQ1reQDk35U-5v5YoGEfRTz8oMqnIZIM2FcRko~hSfQ31GeGkZlmNS1pc-rrnzVv1uVf8OlcFoqu~dApUBgF2bM-gAVA5LPfCc1NzmBKyAH1mu~zZGFNISKXTpB7O96-wHpEKLSI9pQbC-T0pU9ItOPwZgfYRHwO2oUtuuR1L7HL1Srdb0Usv474lPAr4Mr4NLIq1bfGdRhg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","Property owners in the Alameda business corridor voted by a narrow margin to establish a Community Benefit Improvement District (CBID), and the City Council on June 17 adopted resolutions approving the management plan and directing the city clerk to record the assessment.

Ballot result: The city clerk reported 111,389.66 weighted assessment votes in favor and 109,907.36 opposed — a narrow majority in favor. Because ballots are weighted by assessment, the measure met the statutory threshold and the council moved forward to establish the district.

What the CBID will do: The proposed Alameda CBID will fund cleaning and safety services, beautification, signage and administrative costs across properties fronting The Alameda between Scheele Avenue and Stockton Street. Staff presented a budget in which roughly 78% of funds would be dedicated to clean‑and‑safe activities, with the remainder for beautification, signage and administration. City property in the district will pay approximately $8,500 annually as the municipal assessment share.

Why this matters: Property‑based assessments create a dedicated funding stream for corridor maintenance and help business associations coordinate tourism and marketing, public‑space upkeep and safety services. The Alameda Business Association will form a board to present annual budgets and manage programs.

Council action and next steps: The council accepted staff’s recommendation for the city to vote in favor as a property owner, closed the ballot, declared the result, adopted the management and engineer’s reports, and directed the city clerk to record the notice of assessment. Staff will submit the assessment roll to the county and the Alameda CBID proposes to begin operations January 2026.

Community reaction: Supporters told the council their neighborhoods and businesses feel “rundown and dirty” and said residents want more frequent cleaning, public‑space activation and safety services. Several residents present urged careful neighborhood engagement and safeguards for sensitive uses.

Ending note: The CBID will give neighborhood property owners direct control over a new, dedicated assessment to fund corridor services; opponents who voted no will continue to have the annual dissolution option under state law if the district fails to meet members’ needs.","A weighted property‑owner ballot favored forming a new business improvement district along The Alameda; the council adopted the management plan and ordered the assessment record recorded.",{"_33":99,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":100,"_41":101,"_43":102,"_45":103,"_47":104,"_49":105,"_51":106,"_53":107,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":108,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":109,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514817,"Council clears five freeway‑facing digital billboards; companies to remove 35 static faces citywide",166,10800000,10966000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=10800&end=10966","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_10800000.jpg","/articles/6514817/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/Council-clears-five-freewayfacing-digital-billboards-companies-to-remove-35-static-faces-citywide","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514817-e101a60eddd14d9326c303bde077474f/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=JmX8G~g8forC~ZrzcAplJOF6RsjtVxF62ICP87W-YNtzNpW1DRTcNxZuiBBi8Szh98xRBwWt1GWJaEQ~n1xtZaXH8Zf7Aw2j7zoRIWLaGroqnSM-Yh5ofgjTUHplGSpbicWAmaw56NwmRQ~WRUAqkqDXUtNPkN2FAPe2x9QjKFCsWww~iJDzENlbGQ9ioZAO7N9dUkETVqXM2Pz98S2UNa65f7zVFwAdpw~4xvgwVC9cq3G5LE92Kp8xE1j~u4W~dhbrdOwPUITClkuAVEKGcxnJX3fRjJZGoT6S8z3cm-Plth1yrn2vC9oZQk2Zf3L8Vok~7kUHH2tBHL30KY9vDg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Jose City Council on June 17 approved staff recommendations to negotiate and execute leases for three freeway‑facing digital signs on city property and certified the associated environmental reviews. The action includes an expanded takedown requirement for existing static billboards and greater city messaging time on the new signs.

The specifics: Two leases with Clear Channel Outdoor (one two‑faced sign at US‑101/Mayberry Road and one single face at SR‑87/West Mission) and one lease with Outfront Foster Interstate (double face at SR‑87/Willow Street) were authorized. Council approved the related mitigated negative declarations for the projects. As part of the agreements, Clear Channel will pay 45% of gross revenues and Outfront will pay 40% of gross revenues to the city (with minimum guarantees); the city will receive 12.5% of display time for public messaging on the signs.

Takedown and city use: The companies proposed removing a total of 35 static billboard faces across the city (the council policy required a 6:1 removal ratio; staff said the proposed takedowns exceed the requirement). The city’s share of displayed time increased from the RFP’s 10% to 12.5%, and signage content prohibitions were enumerated (no alcohol, tobacco, cannabis, guns, profane or pornographic material, political or religious advocacy or adverse city content without consent).

