TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Lee Price, MMC City Council Members City Clerk SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: November 30, 2007 November 20-29, 2007 ITEMS TRANSMITTED TO THE ADMINISTRATION (1) Letter from Melanie Richardson, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, to

Mayor and Council dated October 31, 2007 regarding representation on the Coyote Valley Task Force.

ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

(a) Letter from Veronica Tincher, Chair of the Santa Clara Valley Mental Health Board, addressed to Chief Robert Davis, congratulating Chief Davis and offering assistance for continued CIT (Crisis Intervention Team) training. (b) Letter from John Singh expressing concern regarding 311 responses to incidents at his

home. (c) Letter from TMobile to City Clerk Lee Price dated November 16, 2007 regarding OCI Site Number SF15065 located at 1580 Kooser Road, San Jose. (d) Letter from David S. Wall to Mayor and City Council dated November 21, 2007 regarding sewer rate increase and the reclaimed water project. (e) Letter from David S. Wall to Mayor and City Council dated November 29, 2007

regarding the reclaimed water project-projected return on investment. (f) E-mail communications from Kimo Crossman regarding access to records and

subcommittee meetings of the Sunshine Reform Task Force. (g) Notice of Trustee’s Sale from California Reconveyance Company, dated November 19,

2007, regarding real property located at 873-875 S. Almaden Avenue, San Jose, CA. Lee Price, MMC City Clerk LP/np

Honorable Mayor and City Council Members November 29, 2007 Subject: The Public Record November 29, 2007 Page 2 Distribution: Mayor/Council City Manager Assistant City Manager

Assistant to City Manager Council Liaison Director of Planning City Attorney City Auditor Director of Public Works Director of Finance Public Information Officer San José Mercury News Library

CITYOF~SAN]OSECArn1.L OF SILICON VALLEY

TO: Honorable Mayor &City Council Members

SUBJECT: The Public RecordNovember 20-29,2007

RULES COMMIITEE: 12-5-07ITEM: E

MemorandumFROM : Lee Price, MMC

City Clerk

DATE: November 30, 2007

ITEMS TRANSMITTED TO TH E ADMINISTRAnON

(I) Letter from Melanie Richardson, Chair of the Parks and Recreation Commission, toMayor and Council dated October 31, 2007 regarding representation on the CoyoteValley Task Force.

ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD

(a) Letter from Veronica Tincher, Chair of the Santa Clara Valley Mental Health Board,addressed to Chief Robert Davis, congratulating Chief Davis and offering assistance forcontinued CIT (Crisis Intervention Team) training.

(b) Letter from John Singh expressing concern regarding 311 responses to incidents at hishome.

(c) Letter from TMobile to City Clerk Lee Price dated November 16,2007 regarding OC!Site Number SF15065 located at 1580 Kooser Road, San Jose.

(d) Letter from David S. Wall to Mayor and City Council dated November 21,2007regarding sewer rate increase and the reclaimed water project.

(e) Letter from David S. Wall to Mayor and City Council dated November 29, 2007regarding the reclaimed water project-projected return on investment.

(I) E-mail communications from Kimo Crossman regarding access to records andsubcommittee meetings of the Sunshine Reform Task Force.

(g) Notice of Trustee's Sale from California Reconveyance Company, dated November 19,2007, regarding real property located at 873-875 S. Almaden Avenue, San Jose, CA.

4'~Lee Price,~1.-A--City Clerk

LP/np

Honorable Mayor and City Council MembersNovember 29,2007Subject: The Public Record November 29,2007Page 2

Distribution: Mayor/CouncilCity ManagerAssistant City ManagerAssistant to City ManagerCouncil LiaisonDirector of PlanningCity AttorneyCity AuditorDirector of Public WorksDirector of FinancePublic Information OfficerSan Jose Mercury NewsLibrary

CITYOF ASAN]OSECAPmIL OF SIUCXlN vAlLEY

Department of Parks, Rea

(i)

RECEIVEDSan Jose City Clerk

PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION

October 31, 2007

Honorable Mayor and City Council.City of San Jose200 East Santa Clara StreetSan Jose, California 95113

Subject: Coyote Valley Task Force

Dear Honorable Mayor and City Councilmembers:

The Parks and Recreation Commission (hereinafter "Commission") has been represented on theCoyote Valley Task Force by Helen Chapman, past Chair of the Parks and RecreationCommission. Mrs. Chapman was termed out from the Park and Recreation Commission in July2007, after serving two terms on the Commiss ion. The Commission would like Mrs. Chapmanto continue on the Coyote Valley Task Force as a liaison between the Commission and the TaskForce, however, it is the understanding of the Commission that Mrs. Helen Chapman can nolonger represent the Commission in her present capacity. Please advise the Commissionwhether our understanding of this situation is accurate, so that we may select a newrepresentative to the Coyote Valley Task Force, if necessary .

The Commission also requests that any changes to the Coyote Valley triggers be considered bythe City Counci l as part of its review of the General Plan.

The Parks and Recreation Commission will be glad to answer any questions the City Councilmay have regarding these request.

Sincerely,

,.."..,....... ioL~ / j el ie Richardsono/I hair, Parks and Recreation Commission

ee: PRNS

200 East Santa Clara Street, San Jose, CA 95113 leI (408) 535-3570 ra, (408) 292-6416 www.sanjoseca.gov/prns

October 31, 2007

Chief Robert DavisSan Jose Police Department20 I West Mission StreetSan Jose , CA 951 10

~ Dear Chief Davis:

SANTA CLARA

VALLEYj.:£,f,IJ}l 1 00SPlT~ SY5T9 J

DEPARTMENT 0,::

MENTAL H€.~ml

...1~i..'1 He-.II ln ~·)d ~ .l

• :;~ >; ; •• r' ;,':~;.c_. ~' .t." !: ""' , " . 1••: :' , .;

~ ;: ' ": "\'; "' f ': l ,;: .: :

7.: i ~:lm llr'}- .' 7.!h .l : ~ IlG) A:-: .".?';F. ..:

The Mental Health Board recently had a presentation made by Pat Dwyer on CIT trainingdevelopments in Santa Clara County. We understand that your department will be working with Mr.Dwyer in developing a best practices curriculum for CIT training.

The Mental Health Board has long endorsed CIT training for law enforcement officers, and wecongratulate you for your efforts in the program. Mentally ill citizens in Santa Clara County, alongwith law enforcement personnel, and the general public will benefit greatly from expanded CITprograms .

If you would like to also address the Mental Health Board or one of our committees regarding yourprograms , we would be most interested. If there is any way that you think the Mental Health Boardcould be of assistance to you and your department in these efforts , please do not hesitate to contactus.

Sincerey yours, .

