RULES COMMITTEE: 5/7/2025
Item: B.1
File ID: ROGC 25-163
TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Toni J. Taber, MMC
City Council City Clerk
SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: May 7, 2025
April 24, 2025 – May 1, 2025
ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD
Letters from Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Letters from the Public
1. Letter from Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division - California Public Utilities Commission (Verizon Wireless), dated April 24, 2025, regarding: CPUC - Verizon Wireless - City of San Jose-SF SAN JOSE 160 - A-441233.
2. Letter from Mike Wagner, dated April 29, 2025, regarding: Submission for the Public Record. ____________________________
Toni J. Taber, MMC
City Clerk
TJT/tt
Public Record: 1
Apr 24, 2025
Consumer Protection and Enforcement Division
California Public Utilities Commission
505 Van Ness Avenue
San Francisco, CA 94102
RE: Notification Letter for SF SAN JOSE 160 - A
SF SAN JOSE 160 - A
SF SAN JOSE 160 - A
SF SAN JOSE 160 - A
San Jose, CA /GTE Mobilnet California LP
This is to provide the Commission with notice according to the provisions of General Order No. 159A of the Public Utilities Commission of the State of California ( "CPUC") for the project described in Attachment A.
A copy of this notification letter is also being provided to the appropriate local government agency for its information. Should there be any questions regarding this project, or if you disagree with any of the information contained herein, please contact the representative below.
Verizon Wireless
Felipe Martinez
Coordinator RE & Compliance - West Territory
1515 Woodfield Road, #1400
Schaumburg, IL 60173
JURISDICTION PLANNING MANAGER CITY MANAGER CITY CLERK DIRECTOR OF SCHOOL BOARD COUNTY City of San Jose [email protected] [email protected] [email protected] Santa Clara VZW Legal Entity Site Name Site Address Tower Design Size of Building or NA GTE Mobilnet California LP SF SAN JOSE 160 - A 257 Bernal Road, San Jose , CA95119 Pole Utility Pole Utility Site Latitude Site Longitude PS Location Code Tower Appearance Tower Height (in feet) Type of Approval Approval Issue Date 37°13'24.07''N 121°46'48.12''WNAD(83) 441233 49.8 46.7 Permitting 04/17/2025 Project Description: -
VZW Legal Entity Site Name Site Address Tower Design Size of Building or NA GTE Mobilnet California LP SF SAN JOSE 160 - A 257 Bernal Road, San Jose , CA95119 Pole Utility Pole Utility Site Latitude Site Longitude PS Location Code Tower Appearance Tower Height (in feet) Type of Approval Approval Issue Date 37°13'24.07''N 121°46'48.12''WNAD(83) 441233 49.8 46.7 Permitting 04/17/2025 Project Description: -
VZW Legal Entity Site Name Site Address Tower Design Size of Building or NA GTE Mobilnet California LP SF SAN JOSE 160 - A 257 Bernal Road, San Jose , CA95119 Pole Utility Pole Utility Site Latitude Site Longitude PS Location Code Tower Appearance Tower Height (in feet) Type of Approval Approval Issue Date 37°13'24.07''N 121°46'48.12''WNAD(83) 441233 49.8 46.7 Permitting 04/17/2025 Project Description: -
VZW Legal Entity Site Name Site Address Tower Design Size of Building or NA GTE Mobilnet California LP SF SAN JOSE 160 - A 257 Bernal Road, San Jose , CA95119 Pole Utility Pole Utility Site Latitude Site Longitude PS Location Code Tower Appearance Tower Height (in feet) Type of Approval Approval Issue Date 37°13'24.07''N 121°46'48.12''WNAD(83) 441233 49.8 46.7 Permitting 04/17/2025 Project Description: -
[External Email. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. Learn more] This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Outlook
FW: Submission for the Public Record
From City Clerk <[email protected]>
Date Tue 4/29/2025 3:30 PM
To Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas <[email protected]> 1 attachment (2 MB)
Email to Matt_04282025_Cat Adoption Availablity Narratives_SJACS (1).pdf; From: M Wagner
Sent: Tuesday, April 29, 2025 2:31 PM
To: Taber, Toni <[email protected]>; City Clerk <[email protected]> Subject: Re: Submission for the Public Record
Good afternoon Miss Taber and City Clerk's Office,
Please accept the following PDF file entitled "Lack of Cats Available for Adoption" at SJACS for submission to the public record and the Rules Committee.
Thank You.