Why this mattered: Supporters including business groups and the sign vendors said the leases will generate revenue for city services, amplify emergency messaging and support major events. Opponents — including scientists, environmental groups and local residents — raised concerns about light pollution, health‑risk studies on blue‑rich LED lighting, wildlife impacts near riparian areas, and potential litigation or spillover pressure to allow digital signs on private property.

Council discussion: Deputy Director Blagaszilowicz and staff described project‑level CEQA work and the public comment record. David Keon (planning) and Kevin Eyst (real estate) outlined lease terms and revenue projections. Environmental and astronomy experts warned of “light trespass” and long‑term health risks; Clear Channel defended its design and noted that modern LEDs are more directional and will use San Jose Clean Energy’s 100% renewable power supply.

Vote and conditions: The council voted to authorize negotiation and execution of the leases and to certify the environmental documents; one council member recused (Mulcahy) because of a reported conflict. Staff emphasized that the vendors must remove the identified static faces before the new digital signs are activated. Council also secured emergency control rights for the city to use sign time and to take control in an emergency.

Ending note: Proponents argued the sites will bring recurring revenue and allow city messaging; opponents warned about potential health and ecological impacts, and legal challenges remain a possibility. Councilmembers said they want to see takedowns and strict operational controls enforced before new signs go live.","The City Council authorized three lease agreements and certified environmental documents for freeway‑facing digital signs, accepting higher city message time and a takedown program for older static billboards.",{"_33":111,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":112,"_41":113,"_43":114,"_45":115,"_47":116,"_49":117,"_51":118,"_53":119,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":120,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":121,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514822,"San Jose approves navigation hub and five‑motel contracts to expand interim housing",3124,11238000,14362000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=11238&end=14362","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_11238000.jpg","/articles/6514822/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/San-Jose-approves-navigation-hub-and-fivemotel-contracts-to-expand-interim-housing","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514822-91187109b1bea22ebf0a80f4a5cd2548/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=LmN9M5A5Ojzy~UopluIo79eF~xtmYu3Y2lwitTKzCOxwSdwv3OcLROYncrXWEDBoQag3eZNY1idrCCUNgndwNP55iC12q4LqfFJmRqxqm5f7-yhY0fPIlMNg~hsW6CUv7gqGDwk3D2gJU8p8dUe7H~86gZxRlyq3mk87SfE81upRcLrY~rmUNZoHZq~5YTy10TfjcvswkTur2aj~oDUArccyhAK5pJgPaxZSZj1pa9d1G7~Jd79eR2AC0BHhaD3OWK5-uQJYF4qfEOvwAx3JQnjE1ts1DXY9QXFtlF14dFbmwF1-HUHxmJldO97e34iDtT-VRQUlffZAxNwV~6po9Q__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Jose City Council on June 17 authorized contracts to operate a navigation hub at 1157 East Taylor Street and to lease five motel properties to provide interim shelter and supportive services. Council members said the strategy is intended to move people off streets and waterways into staffed, service‑rich interim housing and then on to permanent housing when possible.

Why this matters: The city is expanding a system of interim housing that officials say is necessary to reduce encampments along waterways and to connect people experiencing homelessness to medical, behavioral‑health, and housing services. Staff said the contracts are funded in the fiscal 2025–26 budget and will allow a rapid turn‑on of sites this summer.

What the city authorized: The council approved grant/contract authority totaling about $9.26 million: roughly $2.4 million for the Taylor Street navigation hub and $6.86 million for motel operations. HomeFirst was selected as the service provider. The contracts run retroactively from July 1, 2025, through June 30, 2026, and include staffing, 24/7 on‑site security, case management, and links to health care.

How the hub and motels will work: The navigation hub will provide a triage space with 56 tents (eight ADA accessible) for people leaving encampments to stabilize, receive intake and services, and be prioritized for motel rooms or other interim options. The five motels total 251 rooms and up to 331 beds, plus optional safe‑parking and tiny‑home places in the broader system. Staff said the motels will not house registered sex offenders and will be managed with access controls, fencing, and site security.

Quotes and service model: Housing Director Eric Sullivan and Deputy Director Cupid Alexander emphasized throughput and accountability. Alexander said the sites will track performance publicly and report on an emergency interim‑housing dashboard. Sullivan and Alexander said the motels will prioritize people with the highest vulnerabilities and work to “move people forward, not just hold them in place.”

Community outreach and timeline: Staff said community outreach took place near the selected motels and the navigation hub; the city is targeting August for initial move‑ins but cautioned dates depend on site work. Councilmembers urged staff to ensure sites are fully ready before opening and to keep neighbors informed. Council approved the contracts unanimously.