--1/. ,~ r7A ... -:1/ .: ..." n ..-v<-~ (.. ·..Veronica Tincher, ChairMental Health Board

MG:VT:k

cc: Pat Dwyer, Law Enforcement LiaisonSanta Clara County Board of Supervisors

---San Jose City Council -Nancy Pena, Mental Health Director

//-/f--o 7 o:)

L, -;'1N/'7L-f I t.4-/kJ 5 11 ;:~ ~ jt!?~i "/~;Sti

tv~/... ,-./o:r; IJ-U fA.-j IlrM ,,#'1 A:JO,lM. (i1-1'I-r77)~

t.0 "'r-'£ i"'« !:1f-;/Or-Ji1J -;; '/' {;?""'I'tf,/~r Itv£..

hM I~ 7lf'.: A..'t~e --h.< IS ';'"fA!!.5 AIM .4#'/ TUiv\, 7(.'n ~F~ blV( ,fi/)1 !;:..,s ~1 7h f~tC-if

1(;7f";~"L :;. 'iJ1U;17Z~7 /~ 7Z~ :$7$k..... is .

hftQk.t?P.WJ.;:N /YO (lN1l. tAlM/(f /J.({)w""i ~u dclJ/!1-tf. 4 -~·~f)~f..;; 7i'M'i.-kr~ 7l < "7r' ,-I- .?<>J<:.!4;,J!:

Ai/'1k. /'.v",;!r;j ~'ifrt-'xl wi;;", IZ: J1~ /;C< b"s7i!7(;~(I,.J( /:V~'10/1 i:tfvtj -fo~, ('£. /2£ /IKSuiJ

~-';'lth7iI b;; bF!.~/Jc,:.J> QJI!. w/;"lWJ M ~ blo~A,v'j <;kaT;;;5 7Wo 0'/';) 1M'.! wi~IV~ . l'~~ti/Rj

it t;T ",1/ -L j' t w4 5 /lp 1/'"{/;;""t~~ /;.J 11~ in">/'!

J, 1:;1yo

l;JcleH~' : -u: 5t;.r'i~

// "I h P..b'O 94 ,e;c4£ Pct;,AP ~It a 9.5/27

/

•••• tF · ·Mobile·~

November 16, 2007

• City Clerk:Lee Price200 East Santa Clara St.San Jose, CA 95113

Re: OCI Site Number SF l50651 San J ose, CA

Dear Ms. Price,

(c)

RECEIVEDSan Jose City Clerk

lODl NOV 21 P 3: 3b

General Order 159-A (GO-l 59-A) of the California Public Utilities Commission (CPUC) requirescellular carriers to send a notification letter of a utility' s intent to construct a cellular facility toCPUC's Safety and Enforcement Division within 15 business days of receipt of all requisite localland use approvals. The notification letter shall state that such approvals have been received, orthat no land use approva ls are required.

As set forth in GO 159-A, copies of the notification letter are required to be served concurrentlyby mail on the local governmental agency. Where the affected local governmental agency is acity, service of the notification letter to the city shall consist of service of separate copies of thenotification letter upon the City Manager, the City Planning Director and the City Clerk. In orderto comply with these requirements, I have enclosed a copy of the notification letter for our projectwithin your city limits.

If you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Rod De La Rosa at(925) 521-5948.

Sincerel y, ~ _

"Ru.-~~Renee DavisCompliance ConsultantOmnipoint Communications Inc.

Attachments

T-MobileUSA. Inc.Office:19251521-5500Fox: 19251521'55011955CotO"., Dhd..Sunt 900Concord,CA04520

· · · · ~ · ·Mobile·~

November 16,2007

Safety & Enforcement DivisionCalifornia Public Utilities Commission505 Van Ness AvenueSan Francisco, CA 94102

RE: ocr Site Number SF150651Sao Jose, CA

This is to provide the Commission with notice pursuant to the provisions of GeneralOrder No. 159A of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California ("CPUC")that:

X (a) The cellular company has obtained all requisite land use approval for theproject described in Attachment A.

_(b) That no land use approval is required because '

A copy of this notification is also being provided to the appropriate local governmentalagency for its information. Should there be any questions regarding this project, or ifyou disagree with any of the information contained herein, please contact Rod De LaRosa at (925) 521-5948 of Ornnipoint Communications, Inc. dba T-Mobile, USAcorporate identification number U-3056-C.

Very trulyyO~/) , \

~UL-

Renee DavisRegulatory Compliance

C: City of San Jose

T-MobileUSA.lnc.Office:(925)521-5500r"" 1925152155011955C.t,,,,, Blvd" Suit, ~OO

Concord,CA94520

~ • •l\!Tgh;le··1. Pr~ ~~

Site Identification Number:

Site Name:

Site Address:

County:

Site Location:

Assessor 's Parcel Number:

Latitude: NAD 83

Longitude: NAD 83

ATIACHMENT A

SF15065

PG&ECamden

1580 Kooser Rd, San Jose CA

Santa Clara

San Jose, CA 95118

567-30-017

37 14 19.80

12154 08.89

2. Project Description:

Number of Antennas to be Installed:

Tower Design:

Tower Appearance:

Tower Height:

A) Building Height

B) Structure Height

C) Top of Antenna Height

Lease Area:

6

PG&E Tower

Lattice Tower

NIA

126'10"

126'10"

16' X 16'

3. Business addresses of all Governmental Agencies

City of San Jose, CA200 E. Santa Clara StSan Jose, CA 95113-1905

4. Land Use Approval:

Building Permit

No. 2007-031387-CI

Issued: 111712007

5. If Land Use approval was not required: Explain reason/or exemption and attach documentationfrom thejurisdiction (i.e. copy 0/ordinance) that officially states exemption:

T-MobileUSA, Inc.,"" G1t~if.\l!00e7,t. !lOOCcrcorn.CAg4520

David S. Wall455 North San Pedro StreetSan Jose, California 95110

Phone (408) - 287 - 6838Facsimile (408) • 295 • 5999

November 21, 2007

Mayor Reed and Members San Jose City Council200 East Santa Clara StreetSan Jose, California 95113-1905

Re: Sewer Rate Increase and the Reclaimed Water Project

(d.)

RECENEDSanJose City Clerk

ZDU1/IOV21 A II: 34

Yesterday's Tuesday afternoon City Council Meeting left me in bewilderment onjusthow out of touch YOU folks really are in regards to issues surrounding the increase in theSEWER SERVICE & USE CHARGE.

The Director of Environmental Services Department (ESD) presentation to YOU and the .PUBLIC was at best, goofy. That's right, goofy.

• The "pie-chart" presented as to repair costs to the San Jose I Santa Clara Water PollutionControl Plant as pretext for the increase of the SEWER SERVICE&USE CHARGE didnot include allocations for the RECLAIMED WATER PROJECT; ongoing costs ofoperations and maintenance or the proposed expansion of this out-of-controlproject.

• The second graphic presentation, by the Director of ESD, of the projected profitability ofreclaimed water some twenty years from now, and YOUR apparent acceptance, wasenough to justify making out right fun of ridiculing YOUR respective dumb asses. .

It is bad enough that YOU sit there in the Dais pontificating knowledge or the desire forspiritual guidance on any particular issue that comes before YOU. But, to give the Director ofESD any administrative credibility is to give license to the monkeys at the Happy Hollow Zoo tomake their presentation to YOU on the uses of the SEWER SERVICE&USE CHARGE.

By doing so, when the monkeys wipe their butts and sling their shite at YOU, it will beno surprise to me ifno one advises you to duck.

RECCOMMENDATIONS:

• Direct the Interim Auditor to conduct a financial and performance audit of theRECLAIMED WATER PROJECT.

• Direct the City Manager to immediately find a replacement Director for ESD.

. ....Also, any expenditure ofSEWER SERVICE&USE CHARGE funds for the expansion orincreased operations and maintenance of the RECLAIMED WATER PROJECT is a materialbreech of Prop. 218 guidelines. Happy Holidays!