Mike Wagner
4/29/25, 3:57 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 1/1 Public Record: 2
From: M Wagner
Date: Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 4:01 PM
Subject: Re: Cat Adoption Availability Narratives
To: Matthew Loesch <[email protected]>
Cc: Jennifer Maguire <[email protected]>, Angel Rios <[email protected]>, M. Mossing <[email protected]>, Peter Ortiz <[email protected]>, [email protected] <[email protected]>
Good morning Matt,
As I indicated in my email of Friday, April 25th when it comes to explanations for why Cat Adoption availability is so low - - - if you ask 4 different City Administrators . . . you get 4 different answers.
Your explanation that Cats Available for Adoption are being limited and held back by 120 cats on stray-wait hold (from April 15th) is rather curious to me - - - given that Pet Compass shows only 59 cats on stray wait hold as of this morning, April 28th and yet there are (still) only 10 cats available for adoption, 3 of which are in foster care, and 2 of which are Needs Rescue.
(see attached Pet Compass screenshot)
Matt, if a large number of cats have come off their 3-day stray-wait hold period (from 13 days ago), then shouldn't there be significantly more cats showing up on Pet Compass as available for adoption by the public instead of just 8?
Instead, we see that Cat Adoption availability (excluding Needs Rescue) has barely increased:
April 18th (5 available)
April 24th (8 available)
April 28th (8 available)
If the number of cats on stray-wait hold has declined from 120 to 59 since your datapoint of April 15th, then where are these 61 cats currently in the system?
Did a large number wind-up getting Returned to Field (RTF) instead of being placed in Adoption? Is there an issue with cats being processed by your Medical Staff when it comes to performing spay/neuter? There shouldn't be an issue given 4-full time vets on staff.
I continue to be puzzled why there is still a lack of availability of Cats for adoption to the public.
Something just doesn't add up.
Other explanations and narratives are as follows:
Director Icard:
The Community heard from ACS Director Kiska Icard that the low number of cats available is due to being more efficient "with quicker turn" when it comes to adoptions. Miss Icard shared this with a cat volunteer at a recent volunteer meeting earlier this month when asked about the adoption kennels and rooms being "empty".
In her explanation, Miss Icard then pivoted to the upcoming kitten season and saying that kennels will be full. The volunteer who heard this found Miss Icard's explanation to be rather "weak". They found Miss Icard's explanation to be short on details and depth . . . as she then pivoted to kitten season and away from the question at hand.
Mackenzie Mossing:
In the Mayor's Office, Mackenzie Mossing replied to an inquiry by a colleague of mine with a number of explanations that were offered to her by SJACS staff - - - one of which was that the "shelter has had to reduce kennel space in order to comply with ASV standards following the recent audit, which has limited overall holding capacity." Again, this is a most curious and puzzling explanation which shouldn't be impacting adoption availability.
As for the dramatic increase in RTF, Miss Mossing cited a "study" that had been conducted under former ACS director Jon Cicirelli that she indicated that staff was trying to follow. Perhaps you can comment on this explanation as to its veracity?
(See her reply attached below).
But the icing on the "cake" for explanations goes to a neighborhood outreach coordinator in the Mayor's Office.
Tara Dang:
When a senior cat volunteer sent an email inquiry to the Mayor's Office, a neighborhood outreach coordinator by the name of Tara Dang replied back and told her that she wanted to "connect (her) to District 7 Office Chief of Staff, Jonathan Fleming and Captain Jenkins of the Animal Care Center to further assist (you) in this matter." Why someone in the Mayor's Office believes that an animal control officer would have any information or background regarding cats available for adoption is absolutely beyond me.
The same can be said for thinking that because SJACS is located in District 7 that Councilman Doan's office would have any information. The logic displayed by someone in the Mayor's Office clearly escapes me.
Matt, there shouldn't be 4 totally different explanations offered for why Cats are not available for adoption.
In my opinion, this is just another example of the San Jose community having to "navigate" through a whole host of narratives (several of which are terribly false) provided by SJACS staff and the City to explain the lack of a basic service such as cat adoption.
Sadly, this is not the first time that the Community has had to "wade" through various narratives to find the truth as to why a basic service at SJACS is not functioning properly and residents are visiting the shelter looking for their new family member only to leave the shelter empty-handed.
It's hard to imagine why the City can't be on the SAME page when it comes to explaining to the public why Cat Adoption availability is so poor at this time of year. It gives the appearance that Staff has no idea what is really going on.
One would have thought that after not one, but two audits SJACS would have improved enough that the leadership team would be able to answer a most basic question like this. But given the above narratives, that does not seem to be the case. - - - This is most troubling.
Sincerely,
Mike Wagner
ACS Pet Compass
SJACS-Mossing
Pet Compass 4.28.2025