[{"_1":2,"_111":-5,"_112":-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",[32,75,87,99],{"_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",6557344,"mediaKeyId","3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894","parentId",3301296,"title","San Jose mayor proposes tying 5% of council pay to citywide performance; council raises equity and democracy concerns","audioSeconds",3201,"startMs",453000,"endMs",3654000,"viewUrl","/Search/View?dp=1&key=3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894&start=453&end=3654","thumbnailUrl","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894/thumbnail_453000.jpg","articleUrl","/articles/6557344/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/San-Jose-mayor-proposes-tying-5-of-council-pay-to-citywide-performance-council-raises-equity-and-democracy-concerns","mediaUrl","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557344-6de9dde1ba14ac8faa29cd6fe1efea41/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146564&Signature=cawdgMZbS5Hc9rBNYbSx6fvdQqjOgSmSIrubN0BvSo0Hzb7hQchXPSkpvM~506Z~Vq6t8~wrGXFduarGZrwQbuC-zWcHR83iv-sW0QDBh24pOgMBO2iAig6F2G1ooOCL7RG9wZ~ykONIUT4iYvZ1Va0ZQccVOB6eDHKdvZSq2GOO2QiRJM1LiaCl3~xhz0ZootjBZC0mW2g4p0vpPCgI4ipwYiXRJLa~YHPGB8ajB5XHOyMlPGoM-YY-ILSruBxZsU8DXUamyB8~BPHVwICHk8jJB~M3c8n2lxGTt-HYBRg81iv1sHTjvESVr4KGdND0ErMwBfQ~W1AySc7tlzV93g__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","author","San Jose CA","date","2025-05-15T06:12:04Z","article","San Jose Mayor (name not specified) proposed linking 5% of each city councilmember’s base salary to measurable progress on agreed citywide performance measures, prompting a lengthy council debate about equity, accountability and unintended consequences.

The mayor described the proposal as modeled on existing performance contracts for appointees and senior staff and said the city manager would return in the fall with a simple rubric for scoring: “the city manager has requested September…to look at best practices from other sectors and bring us a proposal for how that formula would work to keep it simple,” the mayor said.

Councilmember Ortiz asked how the system would operate in practice and whether pay adjustments would be applied individually: “Am I just gonna sit here while my colleagues vote to not give me a raise, or what?” Ortiz asked. The mayor responded that the metric would be applied “as a body,” because the council approves citywide budgets and policies collectively. City Attorney Nora clarified that, under the city charter, any pay mechanism must apply across the board: “under the charter, it’s all or none. So it applies to everybody.”

Vice Mayor Foley said a shared, councilwide rubric would avoid disadvantaging members who represent areas with different service levels and argued the proposal could amplify minority voices by elevating equity goals into the scorecards the council adopts collectively. “You absolutely shouldn't be held accountable for delivery of services in your area that are not necessarily the number of services that are being delivered in other parts of the district,” Foley said.

Several councilmembers voiced reservations. Councilmember Ortiz and Councilmember Kondellas (who described a nonprofit background) warned that metrics can be shaped to produce favorable results and noted that East San Jose historically has received less city investment. Ortiz said the district’s residents judge his work differently because of historical underinvestment: “My constituents may be seeing, ‘wow. This guy is fighting...’ but to the whole, that may not be as valuable,” Ortiz said, arguing that the approach could “drown out voices” from communities that have been historically underserved.

Councilmember Cohen cautioned that pay‑for‑performance schemes can incentivize short‑term decision making and cited research that warns of corruption and perverse incentives. “This is one of the most ill advised policies that we've seen as a council,” Cohen said, adding that elected officials already face constant public accountability and that elections and community feedback are fundamental checks on behavior.

Supporters including Councilmember Casey and the mayor argued the proposal would strengthen focus and trust by aligning council priorities with measurable outcomes and by making the city’s scorecards and dashboards the basis for evaluation. “We already do it for our appointees. We do it for our senior staff,” the mayor said. Casey said the approach could re‑engage voters frustrated with local government by showing elected officials have “skin in the game.”