Cc: City Attorney I Interim Auditor I City Manager

Respectfully submitted;

J)~~.Will \1.2\ .L0't

David S. Wall455 North San Pedro StreetSan Jose, California 95110

Phone (408) - 287 - 6838Facsimile (408) - 295 - 5999

November 29, 2007

Mayor Reed and Members San Jose City Council200 East Santa Clara StreetSan Jose, California 95113-1905

Re: The Reclaim Water Project-Projected Return on "Investment"

RECEIVEDSanJose City Clerk

ZOOl NOV 2q A IQ: 31

During the Tuesday, November 20, 2007 afternoon City Council meeting, the Director ofEnvironmental Services (ESD) produced a graphic presentation that alleges the RECLAIMEDWATER PROJECT will "profitable" in twenty (20) years. O.K., but what does the Director ofESD really mean by "profitability"?

For example, if I wanted to borrow money from a bank, and told the lending institutionthat as a condition of the loan they would not see a profit (or break even) in twenty years, twothings would happen. I would be denied access to the money and laughed at.

But, let us not apply real wortdflnancing methodologyand real time accounting to theRECLAIMED WATER PROJECT, that would be unfair. But, I do not know why it would beunfair. Well , maybe I do know. Taxpayer money is not treated as "real money". Therefore, realtime appl ication of its use has a different set of rules . What those "rules" are is at issue .

For example, the first Director ofESD, at the direction of the City Manager who at thedirection of the Mayor and City Council of San Jose, started the RECLAIMED WATERPROJECT some fifteen (15) years or so ago. They were concerned of the flow trigger of 120million gallons per day (mgd) to the bay imposed by the State of California and alleged habitatloss or infringement of the little mouse, the little bird and the little pickle weed. At the time, theportrait of necessity for the reclaimed water project could be likened to "the sky is falling" . So,City administrators started siphoning off the San Jose I Santa Clara Water PollutionControl Plant's significant contingency reserves.

Well, the "sky" did not fall. The habitat of the little creatures and plant was never at riskand the real reason for the creation of the RECLAIMED WATER PROJECT (outside ofallowing unbridled growth) was due to faulty flow meters in the outfall. That's right Faultyflow meters were to blame. No one on the taxpayer dole was to blame or ever, and I mean tothis day type of ever, no one was held accountable.

Now, why did I bring up all that hoped to be forgotten ancient history? Well, the firstDirector ofESD died July 14,2007. He never saw a return on this "investment". I'm fifty-two,soon to be fifty-three in January and I doubt I'll ever see a return on this investment. So, whatdoes the Director of ESD really mean by "profitability"?

By the way, the DirectorofESD's presentation said the "investment" in the RECLAIMEDWATER PROJECT is now 5280 million dollars. Hmmmm, just a couple of months or so ago, theDirector of ESD stated the amount was 5225 million dollars to the Treatment Plant Advisory Committee.The San Jose MercuryNews had two separatearticles, on two separate dates stating the same amount,$225 million dollars, so why a $SS million dollar increase? I guess that answer has somethingto do withprofitability. Right. Respectfully submitted;

Cc: City Attorney I Interim Auditor I City Manager I Members TPAC~d~ .\lJoJL.11.'2.'1. lE:t?~

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda

Price, Lee----------- ------------

Page 1 of7

From:

Subject:

. Sent:

To:

Cc:

Kimo Crossman [kimo@webnetic.net]

Wednesday, November 28, 2007 11:00 PM

sunshine_reform_task_force@sanjoseca.gov; 'Beaudry, Eileen'

'Terry Francke'; 'Tucker, Sheila'; bbfischler@aol.com; "'Bob Brownstein ' , '; "'Brenda Otey " ';"'Claudia Boulevard ' , '; "'D. D. S. Karl Hoffower ' , '; 'Zenker, Dave'; dp@boulevards.com;edavis@orrick.com; "'Edward Rast " '; execdir@unscc.org; 'Rivas Cosby, Joan';jnadler@scu.edu; "'Ken Podgorsek ' , '; 'Ruiz, Mary Ann'; nWiliiams@orloffwiliiams.com;phaedra@atwork.org; 'Robinson, Bert'; "'Trixie Johnson " '; virholtz@jps.net; 'Guerra,Antonio'; 'Bosco, Alicia'; 'Gomez, Armando'; 'Attard, Barbara'; 'Chaudhry, Rabia'; 'Williams,Clark'; 'Cogan, Jim'; 'Cortese, Dave'; "'Darlene Bright' , '; '''Fatima Silva ' , '; 'FavoriteHiII,Mona'; "'Jeff Bedolla ' . '; "'Kirk Everett ' . '; "Krya Kazantzis . . '; "'Mark Schlosberg t • ' ; "'Ms.Rombeek ' , '; 'Constant, Pete'; '''Richard Konda ' , '; '''Sanjeev Bery , , '; "'Scott Soper ' , ';'Tieman, Mark'; 'Conly, Barbara'; 'Disher, Dollie'; 'Herrick, Lisa'; 'Manheim, Tom'; 'Price, Lee';'Terrazas, Eva'; 'Beaudry, Eileen '; Dougcoms@aol.com; rak0408@earthlink.net; 'TerryFrancke'; 'Peter Scheer'; 'Allen Grossman'; Wayne Lanier'; 'Bruce Brugmann';tom@cnpa.com; jim@cnpa.com; elc@lrolaw.com; 'Amanda Witherell'; 'David Greene'; "'MarkSchlosberg' , '; 'Joe Lynn'; 'David Waggoner'; 'Oliver Luby'; 'eileen hansen'

San Jose DARKNESS - Refusal to record subcommittee discussions or allow remoteobservation by phone & possibly WHY

Importance: High

Attachments : RE: Documents for the 12106/07 Sunshine Task Force Meeting; RE: Requestingcommunications sent to SRTF; San Jose considers toothless approach to Open Govemment.

Please send this to the Clerk for the San Jose Council ,

Please forward a copy of this letter to each member of the city council, add it to the public .communications file and send me an acknowledgement that this request has been completed tokimo@webnetic.net & kimocrossman@gma il.com . Please also make this a pUblic communication forthe Sunshine Reform Task Force.

To whom it may concern:

I had a very unusual ca ll with Eileen Beaudry (408-535-8120) with the city of San Jose on Wed 11/28.She and Bert below may deny their act ions but wh y would I make this up and the attachedcommun ications indicate that what I am saying is believable.

She is claiming that the reason they will not record a subcommittee meeting (wh ich they are not legallyrequired to do) is because there might be a request for 300 copies of the tapes of the meeting and thatthey have no abi lity to duplicate 300 tapes. I'm not making this up . Also that the public who might bewo rking or unable to leave the house may not call in and listen-only to the meeting beca use 100 peoplemight want to call in and listen to the subcommittee meeting - seriously, Ms. Beaudry told me thistoday on the phone. She cla imed it would be unfair to the public if the city was deluged with requeststo listen only in real-time or obta in cop ies of tapes afterwards and because of th is potentialoverwhelming demand , they wanted to be fair and not allow anycne to be excluded assuming over 100want to call in or over 300 need cop ies of tapes immediately. So they are not going to allow anyone tolisten to the meeting nor are they going to record it.