Ending note: Council members framed the expansion as a pragmatic, rapid strategy to reduce unsheltered homelessness and to create capacity for longer‑term housing placements. Officials said the city will continue to monitor outcomes and report back publicly.","Council authorized contracts to open a 56‑tent navigation hub on East Taylor Street and to lease five motels as interim housing; city staff said the sites will prioritize high‑risk residents and aim to move people into longer‑term housing.",{"_33":123,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":124,"_41":125,"_43":126,"_45":127,"_47":128,"_49":129,"_51":130,"_53":131,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":132,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":133,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6514827,"San Jose council adds implementation review to van‑lording, trespass ordinances after debate",3866,2221000,6087000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3&start=2221&end=6087","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/5023831-403cd247a58a2fbfa8850890e346f7c3/thumbnail_2221000.jpg","/articles/6514827/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/San-Jose-council-adds-implementation-review-to-vanlording-trespass-ordinances-after-debate","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6514827-78475dcb602daa7fcc52b05ccf435d64/orig.mp4?Expires=1770416111&Signature=AbVWxQxybdIJMEaQ9BfHCexmSmMmd88qqc5oGfXI5sRUin41ilaJlLs1zm6jUFOLMunWPoTsa-smUnKLPNcJJIPxKHjXx9ZVeiKyhac~l5WTXyapDzNsGSCwIYkaDGSZagS270NLjHTJAg4hDoK9zcp4b4rJldWcD4Te-onagZaj~y5GGUibJyUsRULTzro7h1ljex6CqOo15bguzTNH9IArnmopSwWAffeSWOIFi2ZiyeyN4dLRounyUDRd7CjJ9Ekb8Uy6dQ5t5odJNIK-xRhpSStz7jafXRbRoO~YUW9Ru~NtFudDIlVo6CYZdD1hqML8aSAcWmv~tgAtYVSIlw__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Jose City Council on June 17 approved changes tied to two related ordinances aimed at giving property owners clearer tools to remove trespassers and targeting “van‑lording” — people or companies that lease space in vehicles and RVs for others — while delaying full enforcement so the city can return with implementation details.

The council voted 9–1 to adopt a substitute motion that accepted the existing trespass ordinance language but asked staff to return with an information memo on how the city will implement trespassing enforcement and to consider alternative language on van‑lording that focuses on landlords who lease out RVs rather than criminalizing people living in vehicles. Councilmember Campos voted no.

Why this matters: Council members and advocates said existing laws leave property owners without a clear, consistent process for asking police to remove people who remain on private property. At the same time housing and homeless‑service advocates and legal groups warned that an outright ban on sleeping in vehicles could push people into more dangerous street encampments and expose the city to legal challenges.

What council discussed: Councilmember Campos said the ordinance text was “a bit ambiguous” and sought clarity about whether police would enforce private‑property trespass only after property owners provided written authorization. Police Chief Paul Joseph told the council, “for a private property trespassing, we will always need authorization from the owner of the property or their agent,” and that police would enforce in response to complaints rather than proactively.

Several council members and outside groups pushed the council to avoid criminalizing people who are unhoused. Councilmember Cohen, who helped craft the substitute motion, said the van‑lording language should focus enforcement on those who exploit tenants by renting them space in RVs rather than targeting people living in vehicles.

City attorneys also warned of legal risk if the ordinance was drafted too narrowly. Johnny Phan, chief deputy in the City Attorney’s Office, explained that the team included a prohibition on overnight sleeping in part because other cities that tried to prosecute landlords had difficulty defending cases in court when the underlying activity (sleeping in a vehicle) was not itself barred. Matthew Tolnay, from the City Attorney’s Office, confirmed the council could remove that provision but warned it could make prosecution harder.

Action and next steps: The council adopted a substitute motion that keeps the current trespass language in place, directs staff to return with an implementation plan for trespass enforcement (including how property owners can authorize police to remove trespassers), and gives staff time to propose alternative van‑lording language focused on the landlords who lease RVs. The council delayed any proactive enforcement changes until that memo is returned in August.

Community reaction and context: Legal and housing nonprofits warned the council that a blanket ban on vehicle living could be challenged in court and worsen public‑health outcomes. The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley and HomeFirst, among others, urged caution; HomeFirst told the council that people living in vehicles often have medical vulnerabilities and that loss of vehicle shelter could “increase the risk of illness, trauma, and displacement.”

Ending note: Councilmembers framed the vote as seeking a middle ground — to strengthen tools for property owners while avoiding punitive measures that could increase street homelessness or expose the city to litigation. Council direction asks city staff to return with clarified language and an implementation memo before stricter enforcement begins.","The City Council approved measures to tighten trespass enforcement language and curb van‑lording while directing staff to return with an implementation plan and possible wording changes to avoid unintended penalties for people living in vehicles.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

Votes at a glance: key San Jose City Council actions on June 17, 2025

Independent Police Auditor’s 2024 year‑end report urges faster access to officer‑involved shooting materials

Property owners vote narrowly to form Alameda Community Benefit Improvement District

Council clears five freeway‑facing digital billboards; companies to remove 35 static faces citywide

San Jose approves navigation hub and five‑motel contracts to expand interim housing

San Jose council adds implementation review to van‑lording, trespass ordinances after debate