Several speakers stressed safeguards and iteration. The mayor said the city manager would propose a rubric informed by best practices and that the council could adjust or reverse any ordinance if unintended consequences emerged. Foley and others suggested including equity measures explicitly in the focus areas to protect minority communities’ interests.

No formal ordinance or vote was taken during the session. The mayor asked the city manager to return with a proposed scoring methodology in the fall and indicated the council would continue discussing the idea during the budget process.

The discussion concluded when the council moved to the fees-and-charges portion of the study session.

","mediaType","Video","parentTitle","MAY 14, 2025 | City Council Budget Study Session","oneSentenceSummary","San Jose Mayor (name not specified) proposed linking 5% of council base pay to measurable, councilwide performance goals; the council asked the city manager to return in the fall with a scoring rubric but voiced sharp differences over equity, accountability and unintended consequences.","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},6557338,"County officials urge caution on new homeless enforcement; San Jose council members debate joint action and triage approach",456,2688000,3144000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894&start=2688&end=3144","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894/thumbnail_2688000.jpg","/articles/6557338/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/County-officials-urge-caution-on-new-homeless-enforcement-San-Jose-council-members-debate-joint-action-and-triage-approach","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557338-c8a2feafc66ee336e36e2ded794b0d86/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146564&Signature=G18NAr5a5nekuV8t~5NpMGAgAWrF-ps7lenUsyo4bwr530nLbKXwKmZ70cqHPwVUqfQ1NC9APKbQxj10eUvhNv54ZPnSuDoVUm06s1gsDfuUjjHoz1Lm2mUFzAANTGGNY1e3OraLcWOQ5PM4m9J5D1cqJYoViucw~roLa-4bTE4aACbSl3a2c27ZIh5e79uTlvU4pV6WKc50VG7Os5ypITj9b1H-q~aT2cyLayiHHBm7rKl3qyvmHG0TcTCuic-JGIlR9mKfN9WQE2nkmxrzfvITW-JOqWw5JcNoGNMSyKX-Mi669dulTLPwrCI66YzXaC9yKpQvBnCHRvd9WfnhMQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","A letter from county leaders including Board President Otto Lee, the sheriff and the district attorney, circulated to San Jose councilmembers this week warned that new criminal penalties or increased arrests tied to a proposed “responsibility to shelter” approach would “not advance public safety” and could strain county criminal‑justice resources. Councilmembers debated the letter’s implications during the city’s budget study session.

Councilmember Condellis read the letter into the record and cited its central concern: “arresting and releasing individuals for low level offenses does not advance public safety, and in fact, it diverts the already limited public safety resources away from enforcement efforts that keep our community safe.” Condellis urged the council to consider the county’s view as the council develops policies the county would be expected to implement.

Councilmembers offered mixed reactions. Several members, including Councilmembers Salas and Casey, said county resources have been insufficient and that the city must act to address urgent public-safety and unhoused-population pressures. “We have a feckless county who's been derelict in their duty…and the idea that we're gonna let that letter…dictate what we do is ridiculous,” Casey said.

The mayor said he regularly meets with county leadership and invited the board of supervisors to a joint meeting, while also noting “different institutional goals and pressures between the city and county.” He emphasized continued collaboration on shared responses—inviting joint meetings, requesting county clinicians for 911 and PERT teams, and seeking other cooperative steps—but added that the city needs ways to intervene when individuals repeatedly refuse shelter and appear deeply in need of behavioral-health treatment.

Councilmember Condellis and others noted the county’s letter arrived late in the review process. Condellis read the letter to highlight the county’s expressed willingness to work with the city on “productive, timely solutions that help protect public safety and deliver services, shelter, and housing solutions for those in need.”

No ordinance or formal enforcement policy was adopted during the session. Councilmembers asked the city manager and staff to continue outreach to county leadership and to consider joint meetings to align responses where possible. The mayor said staff will seek continued collaboration and that county representation would be invited to future discussions.