I had called her because I had been corresponding with her (see attached), asking if there was someway I could call and listen only to the proceedings of the San Jose Public Records Subcommitteeproceedings. She info rmed me that there was not - she claimed the room they meet in has only onelinewhich they had to keep open to allow Council to provide advice or allow members to participate

11/19/1007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 2 of7

remotely. Apparently they don't know how to use conference calling technology some of it even freelike http://www.freeconference.com/Note. I only asked to call in and listen it was fine to mute me butshe claimed that was not even poss ible. I had asked her then if they could record the meeting for meso that I could listen to it later. City hall generally is well practiced and stocked with equipment to taperecord meetings because this is required under law for policy level meeting. Basically they have taperecorders lying around . As you can see in the attached email, she indicated that that would not bepossible. I understood that they weren 't legally required to tape the meeting but found it strange thatthey refused to. I wonde red if members who had been absent might want to hear the proceedings or ifthere is later a dispute over the legislative history of the law why this was not being done. Especially fora Sunshine related Open Government matter. There are three more Public Record Subcommitteemeetings Mon 12/3, 12/17, 1114, in a conference room (probably has a speaker phone in it):The subcomm ittee will meet in T-1054 (lOth Floor Conference Room)More info here : http://www.sanjos_~gC!,g.ov/cierkIT~skForce/SRTF/PuQILC;R_~_c.9rdsM~e\iogS_c!l.ed ule.asp

I then looked up the Chair of the Public Records Subcommittee Bert Robinson who is Managing Editorfor the San Jose Mercury News - a major proponent of this legislation (allegedly). I told him what hadjust happened and expected him as a member of the news media to be shocked. He wasn 't. He saidbasically well why don't you drive down here from San Francisco during work hours and attend themeeting in person. I told him I had a full time job and could not do that. He said disingenuously he hada job too and he was attend ing - of course he is paid to do these things and lives in San Jose and isChair of this Subcomm ittee. Then I said you are a reporter , you have all sorts of tape recorders aroundthe office , could you please record the meeting for me? No he said he wasn 't going to go out and BUYa Tape Recorder for me. Then he said he would ' mention the matter to Eileen ' and then proceeded inan angry tone to finish the call. I was shocked .

I've been trying to figure out why this very strange behavior is happening - why the secrets? Thisevening I came up with a possible reason . About two weeks ago I sent an angry email castigating thefull committee because I discovered that the enforcement provisions that are being proposed aretoothless - education only - no ability to refer to law enforcement, or fine, or find Official Misconduct ­all it had were progressive penalt ies which included education, more education and a letter to citycouncil letting them know of repeat offenders in case they were interested . I've attached my angryemail as well.

What the Heck is going on in San Jose???

Kimo Crossman415-255-8035kimo@w~bne!!c;~et

San Francisco Open Government Act ivist

PS please also be notified for the record , that Ms. Beaudry claims through some "mixup" my emailaddress for notifications of meetings and agenda was lost and I had to notify her to readd it to the list.

Here are the member of the full taskforce:Sunshine Reform Task Force Members arid I have underlined the ones that are member of this PublicRecords subcommittee I wished to observe.

Seat

Seat 1

Seat 2

Seat 3

Seat 4

1 1 /"10/"11\1\'

Appointee

Ken Podgorse k

Ed Rast, Chair

Nanci Williams

Title/Organizati on

Executive Director, United Neighborhoods of SCC

Member, Strong Neighborhoods Initiative PAC

Member, San Jose/Silicon Valley Chamber of Commerce

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda

Seat 5 B.obbie Fischler

Seat 6 Bob Brownstein

Seat 7 Bert Robinson

Seat 8 Judy Nadler

Seat 9 Dave Zenker

Seat 10 Virginia Holtz

Seat 11 Joan Rivas-Cosby

Seat 12 Trixie Johnson

Seat 13 Mary Ann Ruiz

S~at 14 Karl Hoffower

Seat IS B.rendaOtey

Page 3 of7

Metroactive.com Silicon Valley Weekly Newspaper

President. League of Women Voters

Research and Policy Director, South Bay Labor Council

Assistant Managing Editor, San Jose Mercury News

Senior Fellow, Markkula Center for Applied Ethics

Falls Creek Neighborhood Assoc.

Willow Glen Neighborhood Assoc.

Five WoundslBrookwood Terrace Neighborhood AdvisoryCommittee

Former Councilmember

Parks and Recreation Commission

Citizens Commission on Human Rights

At-Large Represen1ative

Snooping around, maybe this has something to do with things too?http://www.metroactive.com/metro/04.05 .06/sunshine-0614.html

The Sunshine ChroniclesA sunshine ordinance has been discussed for seven years . It was just defanged in non-public meetings.And it looks like nothing will happen until after the mayoral elections anyway.By Dan PulcranoIN FRONT of a fireplace in the stately living room of a downtown San Jose real estate broker, CindyChavez presented her case to become mayor of the 900,000-person city of San Jose, Calif. A tree'sDecember lights cast a warm glow over a group of loyalists who sucked down wine and refreshments.Some of them looked concerned.What would she do, they wondered, to distance herself in the public's mind from the failed mayorship ofRon Gonzales, with whom she had become closely identified as his vice mayor and vote-marshall whenmunicipal garbage hit the fan?Sure, there was nothing more than a veneer of suspicion-Chavez was City Hall's voice of organizedlabor when the secret Teamsters-demanded garbage compact was struck in a backroom deal.Councilmembers had raised homeowners' garbage collection fees without knowing that the mayor andhis staff were covertly earmarking $11 million to fund union wages for a subcontractor that sorted thecity's recyclable trash . No evidence emerged to implicate Chavez in any of the wrongdoing, or of evenknowing anything about the promise to improperly commit taxpayer funds back in 2000.The scandals, secrecy and lies swirled all around her, but never seemed to touch her. Besides Norcal, themuck included $45 million in concealed City Hall furniture costs, the $8 million Cisco telephonecontract, cascading waves of staff resignations and grand jury and -district attorney investigations. Earlyin the year, political ally Terry Gregory had resigned, in a deal brokered with the DA's office, because ofloans and gifts he received while in office. And now, the mayor had been censured in a Chavez­engineered push to move on with the city's business on the eve of an election year.As Chavez convinced her colleagues to power-down the independent investigation of the Norcalgarbage matter, two councilmembers running for mayor jockeyed to separate themselves from theemanating waft of corruption by calling for the mayor's ouster or resignation.

