The San José Planning Commission on [date not specified in record] adopted staff‑recommended compliance resolutions for seven active development agreements covering projects across the city, and asked staff to report back with details about the distribution of related community‑benefit funds.

John Thu, division manager in the city’s development-review team, opened the public hearing by telling the commission, “Esta es una audiencia de revisión de cumplimiento para los 7 acuerdos de desarrollo activos en la ciudad,” and said staff’s review found developers met the agreements’ terms for the review period cited in the staff report (July 1, 2024 through June 30, 2025). Staff recommended the commission adopt compliance resolutions for each agreement.

The commission proceeded to vote on non‑conflicted items first and then took separate votes on agreements tied to Cisco, Apple and Google after several commissioners declared financial conflicts tied to stock ownership. The city’s legal staff explained that share ownership in an individual company can require recusal, while passive ownership through mutual funds typically does not require recusal if the commissioner lacks control over specific shares.

Commissioners pressed staff for more detail about timing and triggers tied to multi‑phase agreements. Commissioner Cantrell asked for clarity on Google West’s timeline and the mechanics of benefit triggers; Thu responded that the Google agreement spans multiple phases with different triggers depending on the mix of office and residential development, and that some interim uses have already been permitted.

Commissioners also raised questions about community‑benefit funding tied to one agreement. The transcript records a staff statement that about $5,000,000 had been reserved for community groups and that $1,000,000 had been set aside for a "community gardeners" beneficiary, but several commissioners said Parks, Recreation and Neighborhood Services (PRNS) had custody of some funds and that the committee charged with disbursing funds had not met recently. Kevin Hice, director of real estate in the Office of Economic Development and Cultural Affairs, said he would contact PRNS and the committee to provide an update: “Puedo comunicarme con PRNS e intentar brindarle una actualización,” he said in the hearing.

On a separate compliance matter staff asked the commission to note an amendment to an agreement for the Jackson/Tyler/Hapanton property to reflect updated construction‑timeline language in a third amendment; staff described the amendment’s revised term language and recommended adopting the amended compliance resolution.

The commission’s actions on the record: commissioners voted to adopt the compliance resolutions recommended by staff and approved the company‑specific items with recusals recorded in the transcript. The transcript records staff and the chair confirming that recusals were taken before each company vote.

What happens next: commissioners requested that staff return with a more detailed update on the status and disbursement plan for the community‑benefit funds and on any committee actions regarding those funds. The hearing record does not include the follow‑up report; staff said they would provide an update at a future meeting.

(Reporting note: the meeting transcript records speakers and votes; the record does not include a calendar date for this session.)