","County leaders, including Board President Otto Lee, the sheriff and the district attorney, told San Jose officials that additional arrests tied to a proposed responsibility‑to‑shelter policy could harm public safety and overload criminal‑justice resources; councilmembers disputed whether the city should press ahead without deeper county cooperation.",{"_33":88,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":89,"_41":90,"_43":91,"_45":92,"_47":93,"_49":94,"_51":95,"_53":96,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":97,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":98,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6557329,"San Jose presents $3.4 billion five‑year capital improvement program; $1.2 billion proposed for 2025–26",3910,3245000,7155000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894&start=3245&end=7155","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894/thumbnail_3245000.jpg","/articles/6557329/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/San-Jose-presents-34-billion-fiveyear-capital-improvement-program-12-billion-proposed-for-202526","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557329-4accff08f48fe9b0fdeb5486eb516375/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146564&Signature=Mr--rCP9GtJZeAoo9q9enGrBrE9Q3OhPB7oxY~Rlzhxe-LM61b2f1fFR46OQ2sCpesVTQHvTnwm~8W~Bk1A2KNN1VMtcUbDFeq3WEFh9~jTn-r465ZgTyHOm5i38SZhpwI5nWAG3oAUZ8a4zGSPpoqX-4NE7k0w0Q-4RUzjfLyxo~KI2gKB6FuMJxHhYOBY1FMbqjoN8V2OT0DOu7uvX1i94cH4qvciCow~~i5~WnSuccoEyhhZXmRjy0s5zrqflIIDyJRjfvPc9RYToiq4mVRSan4nE-XMBJQiGX6XIvm3qjf1qWOE0aAnZeZ7vGBwar1OGNTx5l1kVKLAjFdMLkQ__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","City staff presented an overview of San Jose’s proposed five‑year Capital Improvement Program (CIP), a $3.4 billion plan that includes about $1.2 billion budgeted for fiscal year 2025–26 and focuses on water pollution control, traffic, airport, and parks and community facilities.

Jennifer Tell, capital budget coordinator, said the CIP reflects $3.4 billion in planned investments across 14 capital programs and highlighted a new biennial presentation format that will emphasize the first two years of the program and provide annual updates for year‑to‑year rebalancing. “This capital budget is the culmination of the work of staff…prioritizing the city's capital needs and balancing them with available resources,” Tell said.

Financing proceeds are the largest funding source at about $864 million, with wastewater revenue notes and bond proceeds supporting major water pollution control projects. Contributions, transfers and interfund loans represent the next largest category; the proposed CIP includes approximately $53 million in general‑fund contributions for items including fire apparatus replacement and a 911 dispatch backup generator.

The presentation noted Measure T — the 2018 disaster preparedness, public‑safety and infrastructure bond — as a major historical contributor to prior CIP totals and estimated that Measure T funds will be exhausted in 2028–29. Airport and federal grant funding were described as uncertain and staff said they will monitor federal grants and adjust programming as needed.

Public Works Director Matt Lesch summarized program highlights across departments: ongoing street repairs and storm‑drain improvements, sanitary sewer collection projects including a fourth major interceptor, major regional wastewater facility work (including aeration‑tank and blower rehabilitation), library capital needs, parks projects (for example Camden Park inclusive improvements and Alum Rock Park road work), continued fire station construction and apparatus purchases, and airport accessibility and airfield projects. Lesch also emphasized communications and radio‑system upgrades for public‑safety operations.

Councilmembers asked technical questions about project carryovers, the biennial presentation format, and the composition of the proposed spending. Staff said annual updates would address carryovers and federal‑grant uncertainties and that the city would continue to invite county and other partners to joint discussions where appropriate.