1112912007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 4 of7

That December evening by the fireplace, Chavez offered an intimate blow-by-blow of her decision to dowhat she thought was best for the city by taking the mayor to the woodshed. Then she spent the rest ofDecember dusting her rivals in fundraising, pulling in $210,631 by year's end .Opponent Chuck Reed fired the first shot of 2006 with a Jan. 3 newspaper opinion piece calling forhonesty in government and a "sunshine ordinance." It was not a new concept. Metro had first broachedthe issue with councilmembers in 1998, and the Blue Ribbon Task Force on Ethics and Lobbying had iton its work plan in 2004 . A Jan. 21, 2005, memorandum signed by Chavez, Reed and the mayor directedthe task force to review the ordinance. Somehow, though, when the Blue Ribbon Task Force wrapped upits work in 2005, the sunshine ordinance fell into a governmental black hole .A week after Reed published his manifesto, a bombshell landed on the council dais : a $4 millionChavez-Gonzales bill to subsidize the San Jose Grand Prix.The public, the media and most councilmembers learned about the proposal-which Mayor Gonzalesdescribed as a take-it-or-Ieave-it proposition-only a day prior. Chavez, Gonzales and city staff hadknown about the pact in December, but neglected to share the knowledge."I am extremely disappointed-but unfortunately, in a sickening way , I'm getting used to it," anexasperated Councilman David Cortese exploded. "Apparently there was a done-deal negotiated thatwas ready to go to City Council but for a crowded agenda in December, and that information wasn'tcirculated to the City Council. I don 't know how to get through anymore that this is the public's business,and the people have the right to know.... This isn't a private sectorcompany where done-deals are donein the backroom by a couple of people and then brought forward and presented as done-deals."Councilwoman Linda LeZotte joined in. "That simply has got to stop," she said. "I'm as sick as David isabout memos being held ."The Grand Prix surprise was a watershed event for councilmembers, by all accounts. Electedrepresentatives need time to study big-ticket items and ask questions before voting, notwithstanding themayor's admonition that the deal wasn't going to change, even if they took another two weeks toevaluate it.Less than a month later, Cortese's campaign released a set of "reform proposals." Among them wererestrictions on lobbying activities, a requirement that email and VOIP telephone calls be archived and aban on council votes "on any issue if staff reports are not released at least six days before a councilmeeting."By week's end, businessman and former arts group executive Michael Mulcahy jumped into the mayoralcontest on a reform platform that explicitly called for a sunshine ordinance. By Feb. II, three candidateshad used the S-word.A political savant of Chavez's caliber was not about to be sidelined on an issue of this profile, especiallysince she had toyed with the solar question seven years earlier but never gotten a bill off her desk. Sheknew that San Francisco had an ordinance that guaranteed open meetings and provided guidelines foraccess to public documents to ensure that the public's business was conducted in the light of day.Chavez invited a group ofpolitical supporters and neighborhood association leaders to meet at her horneto hammer out a Chavez-branded set of reform proposals to compete with the open government .platforms of Reed, Cortese and Mulcahy. And even ifher proposals fell short of the remedies suggestedby her opponents, she had one thing they didn't: the virtually assured support of a council voting blocelected with the political and financial support of her former employer, the South Bay Labor Council.For a process that was designed to improve government transparency, however, Chavez's process wasunnervingly opaque. From what can be reconstructed from interviews and document requests, there wasno notice, no agenda, no sign-in sheet, no minutes, no media scrutiny. And unlike the other proposals,Chavez's work product was not an op-ed piece, a press release or a speech; it was a process designed todraft law for City Council approval, undertaken out of public view.Chavez aide Adam Byrnes says that the notes at the Feb. 13 meeting were taken on "butcher [paper],and we threw those away." The bullet points were "copied into a word document" and circulated amongthe council staffs. Underscoring the hurdles that confront media and citizens attempting to scrutinize the .conduct of the public's business, it took two days of multiple faxes , emails, phone calls and visits to City

11/29/2007

RE: 11/15107 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 5 of7

Hall for Metro to obtain that one-page document.Even less details exist about a follow-up meeting that reportedly occurred at the Chavez campaignheadquarters. "There was another meeting. I don't know when that was," Byrnes says . "You'll have toask Cindy."Chavez says she doesn't remember details about the meeting, and document requests to Chavez's counciloffice have turned up no written information about who attended the meeting, when it took place or whatwas decided. Ironically, Chavez's reform bill requires release of councilmembers' calendars, a provisionthat presumably would document these types of activities.Calendar release was part of Cortese's Feb. 6 reform proposals, and also appeared in the "ReedReforms," a March 13 memo that included 18 sunshine ideas, among them a draft of a 17,000-wordordinance based on San Francisco's. Reed didn't stop there, though. The idealistic, American-flag-tie­wearing councilman added oaths and charter changes and codes of conduct that included truth-tellingand anti-bribery language. The language was reminiscent of the Boy Scout pledge, the TenCommandments, the Golden Rule and 1950s superhero Captain Video's Code of Honor all rolled intoone .The March scramble to bathe local government activity in a bright bath of solar illumination alsoincluded the release, on March 8, of the Chavez-LeZotte memorandum signed by four councilmembersand described as "sunshine reforms." !t was not a sunshine ordinance at all, but rather a laundry list ofideas ranging from neighborhood meetings to performance measurement suggestions that had beenhashed out in private on butcher paper and in circulated drafts and emails among staffers the fourcouncil offices.The MercuryNews jumped into the memo and press release thicket with a tightened-up version of theSan Francisco ordinance, to which they affixed their name and which they posted to their website, thenendorsed in a rare front-page editorial.The Mere initiative drew immediate scorn from the mayor, who denounced it in a radio show as "abunch of nonsense." His spokesman, Dave Vossbrink, emailed San Jose State University's Grade theNews research project, huffing, "In my decades as a municipal public information officer, I have neverencountered such a step by a representative of a major newspaper."Open SecretsEyes popped open in the City Council chambers on March 21 when one of Chavez's most loyalsupporters, a goateed neighborhood leader wearing a blue jersey embroidered with a soccer club logo,let word of the living room meeting out of the bag ."I support sunshine reform, and specifically I support the proposal of Vice Mayor Chavez and hercouncil colleagues Pyle , Chirco and LeZotte. And I support the proposal before you because I helpedwrite it," thundered Joe Gagliardi, who heads the Northside Neighborhood Association east of SixthStreet between Hedding and Julian."Along with the head of United Neighborhoods of Santa Clara County and neighborhood leaders fromacross the city , I sat in Cindy Chavez's living room and thrashed out a set of ideas for sunshine reform.Now the Mercury News didn't ask me for my input as a neighborhood leader, before they made theirsunshine proposal, but Cindy Chavez did. That's why downtown neighborhood leaders uniformly loveCindy Chavez."Later in the three -hour long public hearing, Councilmember LeZotte defended the public involvement,saying, "We've had several meetings at Councilmember Chavez's home."Cortese waited for his tum to speak and observed, "It's got to be the ultimate paradox, at a minimum, ifnot the ultimate contradiction. I think it's a great thing, Cindy, that you had an exclusive group of peopleat your house in a non-publicly noticed meeting. I'm glad you did that. I think it was brilliant. It was agood thing to do to get some neighborhood leaders and to talk about this. But I wasn't invited to bringmy ideas over there. Many of the constituencies that we represent weren't invited."Many , though not all , of the invitees were Chavez allies, contributors and endorsers, such as fellowAFL-CIO endorsee Jay James, a planning commissioner and city council candidate. While Jamessupports the reforms, he thinks that the memo that made it to council should have included a plan to

11/29/2007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 6 of7

make it easier for the public to obtain documents because "it's like a minefield working around everystaffer, every department head."A public documents provision "definitely needs to be a part of any sunshine ordinance ..." James adds."That's one thing that I think should have been included .... It was discussed, but for some reason it gotleft out."United Neighborhoods chair Ed Rast, another attendee of the living room "brainstorming session,"believes the council should have gone farther . "I think there's a lot of good stuff in there," he says, "butthere's a lot of other things that still need to be looked at."Having operated a company in San Francisco, he observes, "San Jose does not provide the public or themedia the same kind of access to records that San Francisco does . ... Without the information, it isdifficult for the citizens and the neighborhood leaders to participate." Rast, who has not endorsed amayoral candidate, also wants any open government law to have enforcement provisions. Otherwise,"It's like having a speeding law with no enforcement."Another nonaligned meeting participant, Rose Whitcomb, concedes, "I wasn't real happy with some ofthe reforms .""I don't see where we are going to get the money to pay for these things," fears Whitcomb, a communityvolunteer who works with children. "If we had lots of money, they'd be great.""One of the reforms I didn't care for was giving community groups or neighborhood associations moretime" for verbal comments at council meetings by increasing time limits from two to four minutes ."There were a lot of neighborhood association people there, and I'm not one of them. Sometimes if yougive them too much power they get weird. We need to learn to work with the city, not tell them what todo."Chuck Reed had come up with a lot of the reforms months ago," Whitcomb adds . "I think this is dirtypolitics, if you want my opinion. Why didn't it all come out last year if it was so important?"Rask expresses a similar sentiment. "Sometimes timing is everything," he says. "Without the electionright now, we wouldn't be getting much progress on this."In voting to refer the limited Chavez-LeZotte reforms to a task force, the council majority rejected anamendment to also refer Reed and Cortese's proposed reforms. The decision also meant that a truesunshine law, like the time-tested ones on the books in the Bay Area's other large cities, was not amongthe referred items. A sunshine ordinance defines specific categories of documents that are available forpublic inspection, along with procedures and timetables for their release .The task force being put together by Interim City Manager Les White, which will go to the rulescommittee this week, could still choose to review the sunshine ordinance draft. Chavez says she expectsthe committee work to take six to eight months , which would put any meaningful reform or disclosuressafely past the mayoral election in November.It's hard to get information out of City Hall, just about everyone agrees. Even councilmembers complainthey can't get information from each other-even though they are often some of the worst culprits,hoarding nuggets of information like squirrels in winter . Ironically, they sometimes cite the Brown Act,the state's open-meeting law, as a basis for keeping their political rivals in the dark, because the BrownAct prohibits councilmembers from arriving at decisions by communicating arnong a public body'svoting majority.Former Councilmember Charlotte Powers, a Chavez supporter who attended the meeting at Chavez'sresidence, agrees that council memos should go out earlier. "I think we had rules [that] everything had tobe out on Friday," she remembers of her time on the council, in the pre-Gonzales era. "It seemed to methere was more flow of information between everybody, back and forth."It wasn't always seen that way outside of the Sixth Floor. The perpetual frustrations with gettinginformation out of agencies such as Redevelopment, the San Jose Police Department or the city'sFinance Department by the editorial staff of this newspaper led to the initial proposal of a sunshineordinance in 1998.During the general election for mayor that year, we emailed copies of the San Francisco ordinance to therunoff candidates, Pat Dando and Ron Gonzales. On a televised debate on NBC 11, in which I

11 /21)/2007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 70f7

participated on the panel of questioners, I asked both if they would support an ordinance substantiallysimilar to San Francisco's. Dando agreed to support it without hesitation. Gonzales dodged the questionwith a nonanswer, but when pressed on the follow-up , committed his support.Following the election, copies of the San Francisco and Oakland ordinances were provided to several ofthe councilmembers and the city attorney. Chavez asked if she could be the one to introduce it. "Let mehandle it," she said . A few months later, Chavez invited me to meet with the city attorney and her. Hehad some concerns. The bill sat for half a decade with no movement until scandals and election-yearjockeying brought the issue to the forefront.The more quickly a San Franciscostyle ordinance is passed, the sooner elected officials can get back toworking on issues of substance rather than process. No doubt, financial arguments will be raised,because document requests do sometimes incur costs . Inexpensive web-based document managementsystems may provide part of the answer.Any true cost assessment would also have to find a way to measure the costs of government secrecy .How much extra do taxpayers pay each year for contracts and deals that receive insufficient scrutiny?From the $60 million bond loss in the mid-1980s to last year's Cisco and Norcal contracts, it's clear thatmanagement of the public's business in private carries with it a price tag as well.Sunshine Ordinance TimelineOctober 1998Metro calls for sunshine ordinance and secures pledges of support from mayoral candidates Pat Dandoand Ron Gonzales during televised debate.1999Cindy Chavez sworn in as District 3 councilmember. She volunteers to introduce sunshine ordinancebased on San Francisco's law and holds follow-up meeting with city attorney.October 11, 200SMetro's executive editor urges sunshine ordinance in speech to San Jose Rotary Club.December 8-13, 200SMayor apologizes for lying about Norcal garbage contract negotiations and rate hike but refuses toresign. Council censures Gonzales and votes to halt investigation despite calls to continue it.January 3, 2006Councilmember Chuck Reed publishes op-ed piece in Mercury News advocating sunshine ordinanceand other reforms.February 6, 2006Cortese unveils his "reform proposals." His press release contains open government proposals withoutmentioning sunshine by name though later publicity does.February 11, 2006Michael Mulcahy kicks off campaign for mayor with endorsement of sunshine ordinance.February 13, 2006Chavez holds meeting in her living room with "neighborhood leaders" to craft a series of proposals.March 8, 2006Four councilmembers sign and release "sunshine reforms" memo.March 12, 2006Mercury runs front-page editorial and presents its model ordinance. "In my decades as a municipalpublic information officer, I have never encountered such a step by a representative of a majornewspaper," mayoral spokesman Vossbrink emails "Grade the News."March 21, 2006City Council votes to set up task force to study proposals hammered out at Chavez's home and campaignheadquarters, but fails to refer broader proposals by Metro , Mercury News , Cortese and Reed.

11/29/2007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda

Price, Lee- - - -

Page 1 0[2

From: Kimo Crossman [kimo@webnetic.net]

Sent: Thursday, November15, 2007 8:58 PM

To: Tucker, Sheila; bbfischler@aol.com; "'Bob Brownstein' , '; "'Brenda Otey , , '; "'Claudia Boulevard ' ,'; "'D. D. S. Karl Hoffower ' , '; Zenker, Dave; dp@boulevards.com; edavis@orrick.com; "'EdwardRast' , '; execdir@unscc.org; Rivas Cosby, Joan; jnadler@scu.edu; "'Ken Podgorsek ' , '; Ruiz,Mary Ann; nwilliams@orloffwilliams.com; phaedra@atwork.org; Robinson, Bert; "'TrixieJohnson ' , ';virholtz@jps.net

Cc: Guerra, Antonio; Bosco, Alicia; Gomez, Armando; Attard, Barbara; Chaudhry, Rabia; Williams,Clark; Cogan, Jim; Cortese, Dave; "'Darlene Bright' , '; Parker, David; "'Fatima Silva' , ';FavoriteHill, Mona; "'Jeff Bedolla' , '; "'Kirk Everett' , '; "'Krya Kazantzis ' , ': "'Mark Schlosberg' , ';'''Ms. Rombeek ' , '; Constant, Pete; "'Richard Konda ' , '; '''Sanjeev Bery , , '; "'Scott Soper' , ';Tiernan, Mark; Conly, Barbara; Disher, Dottie; Herrick, Lisa; Manheim, Tom; Price, Lee; Terrazas,Eva; Beaudry, Eileen; Dougcoms@aol.com; rak0408@earthlink.net; 'Terry Francke'; 'DavidGreene'; 'Peter Scheer'; 'Erica Craven'; 'Allen Grossman'; 'Wayne Lanier'; 'Bruce Wolfe MSW;'Bruce Brugmann'; 'AmandaWitherell'; tim@sfbg.com; tom@cnpa.com; jim@cnpa.com; 'Sage';'Marc Salomon'; 'Joe Lynn'; 'CharlesMarsteller'; 'Oliver Luby'

Subject: San Jose considers toothless approach to Open Govemment.