No capital appropriations were adopted during the session; the presentation was informational as part of the budget study process.","City staff presented the proposed five‑year capital improvement program totaling $3.4 billion with $1.2 billion budgeted for 2025–26. Major areas include water pollution control, traffic, airport and parks; Measure T bond funds are expected to be exhausted in later years of the plan.",{"_33":100,"_35":36,"_37":38,"_39":101,"_41":102,"_43":103,"_45":104,"_47":105,"_49":106,"_51":107,"_53":108,"_55":56,"_57":58,"_59":109,"_61":62,"_63":64,"_65":110,"_67":68,"_69":70,"_71":68,"_72":73,"_74":73},6557335,"San Jose council questions steep fee increases; staff cites updated cost-recovery analysis and plans for phased changes",315,3710000,4025000,"/Search/View?dp=1&key=3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894&start=3710&end=4025","https://assets.pipeline.soar.com/3301296-4a1f3275c989e9c5a5e074f17d7d0894/thumbnail_3710000.jpg","/articles/6557335/San-Jose/Santa-Clara-County/California/San-Jose-council-questions-steep-fee-increases-staff-cites-updated-cost-recovery-analysis-and-plans-for-phased-changes","https://secure.pipeline.soar.com/6557335-d42b7fb9cc114c1c05d2f08af46eef3e/orig.mp4?Expires=1771146564&Signature=bJoj8kW-Z9PJkG53Q3jax1KQUB3r4jNzvD9RJRWLWvIk7~lklORZU0l7mjjwPAlcB8QJ38WqcmL8z51DxPQWW-thWkiaSlqh3nORRFFkchRKa~prgEOMQRBAtB4HSVp1vopDZTJ-LXbxeGTFLa9WZvnFR8TjhmjCpt71dzLsS7RLvRfvdhVWmTRkJV4vrgCLuUZBAmranFQCbJc25LPMv7ABROG98gJ9xfFSH8Dn8jUExyu~~g0oG05ydDQ-bBMBvxMgMBk~pJ4-61U~ARccjz8UdCsaL2Vb~cr~FTRL4bYI0RZkwUrKD5s~PT7k~mn97rgKO-kwuSe0lFZX4zd4Pg__&Key-Pair-Id=KUT5TJCACFTXG","San Jose councilmembers questioned staff about large increases in several application fees during the budget study session, pressing for automation and fee‑calculator tools to reduce time and cost burdens on small businesses.

Councilmembers identified two application fees with notable year‑over‑year increases: the commercial linkage fee standard application (roughly a 51% increase) and the cannabis initial application (roughly a 44% increase). Councilmember Mulcahy and others asked why seemingly routine application fees rose so sharply.

Jim (budget staff) said the annual fees-and-charges review seeks cost recovery and that departments have updated the assumed time and staff mix devoted to each task — sometimes using a time‑study approach. “There are times when the department reassesses the time spent doing a particular item of work, and so that gets updated as part of the fee process,” he said.

Housing staff explained that as part of a broader fee review they adjusted how labor costs are allocated (reducing overhead charged to lower fees) and in some cases applied an inflator where historic time‑use data was unavailable. One housing staffer said, in some cases, previous fee calculations had omitted fringe and overhead; the commercial linkage application increase also reflects adding those fully burdened costs.

Councilmembers urged automation to reduce staff hours and lower fees in the long run. Councilmember Campos suggested a “TurboTax‑like” self‑service tool to let applicants input data and receive an automated fee estimate. “We should make these things simpler and more digitized,” Campos said.

Councilmember Campos also asked whether the city provides fee waivers or reductions to encourage community‑serving businesses (for example, child‑care operators). Staff replied that the Parks Department and Public Works have waiver authority in some areas; departments sometimes phase in large increases over several years or set aside funds to offset permit costs for social‑service providers.

On library fines, the city librarian said last year’s trial waiver of late fees for adult materials is being considered for permanent elimination through a manager’s budget addendum so that all late‑fee waivers could become permanent without a revenue impact.

No fee increases were adopted during the session; staff said proposed fee changes are part of the budget process and that large single‑year increases are often phased in as staff completes time‑use analyses and considers waivers or other mitigation.

","Councilmembers pressed staff on large year‑over‑year jumps in certain permit and application fees — notably the commercial linkage application and cannabis initial application — and urged automation, fee calculators and phased increases to reduce burdens on small businesses and childcare providers.","actionData","errors"]

Article not found

San Jose mayor proposes tying 5% of council pay to citywide performance; council raises equity and democracy concerns

County officials urge caution on new homeless enforcement; San Jose council members debate joint action and triage approach

San Jose presents $3.4 billion five‑year capital improvement program; $1.2 billion proposed for 2025–26

San Jose council questions steep fee increases; staff cites updated cost-recovery analysis and plans for phased changes