I have reviewed the Progressive Penalties suggested here :

http://~,.?.ll.Dloseca.gov/cierkfTaskForce/SRTF/pdf/Subcommittees/AdminAccount/111907/111907AQ!

which appears to be a simple referral for noncompliance and can inform the San Jose Task Force thatthis is wholly inadequate. For 15 years, the San Francisco Sunsh ine taskforce has followed a similarpolicy for departments and bodies that refuse to follow the advice provided by the taskforce and hasfound that a letter to a reluctant department head or chair cc to city council rarely has the intendedeffect.

It is very disappointing to see the toothless approach that is being considered. One of the topcompla ints about the San Francisco taskforce is that it has no enforcement ability. It is truly surpris ingthat all the work you have put into this proposed legislation can be basica lly ignored with no penalty .

I'm incredulous that the city attorney highly praised the committee for its innovative education basedapproach for obtain ing compliance stating that this would be a landmark approach for dealing withOpen Government violations.

Kimo CrossmanSan Francisco

8.6.040 Progressive PenaltiesPenalties for violating the Sunshine Ordinance sh ould be progressive.A. If the Open Government Commission determines that the complaint arose out ofa minor violation based on a misinterpretation of the Sunshine Ordinance, theCommission may recommend to the appropriate Counci l Appointee that theperson or persons who misinterpreted the Sunshine Ord inance must participatein education and training about the Sunshine Ordinance within 30 days of thedate the Commission makes its recommendation.

B. If the Open Government Commission finds intentional or repeated violation of theSunshine Ordinance. it may issue a report. including a recommendation for

1112912007

RE: 11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda

corrective action , to the appropriate Council Appointee and the Rules and OpenGovernment Committee.

11/29/2007

Page 2 of2

11l15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda

Price, Lee----------- _ ._--- --_ - - - - - ---- -- _..- - ._---From: Beaudry, Eileen [eileen .beaudry2@sanjoseca.gov]

Sent: Monday, November 19, 20074:42 PM

To: 'Kimo Crossman'

Subject: RE: Requesting communications sent to SRTF

Follow Up Flag: Follow up

Due By: Thursday, November 22,20074:00 PM

Flag Status: Flagged

Kimo Crossman,

Page 1 of 2

Public communications sent to the SRTF are available for review by the public although we do not maintain anindex of all of the Public Communications received. Communications that relate to an item on the Task Forceagenda are brought to the meeting in hard copy and are also posted on the website. The public may request copiesof any public communication at the meeting itself or print them from the website.

For example, for the November 1st Task Force meeting, staff brought public correspondence regarding lawenforcement records in hard copy in a binder and then posted the communications to the website. Staff makesevery attempt to post all correspondence within a few days of its receipt; however, in this case, it took longer dueto an internal transition of responsibilities among staff.

The public commun ications can be found on the SRTF website. on the page with SRTF Agendas and Minutes, inthe right hand column "Public Packet."http ://v.'WW.sanjoseca.gov/clerklTaskForce/SRTF/MeetingAge ndasandMinutes .aspThe Public Packet includes all of the documents that were part of the Task Force's meeting for the specified date,including any public comm unication received, in PDF format. The complete Public Packet is posted 10 days afterthe meeting was held, but as stated above, public communications may be posted sooner than the 10 dayrequirement for the meeting minutes.

1believe this addresses your questions.

Eileen BeaudrySunshine Reform Task Force

From: Kimo Crossman [mailto:klmo@webnet ic.netjSent: saturday, November 17, 2007 7:22 PMTo: sunsh ine_reform_task_force@sanjoseca.govSubject: Requesting communications sent to SRTF

From: Kimo Crossman [mailto:kimo@webnetic.netjSent: saturday, November 17, 20077:13 PMTo: Tucker, Sheila'Cc: "edavis@orrick.com ' ,Subject: Requesting commun ications sent to SRTF

Ms. Tucker

11/29/2007

11/15/07 SRTF Meeting Agenda Page 2 0£ 2

Are all communications sent to the SRTF ava ilable for review by the Public and when are they posted ifso (nextday, real-time?).

If not, is there an index of them? I would like 10 review some of these communicat ions but don' t want to reques tcopies of all of them .

Tha nk you

Kimo Crossman

11129/2007

Page 1 of2

Price, Lee

From:

Sent:

Beaudry , Eileen

Wednesday, November 28, 2007 9:39 AM

To: 'Kimo Crossman'

SUbject: RE: Documents for the 12/06/07 Sunshine Task Force Meeting

Kimo Crossman,We are not able to accommodate your request to record the subsequent subcommittee meetings of PublicRecords on December 3rd, December 17th and January 14th. The public partic ipation process is designed tooffer means of participation that are open to all, not just one or a few. We do not have the resources to recordand broadcast these meetings at this time.

Information regard ing what will be discussed at each meeting is availabie on the website . Your addresses are onthe distribution lists for both the Task Force and the subcommittee meetings. There is room on both of thesemeeting agendas for public testimony, at the end of the meetings. Any member of the public is welcome toattend , listen to work of the groups and add hislher input at the end. In addit ion, the subcommittee receives publice-mails .

Please be aware, also , that the Council will be considering whether to record ancillary body meetings, as the TaskForce recommendations move through the City process .

Thank you for your interest in sunshine reform ,

Eileen BeaudrySunshine Reform Task Force200 East Santa Clara Street, 17th FloorSan Jose, CA 95113408.535.8120 (voicemail)

From: Kimo Crossman [mailto:kimo@webnetic.net]sent: Wednesday, November 28, 20074:31 AMTo: 'Beaudry, Eileen'Subject: RE: Documents for the 12/06/07 Sunshine Task Force Meeting

Thank you - what was the result ofyour research about taping subcommittee meetings? I woul d like to requestthat even the one scheduled be recorded.

Best

Kimo

From: Beaudry, Eileen [mailto:eileen.beaudry@sanjoseca.gov]sent: Tuesday, November 27,2007 11:50 AMTo: 'Kimo Crossman'Subject: FW: Documents for the 12/06/07 Sunshine Task Force Meeting

Kimo Crossman ;In the future, you will be included on this distribution in the e-mail below. Please note, the e-mail below includesan erroneous reference to the 12/15/07 minutes , it should read "the meeting minutes from the 11 /15/07 SunshineReform Task Force meeting ".

Thank you for your interest in sunshine reform,

1112912007

Page 2 0[2

From: Beaudry, Eileensent: Monday, November 26, 2007 5:28 PMTo: (bbrownstein@atwork.org); (davezenker@welive2ski.com) ; (dpulcra no@metronews.com);(jcosby@sanjose.org); (ken@podgorsek. com); Bert Robinson (jhrobinson@mercurynews.com); Bobbie Fischler(bbfischler@aol.com); Brenda Otey (sunshineshoulders7@yahoo.com); Ed Rast (edrast.sanjose@gmail.com);Edward Davis (edavis@orrick.com) ; Judy Nadler (jnadler@scu.edu); Ken Podgorsek (execdir@unscc.org) ; MaryAnn Ruiz (mru iz@enviru.com); Nand Williams (nwilliams@orloffwilliams.com)Cc: Conly, Barlbara; (dpulcrano@metronews.com); Darlene Bright (darbright@earthlink.net); Parker, David;Edward Davis (edavis@orrick.com); Fatima Silva (fsilva@aclunc.org); Jeff Bedolla (jpaulbedolla@yahoo.com); KirkEverett (keverett@svlg.net); kyra Kazantzis (kyra @lafoundat ion.org); Mark SChlosberg(mschlosberg @adunc.org); Richard Konda (sccala@pacbell.net); Scott Soper (fosterkane@hotmail.com ); Guerra,Antonio; Bosco, Alicia; Gomez, Armando; Attard, Barbara; Chaudhry, Rabia; Cogan, Jim; Cogan, Jim; Cortese,Dave; FavoriteHiII, Mona; Constant, Pete; TIeman, Mark; Disher, Dottie; Gavin, Troy; Herrick, Lisa; Manheim,Tom; Price, Lee; Terrazas, EvaSubject: Documents for the 12/06/07 Sunshine Task Force Meeting

Sunsh ine Reform Task Force.

The agenda packet for the 12106107 meeting is posted athttp://www.sanjoseca.gov/clerklTaskForcelSRTF/pdf/120607/1 2062007Agenda.asp and includes the meetingminutes from the 12115/07 Sunsh ine Reform Task Force meeting.

Please note, we are in the process of correcting one broken link which should be corrected later this evening.

Please let me know if you have any questions or need anything further ,

Eileen BeaudrySunshine Reform Task Force200 East Santa Clara Street, 17th FloorSan Jose , CA 95113408.535.8120 (voicemail)

11/29/2007

71 79 2993 5760 0252 2796

Trustee's Sale No. 421489CA Type of Mailing: Sale

CITY OF SAN JOSEOFF ICE OF THE CITY CLERK801 NORTH FIRST STREETSAN JOSE, CA 95110-1285

1Jt61 ReurrclRECEIVED c.~)

San JQse City Clerk

Innl l\O~ 2b p 2: 'b.

IMPORTANT INFORMATION ISCONTAINED WITHIN THE ATTACHED

NOTICE.

PLEASE READ CAREFULLY

CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY IS A DEBT COLLECTORATTEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANY INFORMATION OBTAINED WILL

BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

RECORDING REQUESTED BYCALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY

AND WHEN RECORDED MAIL TO

CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY9200 Oakda le AvenueMail Stop: N110612Chatsworth, CA 91311

Trustee Sale No.Loan No.Title Order No.

421489CA0697531226602090978

NOTICE OF TRUSTEE'S SALE

Space above this line for recorder' s use only

CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCECOMPANY IS A DEBTCOLLECTOR ATfEMPTING TO COLLECT A DEBT. ANYINFORMAnON OBTAINED WILL BE USED FOR THAT PURPOSE.

YOU ARE IN DEFAULT UNDER A DEED OF TRUST DATED 02109/2006. UNLESS YOU TAKE ACTION TO PROTECTYOUR PROPERTY, IT MAY BE SOLD AT A PUBLIC SALE. IF YOU NEED AN EXPLANATION OF THE NATURE OFTHE PROCEEDINGS AGAINST YOU, YOU SHOULD CONTACT A LAWYER.

On 12110/2007 at 11:00 AM, CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY as the duly appointed Trustee underand pursuant to Deed of Trust Recorded 02124/2006, Book , Page , Instrument 18818074, of offic ial records in theOffice of the Recorder of SANTA CLARA County, California, executed by: WILLIAM UMANA, A MARRIED MAN AS HISSOLE AND SEPARATE PROPERTY, as Trustor, LONG BEACH MORTGAGE COMPANY, as Beneficiary, will sell atpublic auct ion sale to the highest bidder for cash, cashier's check drawn by a slate or national bank, a casbier's checkdrawn by a slate or federal credit union, or a cashier's check drawn by a state or federal savings and loan association,savings association, or savings bank specified in section 5102 of the Financial Code and authorized to do business in thisstate. Sale will be held by the duly appointed trustee as shown below, of all right, title, and interest conveyed to and nowheld by the trustee in the hereinafter described property under and pursuant to the Deed of Trust. The sale will be made,but without covenant or warranty, expressed or implied, regarding title, possession, or encumbrances, to pay the remainingprincipal sum of the note(s) secured by the Deed of Trust . interest thereon, estimated fees, charges and expenses of theTrustee for the total amount (at the time of the initial publication of the Notice of Sale) reasonably estimated to be set forthbelow. The amount may be greater on the day of sale.Place of Sale: THE NORTH MARKET STREET ENTRANCE TO THE COUNTY COURTHOUSE, 190 NORTH MARKETSTREET ,SAN JOSE,CALegal Description: SEE EXHIBIT "A"Amount of unpaid balance and other charges: $506,808.39(estimated)Street address and other common designation of the real property: 873-875 S ALMADEN AVENUE

SAN JOSE, CA 95110APN Number: 264-380-014

The unders igned Trustee disclaims any liability for any incorrectness of the street address and other commondesignation, if any, shown herein. The property heretofore described is being sold "as is".

DATE : 11-19-2007

CALIFORNIA RECONVEYANCE COMPANY, as Trustee(714) 259-7850 or www.fidelitvasap .com(714) 573-1965 or www.prioritvpostinq.com

Deborah BrignacDEBORAH BRIGNAC. VICE PRESIDENT9200 OAKDALE AVIEMAILSTOP N110612CHATSWORTH. CA 913 11

EXHIBIT "A"

PORTIONS OF LOTS 16 AND 17, IN BLOCK 8, RANGE 3 WEST, AS UPON THAT CERTAIN MAPENTITLED "MAP OF MACE'S SOUTHWESTERN ADDITION IN THE CITY OF SAN JOSE:, WHICHMAP WAS FILED FOR RECORD IN THE OFFICE OF THE RECORDER OF THE COUNTY OFSANTA CLARA, STATE OF CALIFORNIA, ON JANUARY 20,1877 IN BOOK A OF MAPS, ATPAGE 16, AND MORE PARTICULARLY DESCRIBED AS FOLLOWS:

BEGINNING AT A POINT IN THE SOUTHWESTERLY LINE OF ALMADEN AVENUE, DISTANTTHEREON SOUTHEASTERLY 16 213 FEET FROM THE EASTERLY COMMON CORNER FORLOTS 16 AND 17 IN BLOCK 8, RANGE 3 WEST AS SHOWN ON THE MAP HEREINABOVEREFERRED TO AND FROM WHICH POINT OF BEGINNING, THE POINT OF INTERSECTION OFSAID LINE OF ALMADEN AVENUE, WITH THE NORTHWESTERLY LINE OF OAK STREETBEARS SOUTHEASTERLY 126.50 FEET; RUNNING THENCE FROM SAID POINT OFBEGINNING ALONG SAID LINE OF ALMADEN AVENUE, NORTHWESTERLY 331/3 FEET TOA POINT THAT IS DISTANT THEREON NORTHWESTERLY 16 213 FEET FROM THE COMMONCORNER FOR SAID LOTS 16 AND 17; THENCE SOUTHWESTERLY AND PARALLEL WITH SAIDLINE OF OAK STREET 137.50 FEET TO THE NORTHEASTERLY LINE OF AN ALLEY AS SHOWNUPON SAID MAP; THENCE SOUTHEASTERLY ALONG SAID LINE 33 1/3 FEET; THENCENORTHEASTERLY AND PARALLEL WITH THE SAID LINE OF OAK STREET 137.50 FEET TOTHE POINT OF BEGINNING: