San Jose City Council
June 3, 2025

TO: HONORABLE MAYOR

AND CITY COUNCIL
FROM: Erik L. Soliván

SUBJECT: See Below DATE: May 27, 2025

Approved

Date:
5/23/25

COUNCIL DISTRICT: Citywide

SUBJECT: Public Hearing on the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

RECOMMENDATION

(a) Conduct a final public hearing regarding approval of the City’s 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, as required by the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development, to receive federal housing and community development funding;
(b) Approve the City’s 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan;
(c) Approve the City’s Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan; (d) Adopt a resolution authorizing the Housing Director, or his designee, to submit the City’s 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan to the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development; (e) Adopt a resolution authorizing the Housing Director, or his designee, to accept grant funding and to execute all grant agreements and related documents with the United States Department of Housing and Urban Development for the expenditure of the Community Development Block Grant, HOME Investment Partnerships Program, Housing Opportunities for Persons with acquired immunodeficiency syndrome, and Emergency Solutions Grant funds on behalf of the City.
(f) Adopt a resolution authorizing the Housing Director, or his designee, to negotiate and execute grant agreements with grantees for the activities identified in the Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, including any amendments, extensions, or modifications.

COUNCIL AGENDA: 6/3/25
FILE: 25-592
ITEM: 8.3

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

SUMMARY AND OUTCOME

This memorandum outlines the research, community outreach, and policy considerations that informed the development of a five-year spending strategy for investing federal housing and community development funds provided by the U.S.

Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The purpose of this action is to provide the final opportunity for City Council and members of the public to provide input on the draft Five-Year Consolidated Plan and the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, collectively referred to as the “Plans.” The Plans outline the City’s proposed use of federal funds to address housing needs, reduce homelessness, and strengthen communities.

In accordance with the City’s Citizen Participation Plan (renamed to Community Participation Plan as recommended as part of a separate Council agenda item), the Housing Department conducted three public hearings to ensure community involvement in the development of the Plans. The first hearing, held on March 13, 2025, took place before the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) to gather input on funding priorities. The second hearing, held on May 8, 2025, provided HCDC with an opportunity to review the draft Plans. This third and final hearing before City Council provides the last opportunity for public input and serves as City Council’s formal consideration and adoption of the Plans.

HUD requires City Council approval of both Plans as a condition for the City to receive approximately $13.1 million in annual formula funding through the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships Program (HOME), Housing Opportunities for Persons With AIDS (HOPWA), and Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) programs. Upon City Council adoption, the Housing Department will submit the final Plans and a summary of public comments to HUD by the August 16, 2025 deadline.

The 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan’s three spending priorities over the next five years are to:

1. Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness – Expand housing access and self- sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness;

2. Increase Housing Affordability – Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing housing; and

3. Strengthen Communities – Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

These three priorities build upon the goals established in the previous five-year plan while refining the City’s strategic focus.1 The updated priorities consolidate the previous priorities to reflect current community needs, emphasize the urgency of addressing unsheltered homelessness, and integrate fair housing and economic opportunity efforts into a broader community development framework. This more focused approach is intended to improve alignment with available resources, emphasize measurable outcomes, and respond more effectively to current community needs. All federally funded activities must support at least one of the three priorities identified in the 2025- 2030 Consolidated Plan.

The FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan totals $36.6 million, including $13.6 million of new funding, $23.0 million of remaining funding from prior years, and $500,000 of program income. Ordinarily, these resources would be programmed within the 2025- 2026 Adopted Operating Budget. However, many federal agencies are imposing new terms and conditions on federal grant recipients that would require active support of federal immigration enforcement, as well as the prohibition of policies and programs supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is likely that the City could receive specific notice requiring certification of compliance with the new conditions to receive its allocation of the grants so the funding is not yet programmed. For example, HUD has imposed compliance with all Executive Orders to receive Continuum of Care grants, grants received through the County of Santa Clara that directly benefit unhoused individuals residing in San José. The Administration continues to monitor the status of federal funding and will bring forward recommendations to recognize the receipt of these funds through a future budget action, as appropriate.

BACKGROUND
As a condition of receiving federal funding, HUD requires the City of San José to complete two planning documents. The first, called a Consolidated Plan, is a five-year strategic planning document identifying priority needs, goals, actions, and funding strategies. The second, called an Annual Action Plan, is a spending plan developed each year and supports the goals identified in the Consolidated Plan. Priorities for the new Consolidated Plan are developed based on the housing and community development needs of the community. Needs are determined through community engagement, analysis of data on local needs, and the policy priorities of the local jurisdiction.

On March 13, 2025, staff presented the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) with an overview of the purpose, development process, and proposed funding priorities for the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026

1 City of San José. Citizen Participation Plan:
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/67099/637417146276030000

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

Annual Action Plan.2 Commissioners expressed support for the four initial funding priority areas (since consolidated to three) and the example activities identified within each category.

During the discussion, Commissioners raised questions about the specific programs included under each priority area and the types of services they would provide.

Additional inquiries focused on federal program regulations and the types of activities eligible for funding under HUD guidelines. Commissioners also asked about the future availability of federal funding. Staff confirmed that there had been no confirmation of reduction or elimination of funding from HUD, but staff would continue to monitor the situation and provide updates to HCDC as needed.

Public Outreach Process to Gather Data on Community Needs

HUD requires jurisdictions to complete an assessment for housing, homelessness, and other community development needs through analyzing census data and community outreach and engagement.

Staff conducted community outreach and engagement from October 2024 through February 2025 for the Consolidated Plan. Staff ensured that outreach was undertaken in multiple languages. Official public meetings were noticed in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese. For the meetings, translators and accessibility equipment were available. These standards are consistent with the City’s Citizen (Community) Participation Plan for the Consolidated Plan outreach.

In January and February 2025, the City held two at-large community meetings for the general public at which participants were asked a variety of questions, such as:

• What should the City’s top priorities be over the next five years? • What do you feel are the most common or pressing housing problems in the City? • What neighborhood improvements would you like to see?

The meetings were held virtually and in-person. Staff sent meeting invites via emails to 3,604 recipients in the Housing Department’s listservs for affordable housing developers, anti-displacement policy, assessment of fair housing, general interest, and market-rate developers. Both meetings were held in the evening to ensure maximum participation. The in-person meeting provided childcare and refreshments for attendees.

In addition to the two at-large meetings, staff held 46 focus group and small stakeholder meetings, including residents from protected classes, community-based organizations,

2 City of San José. Staff Presentation on Funding Priorities:
https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=AO&ID=158606&GUID=aef25590-9278-4f19-a828- af94b488d3d3&N=UHJlc2VudGF0aW9u

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

housing developers and housing advocates These smaller format meetings helped to ensure that feedback was obtained from community members who did not feel comfortable taking on-line surveys, or who typically do not come to City-sponsored outreach meetings.

Staff attempted to maximize community input and minimize participants’ efforts to attend. For example, staff attended an Amigos de Guadalupe event at the Mexican Heritage Plaza on November 5, 2024, where staff educated community members on the Consolidated Plan and encouraged in-person and online completion of the survey. Staff partnered internally with the Rent Stabilization Program to provide informational flyers and surveys at neighborhood meetings and outreach events.

In total, approximately 412 people participated in public and focus group meetings, and 405 San José residents responded to the Citywide survey, for a total of 817 residents.

See Attachment A for the list of outreach events and survey results.

Community input consistently confirmed the housing and community development challenges facing lower-income neighborhoods for which HUD’s funds can be directed.

Across all community engagement events, the top needs expressed by participants included the following:

• Create additional affordable housing and provide more housing options for low- income renters;
• Improve nonprofit community services to provide and services for vulnerable populations, in particular individuals with disabilities, seniors, and the unhoused; • Improve housing stability by increasing housing education for tenants and landlords; and
• Enhance resident quality of life by improving neighborhood conditions and expanding economic opportunities.

These priorities closely align with recent findings from local studies in the San José area, as well as broader state and regional legislative priorities focused on housing, homelessness, and fair housing.

Quantitative Data Indicates Significant Challenges for Lower-Income Residents

In addition to community feedback, HUD requires analysis of quantitative data, primarily from the U.S. Census and American Community Survey, to document housing challenges. Attachment B, the Draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and 2025-2025 Annual Action Plan, details many metrics of housing needs in San José. Key findings include the following:

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

• Of the total number of households in San José, 44% earn lower incomes (below 80% of area median income (AMI)):
o 17% are extremely low-income (at or below 30% AMI);
o 13% are very low-income (31-50% AMI); and
o 14% are low-income (51-80% AMI).

• Lower-income renters experience more housing challenges than home owners.

Housing problems include substandard housing, overcrowding, or rent burden. • R enters with housing challenges account for 63% of all households earning at or below 100% AMI that have some housing challenges.
• Overcrowding is the third-highest housing challenge experienced among households below median income.

Table 1 notes the prevalence of housing problems of all types broken out by residents’ race/ethnicities and income. Following are some key conclusions on subpopulations in San José that experience more housing challenges than others:

• In San José, 82% of extremely low-income residents have at least one HUD- defined housing problem, but this was disproportionately true for two groups - 95% of Pacific Islander residents reported problems, as did 100% of American Indian/Alaska Native residents.
• Hispanic and African American households show consistently high rates of housing problems across all income levels.

TABLE 1: HOUSING CHALLENGES BY RACE/ETHNICITY AND INCOME Population Group 0%-30% AMI 31%-50% AMI 51%-80% AMI 81%-100% AMI Jurisdiction as a whole 82% 77% 58% 48%
White 77% 69% 52% 44%
African American 89% 78% 61% 47%
Asian 79% 75% 59% 48%
American Indian, Alaska Native 82% 89% 42% 22%
Pacific Islander 98% 78% 31% 84%
Hispanic 87% 85% 62% 51%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

Table 2 indicates the degree of housing cost burden for households broken out by race/ethnicity. A household is considered housing cost-burdened if it pays more than

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

30% of its gross income on housing costs and is considered severely cost-burdened if it pays more than 50%.
• While 62% of households overall spend 30% or less of their income on housing, this share varies greatly by group.
• African American and Hispanic households are more likely to be severely cost- burdened, with 26% and 23%, respectively, spending more than 50% of their income on housing.

TABLE 2: HOUSING COST BURDEN BY RACE/ETHNICITY
Population Group ≥30% of income
spent
31-50% of income
spent
>50% of income
spent
Jurisdiction as a whole 62% 20% 17%
White 67% 18% 14%
African American 48% 24% 26%
Asian 65% 19% 15%
American Indian, Alaska Native 65% 14% 21%
Pacific Islander 61% 28% 10%
Hispanic 50% 25% 23%
Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

ANALYSIS
The priorities identified in the draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan are assessed from community needs, public input, and local policy priorities. These inputs collectively informed a strategic framework that builds upon the goals of the previous five-year plan while refining the City’s focus to better respond to current challenges.

Compared to the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan, which included separate goals for homelessness, affordable housing, fair housing, and community stabilization, the updated framework consolidates these areas into three streamlined priorities: reducing unsheltered homelessness, increasing housing affordability, and strengthening communities.

The standalone goal of “Promote Fair Housing” from the previous five-year plan has been incorporated into the second priority, “Increase Housing Affordability,” to reflect a more holistic approach to housing access and equity. Rather than treating fair housing as a separate goal, the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan embeds it within strategies aimed at expanding affordable housing opportunities and removing barriers to housing choice.

This integration ensures that activities such as education, legal services, and anti-

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

discrimination efforts are directly tied to the broader objective of affordable housing opportunities and preservation.

Given finite resources and the potential for future funding uncertainty, the City must focus investments where they will have the greatest impact. The Housing Department developed the proposed priorities with three guiding principles in mind. First, it is critical to invest in projects that generate meaningful, measurable impact, rather than dispersing funds too broadly. Second, wherever possible, funding should be used to leverage additional resources, strengthen partnerships, and advance broader City goals. Finally, the City will prioritize projects that are outcome-focused and sustainable.

Programs should demonstrate long-term effectiveness and the potential to continue without ongoing reliance on federal or public funding.

Tracking Outcomes
In response to City Council’s request during last year’s Annual Action Plan review, as well as recommendations from the state audit on homelessness programs, the Housing Department has strengthened its approach to tracking program outcomes. 3 While the
Annual Action Plan is forward-looking by design, staff has integrated key performance metrics and internal review processes to better assess program effectiveness.

The Quarterly Progress Review Report process has long served as the primary tool for monitoring subrecipient performance. However, beginning in fall 2024, the Grants Management Team implemented refinements to this process. Under the updated version, each agency’s quarterly performance report is evaluated against contractual goals and outcome targets. These evaluations result in a performance rating that helps staff identify program strengths, flag areas for improvement, and initiate timely corrective actions when needed. This improved evaluation process ensures that programs remain aligned with City priorities and supports continuous improvements in services to deliver measurable and impactful results.

Table 3 below summarizes the proposed priority needs, goals, and example programs for the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan.

3 California State Auditor. Homelessness in California: The State Must Do More to Assess the Cost - Effectiveness of Its Homelessness Programs. Report 2023-102.1, April 9, 2024:
https://information.auditor.ca.gov/reports/2023-102.1/index.html

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

TABLE 3: CONSOLIDATED PLAN PRIORITIES AND FUNDING STRATEGIES # Priority Need Goal/Funding Strategy Potential Programs

1. Reduce Unsheltered
Homelessness
Expand housing access and self-
sufficiency resources for individuals
and families experiencing or at risk
of homelessness.
• Homeless citywide and Downtown outreach
• Homelessness prevention programs
• HMIS data systems support

2. Increase
Housing Affordability
Develop new affordable housing
opportunities and preserve existing
housing.
• Single family and mobilehome repair programs
• Enhanced and targeted code enforcement
• Tenant based rental assistance

3. Strengthen
Communities
Enhance community well-being and
improve residents’ quality of life.
• Grassroots outreach skills development
• Neighborhood leadership development
• Senior Nutrition Program
• Education, compliance, and legal assistance
with City’s Apartment Rent Ordinance, Tenant
Protection Ordinance, and Housing Equality
Payment Source of Income Discrimination
Ordinance
• Housing education and legal assistance

FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Development

To implement the priorities outlined in the Consolidated Plan, the Housing Department administers an Annual Action Plan that identifies specific programs and funding allocations. In January 2023, the City released a two-year Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) inviting qualified organizations to administer programs supported by CDBG, ESG, and HOPWA funds for FY 2024-2025 and FY 2025-2026.

In January 2023, the City’s Housing Department invited qualified organizations to submit proposals to oversee various programs funded by CDBG, ESG, and HOPWA Program funds for FY 2024-2025, and FY 2025-2026. Programs funded through this NOFA included:
• Neighborhood Engagement (CDBG);
• Fair Housing (CDBG and HOME);
• Legal Services (CDBG);
• Senior Nutrition (CDBG);
• Minor Home Repair (CDBG and HOME);
• Microenterprise Program (CDBG);
• Homeless Outreach (CDBG and ESG); and
• Rental Assistance and Support Services (HOPWA).

The FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan represents the final year of the multi-year plan.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

Proposed FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan Funding

The funding program for the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan aligns with the goals identified in the Five-Year Consolidated Plan. As shown in Table 4, the City estimates it will invest, with the prior year balances and program income, a total of $36,597,104 across the four federal housing and community development funding programs.

The total funding in each of the four HUD funding programs listed includes: 1) the amount allocated by formula to San José for each program for the coming year; 2) the amount of estimated program income that will be received by the City to be used in the coming year; and 3) the balance of prior year’s funds for each program. For CDBG, the prior year’s balance consists of unused balances from previous year’s projects and/or unanticipated program income in previous years. For HOME, the prior year’s balance consists of funds set aside in anticipation of commitments for rental development projects in the development pipeline.

TABLE 4: FY 2025-2026 FEDERAL FUNDING LEVELS
#
Program
Actual FY
2024–2025
Allocation*
FY 2025-2026
Allocation
Prior Year
Fund
Balance**
Program
Income
Total
FY 2025–2026
1 CDBG $12,988,074 $7,836,902 $4,358,740 $200,000 $12,395,642 2 HOME $23,646,588 $2,615,708 $18,032,719 $300,000 $20,948,427 3 ESG $867,952 $692,854 $180,425 $0 $873,279
4 HOPWA /
HOPWA-
PSH
$1,801,081
$662,996
$1,869,366
$662,996
$442,158
$0
$0
$0
$2,311,524
$662,996
Totals $39,966,691 $13,677,826 $23,014,042 $500,000 $37,191,868 Notes:*Total includes current year allocation, program income, and prior year fund balances.**Ending fund balance as of April 14, 202 5. ***HOPWA Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) is part of the HOPWA program and operates on a three-year funding cycle. HUD awarded $1,325,991 in FY 2022–2023, which must be fully expended over a three-year period. The City began drawing down these funds in FY 2024– 2025.

The FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan outlines recommended activities for funding.

Each activity aligns with the goals of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and contributes to the City’s five-year objectives. The Annual Action Plan serves as a guide for directing available resources toward initiatives that will enable the City to meet its annual goals.

Completing the Annual Action Plan enables the City to remain on track in meeting the goals of the five-year Consolidated Plan. A detailed description of each proposed activity is available in the draft Annual Action Plan’s Project Summary Table.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

1. CDBG Program
The CDBG Program is a federal funding source that supports the development of viable urban communities by providing decent housing, creating a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities, specifically for low- and moderate-income (LMI) residents’ benefit. As the largest and a more flexible of the four federal entitlement grants, CDBG funds are allocated into three main categories: Public Services; Community Development Improvements (CDI); and Administration. The CDI category is further divided into construction and non-construction activities. Construction activities consist of capital projects that support physical improvements, such as infrastructure or facility upgrades. Non-construction activities include programs and services, such as enhanced code enforcement, that benefit LMI residents.

Table 5 lists the planned CDBG expenditures for FY 2025-2026 by funding category and activity. Additional details are provided in the subsequent tables of this memorandum and in the draft Annual Action Plan.

TABLE 5: PROPOSED CDBG ACTIVITIES FOR FY 2025-2026
# Category CDBG Activities Funding
A Public Service Homeless Outreach Neighborhood
Engagement and Leadership Training $330,000
Public Service Neighborhood Engagement and
Leadership Training $190,000
Public Service Senior Nutrition * $355,385
Public Service Fair Housing Services $34,868
Public Service Legal Services $310,000
B CDI Construction Public Facilities and Improvements $7,315,446 C CDI Non Construction Enhanced Code Enforcement $1,273,703 D Economic Development Microenterprise Program $1,048,394 E Administration Administration Costs $1,537,846
Total $12,395,642
*Fair Housing costs are split between Public Services and Administration, with a combined total of $200,000 in CDBG funds.

A. Public Service
CDBG funds can be used to support a range of public services benefiting LMI individuals and households. Program regulations limit funding for public services to 15% of the annual CDBG allocation combined with program income from the prior year. The City’s proposed allocations reflect funding priorities, program delivery costs, and the service capacity of contracted organizations. Contracts are generally funded on a multi- year funding cycle to provide predictability in service delivery and to support organizational capacity of service providers. Table 6 details CDBG-funded public service programs and providers currently operating under multi-year funding agreements, and existing public service contracts will be extended for one additional year to maintain service continuity. All grant agreements will be monitored for

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

performance in achieving the stated outcomes and compliance with the contractual agreements.

TABLE 6: DETAILED CDBG PUBLIC SERVICES [A]
# Public
Services
Agency
Partner Description
Est. FY
2025-2026
Funding
Proposed Outcome
i. Homeless
Outreach HomeFirst Citywide outreach
and shelter $330,000
• 720 individuals will receive
individualized outreach
services, with a portion
connected to temporary or
permanent housing
placements.*
ii.

Neighborhood
Engagement
and
Leadership
Training
SOMOS
Leadership
development and
engagement
training
$145,000
• 501 individuals will
participate in leadership
training, education
programs, or receive basic
needs and supportive
services.
• 100 individuals will
participate in educational
classes and/or receive case
management services.

VIVO
Neighborhood
engagement -
ESL, citizenship
exam preparation
and civic
awareness
classes
$45,000
iii. Senior
Nutrition POSSO
Meals and support
programs for
seniors
$355,385
• 160 seniors will receive
nourishing meals and in-
person health check-ins.**
iv. Fair Housing
Services
Law
Foundation
of Silicon
Valley
Fair Housing $34,868
• 145 individuals will receive
legal services,
representation, and fair
housing education to prevent
housing discrimination and
ensure access to housing.
***
v. Legal Services
BALA
Citywide legal
services for low-
income tenants.
$150,000
• 100 low-income tenants will
receive legal advice and
representation.
• 75 client-facing staff will
receive training and attorney
support in order to serve as
housing justice workers.
• 800 tenants and landlords
will receive education on
their respective rights as well
as responsibilities and
dispute resolution
assistance.

Legal Link
Neutral tenant-
landlord
counseling and
dispute resolution
services (Legal
Training)
$10,000
Project
Sentinel
Neutral tenant-
landlord
counseling and
dispute resolution
services
$150,000
TOTAL $1,220,253
Notes: * Reflects total individuals served with both CDBG and ESG funds.**Reflects individuals served through CDBG funds only; total served with other non-federal funds is 360.***Reflects total individuals served with both CDBG and HOME funds.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

i. Homeless Outreach

HomeFirst’s Homeless Outreach and Engagement Program will provide individualized, light-touch support to high-needs individuals and households living on the streets and in encampments throughout San José. Services are participant-centered and include connecting participants to shelter and supportive services, distributing basic needs supplies such as hygiene kits, food, water, and clothing, and conducting housing eligibility assessments to facilitate pathways toward stable housing. All activities align to the the City Targeted Outreach Engagement Program.

ii. Neighborhood Engagement and Leadership Training
SOMOS Mayfair will deliver community-building activities through the Eastside Neighborhood Development Program, operated by the Sí Se Puede Collective, a coalition of nonprofits dedicated to uplifting East San José. This program provides leadership development training, case management, financial literacy support, arts education, and workforce development services. These efforts are designed to strengthen resident advocacy, build local leadership capacity, and empower community- driven decision-making.

VIVO will offer English as a Second Language classes, digital literacy workshops, citizenship preparation courses, and cultural awareness programs to promote civic participation among the community. VIVO will also provide case management services to assist residents with applications for public benefits, DMV services, and housing resources. Services are open to all residents, with a special focus on supporting the Vietnamese community.

iii. Senior Nutrition

POSSO will provide culturally and linguistically accessible programs for low-income seniors in San José. Services include door-to-door transportation from seniors’ homes to the Portuguese Community Center, where participants engage in daily activities such as nutrition programs, health support services, and other community-based offerings.

Seniors report that participation in these programs helps reduce social isolation and promotes greater independence. In addition to transportation for medical and personal appointments, POSSO also prepares and delivers hot meals to homebound seniors, ensuring that vulnerable residents receive consistent nutrition and support.

iv. Fair Housing Services
The Law Foundation of Silicon Valley will conduct the Fair Housing Legal and Education Services Collaborative, working to build inclusive and sustainable communities free from housing discrimination. The Collaborative provides a range of services, including complaint-based investigations, systematic fair housing testing, counseling and referrals

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

to legal aid and advocacy services, and direct legal representation for individuals experiencing housing discrimination. While the program supports legal and educational services to address unlawful housing practices, it does not engage in any tenant organizing activities. By promoting fair housing access and removing discriminatory barriers, the Collaborative helps residents secure and access or maintain stable housing opportunities.
v. Legal Services
The Legal Services program will fund two initiatives: Citywide Legal Services for Low- Income Tenants and Neutral Tenant/Landlord Counseling and Dispute Resolution Services.

Bay Area Legal Aid (BALA) will administer the Citywide Legal Services Program, operating a Legal Advice Line that provides comprehensive support, including client screening, intake, referrals, and legal advice. For clients with more complex issues, the Legal Advice Line will schedule in-person appointments at BALA’s San José office.

Additional services include limited-scope legal assistance, such as advice and counsel, brief services, as well as full representation. BALA will also educate the community through Know Your Rights workshops.

Legal Link and Project Sentinel will administer the Neutral Tenant-Landlord Counseling and Dispute Resolution Services Program. Legal Link focuses on building community capacity by providing Housing Justice Worker training and developing a Housing Justice Worker Toolkit to equip community partners with tools to deliver housing education.

Project Sentinel offers direct services to tenants and landlords, including counseling on rights and responsibilities, conflict resolution support, and mediation and conciliation services. Additional services include conducting community education through workshops, warm referrals, and individualized counseling, helping to prevent evictions, stabilize housing situations, and increase public awareness of tenant and landlord rights and responsibilities across San José.

B. CDI Construction
As listed in Table 5 above, CDI Constrcution funds are used to support public infrastructure improvements and other capital needs that benefit LMI communities.

Unlike public services, there is no federal cap on the amount that can be dedicated to CDI activities.Housing Department staff collaborate with other City departments and nonprofit partners to identify eligible infrastructure and capital projects that align with CDBG requirements and the City's Consolidated Plan goals. CDI projects are evaluated based on funding availability, project readiness, public input, and consistency with Consolidated Plan priorities.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

Project readiness includes the ability to fully expend allocated funds within the fiscal compliance period and the completion of required environmental reviews prior to funding commitment, ensuring that projects can move forward promptly and in compliance with federal regulations. Table 7 details the proposed activities for CDI projects.

TABLE 7: DETAILED CDI CONSTRUCTION PROJECTS [B]
# Public Services Agency
Partner Description
Est. FY
2025-2026
Funding
Proposed Outcome
i. Sidewalk Repair
Program
Department of
Transportation
Repair city
owned
sidewalks in
low-mod
neighborhoods
$150,000
Improve pedestrian safety and
neighborhood conditions by
completing critical sidewalk
repairs.
ii. Accessible
Pedestrian Signal
Department of
Transportation
Installation of
accessibility
devices at
signalized
intersections
$434,463
Improve ADA access and
pedestrian safety by providing
multi-sensory crosswalk
signals.
iii.

Brahms Ave. and
Tully Road Street
Light Improvement
Public Works
Installation of
underground
conduits, pull
boxes, and new
streetlights
$260,000
Improve pedestrian visibility
and neighborhood safety
through enhanced street
lighting infrastructure.
iv.

MidPen Housing
Unit Preservation -
Arbor Park Sprinkler
Heads
MidPen
Housing
Replacement of
sprinkler heads
in units and
common areas.
$290,590
Preserve affordable housing
and improve resident safety by
replacing the aging fire
sprinkler system.

MidPen Housing
Unit Preservation -
Italian Gardens
Roofing/Lighting
MidPen
Housing
Roof
replacement
and common
area lighting
upgrades
$1,491,582

Preserve affordable housing
units by replacing deteriorating
roofs and upgrading outdated
common area lighting to
improve for 12 residential units
and 2 community facilities.
v. Reserve for Public
Infrastructure/Rehab TBD TBD $4,688,811
Reserve will support additional
eligible infrastructure or
rehabilitation projects as
identified.

TOTAL $7,315,446

i. Sidewalk Repair Program

The Department of Transportation (DOT) will repair city-owned sidewalks located in LMI neighborhoods to improve pedestrian safety. Contractors are ready to begin work, with project completion expected within 45 to 90 days once a location is assigned. DOT is coordinating with property owners to ensure timely sidewalk repairs in FY 2025–2026.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

ii. Accessible Pedestrian Signal Community Improvement Project DOT will continue its multi-year initiative to install Accessible Pedestrian Signals at signalized intersections to improve accessibility and safety, particularly for visually impaired and other vulnerable pedestrians. Accessible Pedestrian Signal devices provide audible and vibrotactile cues that indicate when the traffic signal is in the "WALK" or "DON’T WALK" phase, offering clear, multimodal feedback to help pedestrians safely navigate intersections.

San José has approximately 1,000 traffic signals citywide, with about 32% currently equipped with APS technology. To equitably enhance safety across the City’s transportation network, DOT is continuing its efforts to install Accessible Pedestrian Signals at priority intersections, with a focus on LMI neighborhoods. Significant progress has been made with the support of CDBG funding, particularly in Low-Mod Census Tracts and neighborhoods participating in Project Hope, a City initiative that empowers underserved communities through neighborhood association development and community engagement.

The total cost for the Accessible Pedestrian Signals installation project will be paid for by a previous CDBG allocation from FY 2024–2025 and an additional $434,463 in this FY 2025-2026 to continue installations at 108 locations citywide. The project advances the City’s goals of fostering inclusivity, promoting pedestrian safety, and improving quality of life for all residents, especially those who rely most heavily on accessible infrastructure.
iii. Brahms Avenue and Tully Road Street Light Improvement Residents have identified a need for improved street lighting in three locations: along Rigoletto Drive, at the intersection of Brahms Avenue and Rigoletto Drive, and on Tully Road near the Coyote Creek bridge. All three locations are within the West Evergreen Strong Neighborhoods Initiative Area. Enhanced street lighting in these areas will significantly improve pedestrian visibility, reduce traffic-related accidents, and promote a greater sense of safety for community members. Following a lighting analysis, it was determined that additional lighting is needed to meet current City standards. The scope of work includes installing new streetlights, replacing outdated fixtures, installing poles and foundations, and trenching for underground conduit.

At the intersection of Rigoletto Drive and Brahms Avenue, the project will upgrade one existing streetlight, install one new streetlight with a pole and foundation, and trench approximately 150 linear feet for underground conduit. On Tully Road near the Coyote Creek bridge, four existing streetlights will be upgraded, two new streetlights with poles and foundations will be installed, and approximately 250 linear feet of underground conduit will be added. Once complete, the project is expected to result in an immediate and visible improvement in lighting quality and overall neighborhood safety.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

iv. MidPen Housing
Arbor Park, located in eastern San José, is an affordable housing community originally built in 2001 and acquired by MidPen Housing in 2003 to preserve its long-term affordability. The property serves low-income families with maximum incomes between 30% and 60% AMI and consists of 75 units, including 12 one-bedroom, 40 two- bedroom, and 23 three-bedroom apartments.

The property’s scope of work includes the full replacement of fire sprinkler heads in all residential units and common areas. After 23 years in service, the sprinkler system components have reached the end of their functional lifespan and require updating to maintain fire safety standards and protect resident well-being.

Italian Gardens is an affordable residential property located at 1500-1560 Almaden Road in the Gardner District, approximately two miles south of downtown San José. The property provides affordable housing for lower-income families with maximum incomes between 30% and 80% AMI. The property includes 12 residential buildings, two community buildings, and a historic leasing office known as the Lo Curto House.

MidPen Housing will replace the roofs of the 12 residential buildings and two community facilities. The existing pitched roofs, currently finished with asphaltic composition shingles, are at the end of their useful life and require full replacement to preserve the property’s long-term habitability.

In addition to roof replacement, MidPen Housing will upgrade outdated common area lighting, particularly in hallways and parking lots, where existing lighting levels are insufficient. New energy-efficient LED fixtures will improve visibility, enhance resident security, and reduce utility costs, allowing savings to be redirected to other critical property needs.
v. Reserve for Public Infrastructure/Rehabilitation

The remaining $4.6 million within the CDI category will support additional eligible projects in the future. The Housing Department and the City Manager’s Budget Office will work with City departments in the coming months to identify additional suitable projects that fund new or rehabilitation of existing public infrastructure and will be able disburse within CDBG timelines. While much of this funding is anticipated to support additional transportation infrastructure, including streetlights, renovation of certain City buildings could also be eligible. Depending on the number of eligible projects identified, a portion of this funding could also be redeployed to support other community infrastructure projects. Once these projects are identified by fall 2025, an amended Annual Action Plan will be presented for City Council’s consideration.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

C. CDI Non-Construction

Non-construction CDI projects fund programs and services that benefit LMI individuals and households. These activities support community stabilization and quality of life improvements without involving physical infrastructure development. Table 8 outlines the proposed non-construction CDI activity, including enhanced code enforcement services aimed at improving housing conditions in targeted neighborhoods.

TABLE 8: DETAILED CDI NON-CONSTRUCTION [C]
CDBG Activities Department/
Agency Partner Description Est. FY 2025-
2026 Funding
Proposed
Outcome
Enhanced Code
Enforcement
Planning, Building,
and Code
Enforcement
Enhanced Code
Enforcement in
Targeted
Neighborhood
$1,273,703
500 housing
units will be
inspected for
compliance
with housing
and blight
codes,
preventing
deterioration of
neighborhoods.

TOTAL $1,273,703

Enhanced Code Enforcement
The City will use CDBG funding to provide enhanced code enforcement services in targeted LMI neighborhoods.

CDBG funding supplements the work of the Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement (PBCE) Department’s Code Enforcement Division, allowing expanded proactive inspections and services for multifamily housing properties. Enhanced code enforcement efforts will focus on six communities: Santee, Five Wounds/Brookwood Terrace, Roundtable, Hoffman/Via Monte, Foxdale, and Cadillac neighborhoods. These efforts help address substandard housing conditions, improve neighborhood livability, and promote safe, healthy living environments for San José residents.

D. Economic Development

The City will use CDBG funding to provide for a microenterprise program. Under CDBG guidelines, a microenterprise is defined as a business with five or fewer employees including the owner. All part-time and full-time employees on the business payroll at the time of assistance must be counted. Eligible microenterprise activities include providing technical assistance and general support services to LMI business owners, helping to establish new businesses, or expanding existing businesses by increasing employment, sales, or revenue.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

Table 9 outlines the proposed microenterprise activity, which provides business and technical assistance to support LMI childcare providers in San José.

TABLE 9: DETAILED ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT [D]
CDBG Activities Agency
Partner Description Est. FY 2025-
2026 Funding
Proposed
Outcome
Microenterprise
Program
Upwards
(WeeCare)
Child Care Providers
Business/Technical
Training
$1,048,394
131 home daycare
providers will
receive technical
assistance and
business to support
to grow and sustain
their business.

TOTAL $1,048,394

Microenterprise Program
Upwards, a network of licensed home-based childcare providers, will implement the Business Operation and Optimization Support Tools (BOOST) Program to support microenterprise childcare providers. BOOST offers comprehensive business and technical assistance aimed at helping low- and moderate-income providers stabilize operations, maximize revenue, and sustain their businesses over time.

By strengthening the business capacity of childcare providers, the BOOST Program contributes to the creation of a more robust, sustainable local childcare ecosystem.

Supporting childcare businesses in turn improves economic stability for families across San José. Through this program, Upwards will help ensure that LMI childcare businesses have the tools and resources they need to succeed and continue providing essential services to the community.

E. Administration
Recognizing the significant requirements involved in administering CDBG funds, HUD permits jurisdictions to use up to 20% of the annual entitlement plus current-year program income for administrative planning and oversight activities. In addition to general grant administration, fair housing services are the only programmatic activities that may also be funded from the Administrative category, as well as through CDBG Public Services or the HOME program. Table 10 details the CDBG Administration budget.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

TABLE 10: DETAILED ADMINISTRATION [E]
CDBG
Activities
Department/Agency
Partner Description Est. FY 2025-
2026 Funding
Administration Housing 20% is designated by HUD
for Program Administration $1,259,956
PBCE PBCE Support services from
Environmental Planner $35,833
CAO CAO Support services from CAO $76,925
Fair Housing
Law Foundation of
Silicon Valley-
Consortium
Fair Housing $165,132
TOTAL $1,537,846
In FY 2025-2026, administrative funds will support fair housing programs and reimburse City departments for their work on CDBG-related activities. These activities include legal reviews of federal contracts performed by the City Attorney’s Office (CAO), environmental review services provided by the PBCE Department, and Housing Department staff work related to the Assessment of Fair Housing and Housing Element planning. Housing Department administration activities also include contract negotiation and development, monthly invoice review, spending trend analysis, contract monitoring, and coordination of HUD audits.

2. HOME Program
The HOME program provides financial assistance to expand the supply of affordable rental and homeownership opportunities for LMI households. Eligible activities include the acquisition, rehabilitation, and construction of affordable housing, the provision of tenant-based rental assistance, and home repair programs.

In FY 2025-2026, a portion of the City’s HOME funds will support the Home Repair Program, helping to maintain and extend the useful life of the City’s existing affordable housing stock.Federal regulations require that at least 15% of the City’s HOME allocation be reserved for activities carried out by Community Housing Development Organizations (CHDOs) — private, nonprofit, community-based organizations with the capacity to develop and manage affordable housing. To qualify, CHDOs must meet specific criteria related to legal status, organizational structure, and demonstrated experience in housing development. Table 11 Details the proposed uses of HOME funds.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

TABLE 11: DETAILED HOME PROJECTS
# HOME Activities Agency
Partner Description Est. FY 2025-
2026 Funding Proposed Outcome
A Home Repair
Program
Rebuilding
Together
Silicon Valley
Owner-occupied
single-family
home and mobile
home repairs
$1,500,000
90 households will
receive critical home
repair services and
remained stably
housed.

Home Repair
Program
Habitat for
Humanity
Owner-occupied
single-family
home and mobile
home repairs
$660,000
29 households will
receive critical home
repair services and
remained stably
housed.

B
New Affordable
Housing
Development
Housing
Community
Housing
Development
Organization
(CHDO)
CHDO Set Aside
(15% HOME Set
Aside) for
Development of
Affordable
Housing
$378,390 New affordable
housing development.

New Affordable
Housing
Development
Project(s)
Housing
CHDO
Reserve for New
Affordable
Housing
Development
Project(s)
$18,034,675
New affordable
housing
development(s).

C Fair Hous\ing
Fair Housing
Law
Foundation of
Silicon Valley
- Consortium
Fair Housing* $200,000
145 individuals will
receive legal services,
representation, and
fair housing education
to prevent housing
discrimination and
ensure access to
housing.*
D Administration and
Planning Housing
10% is
designated by
HUD for
Program
Administration
$82,261 -
TOTAL $20,855,326
* Fair Housing services will be funded from $165,132 in CDBG Administrative funds, $34,868 in CDBG Public Services funds, and $200,000 in HOME funds.

A. Home Repair Program
Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley and Habitat for Humanity will administer the City's Home Repair Program, providing emergency and minor repairs at no cost to eligible LMI homeowners. Eligible properties include single-family homes, mobile homes, and condominiums. Minor repairs address health and safety deficiencies that, while not yet emergencies, could jeopardize housing stability if left unaddressed. Typical repairs include debris removal, window and door replacements, installation of ramps and lifts,

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

ADA improvements to bathrooms, lighting upgrades, flooring repairs, and general accessibility modifications. These critical improvements help preserve affordable homeownership opportunities and allow residents to safely remain in their homes.

B. New Affordable Housing Development Project(s) – TBD
Staff will seek to identify an appropriate forthcoming affordable housing development that meets HOME requirements, including obtaining environmental reviews, construction readiness, and ability to disburse funds in a timely manner. If programs compliance proves to be a challenge the funding will be reprogrammed for other eligible activities such as unit preservation.

C. Fair Housing
The Law Foundation’s sole focus will be on the administration of Fair Housing requirements of federal fair housing program law by responding to compliants with a target of servicing 145 cases. It is noted that much of the federal fair housing law is under review by the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development.

D. Administration
The Housing will utilize the additional resouces up to the 10% statutory cap for the administration of the program.

3. E mergency Solutions Grant Program
The Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 amended the McKinney-Vento Homeless Assistance Act, revising the Emergency Shelter Grants Program and renaming it the Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG) program. The ESG Interim Rule, effective January 4, 2012, reflects the program’s shift in focus from supporting emergency and transitional shelters to helping individuals and families quickly regain stability in permanent housing after experiencing a housing crisis or homelessness. Table 12 outlines the proposed uses of ESG funds, including rapid rehousing, homeless outreach, Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) data system support, and administrative costs aligned with HUD’s priorities for ending homelessness.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

TABLE 12: DETAILED ESG PROJECTS
# ESG
Activities
Depart-
ment/
Agency
Partner
Description
FY 2025-
2026
Funding
Proposed Outcome
A Rapid
Rehousing LifeMoves
Rental assistance
and supportive
services
$180,425*
60 households experiencing
homelessness will receive
rental assistance and
supportive services to obtain
and maintain permanent
housing.*
B Homeless
Outreach HomeFirst
Citywide outreach
and shelter (60% of
ESG Allocation)
$417,850
720 individuals will receive
individualized support through
street outreach interactions,
and # of those individuals
exited to permanent or
temporary housing
placements.

C
Homeless
Management
Information
System
County of
Santa
Clara
Operation of the
Homeless
Management
Information
System (secure
web-based
database) in
compliance with
HUD and the State
$227,119
HMIS access will be provided
to 240 users to maintain
standardized data collection,
coordination, and analysis in
a centralized database
system.

D Administration Housing

7.5% is designated
by HUD for
Program
Administration
$52,231 -
TOTAL $877,625
*ESG funds will supplement non-federal funds. The total of 60 households reflect the total number of households to be served with both ESG and non-federal funds.

A. Rapid Rehousing – LifeMoves

LifeMoves, Rapid Rehousing Program provides rental assistance and supportive services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness. The goal is to help participants quickly obtain and maintain permanent housing without preconditions.

Program components include housing search and placement, financial assistance for rent and move-in costs, and case management focused on housing stability, employment, and connection to resources. Services are individualized and designed to promote long-term self-sufficiency and prevent a return to homelessness. ESG funds will help supplement other state funds. ESG funds will supplement other non-federal funding sources to support program delivery. This is one of three Rapid Rehousing programs currently administered by the City of San José; the other programs are funded with non-federal funds.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

B. Homeless Outreach

HomeFirst’s Homeless Outreach and Engagement Program will provide individualized, light-touch support to high-needs individuals and households living on the streets and in encampments across San José. Services will include connecting individuals to shelter and services, distributing basic needs supplies such as hygiene items, food, water, and clothing, and conducting housing eligibility assessments to support pathways to permanent housing.

C. Homeless Management Information System
The County of Santa Clara oversees HMIS, a secure, web-based data system used to collect, manage, and report client-level data across the homelessness services network.

ESG funding supports a portion of the overall system costs, including software licensing, user training, data quality monitoring, reporting, system maintenance, and necessary upgrades to ensure ongoing compliance with HUD and State requirements.

D. Administration
The Housing will utilize the utilization of additional resouces up to the 7.5% statutory cap for the administration of the program.

4. HOPWA / HOPWA-PSH

The HOPWA / HOPWA-PSH program is the only federal program dedicated to addressing the housing needs of low-income people living with HIV/AIDS and their families. In April 2024, Bay Area Community Health was selected through a competitive Request for Proposals process to administer the HOPWA program, following the closure of The Health Trust’s services at the end of FY 2023–2024. Tables 13 and 14 outline the City’s proposed HOPWA and HOPWA-PSH activities expenditures by category and activity.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

TABLE 13: DETAILED HOPWA PROJECTS
# HOPWA
Activities
Department/Agency
Partner Description
Est. FY
2025-2026
Funding
Proposed Outcome
A
Rental
Assistance and
Supportive
Housing
Bay Area Community
Health
Rental assistance
and supportive
housing
$1,818,036
60 households with
HIV/AIDS will remain
stably housed and
receive supportive
health services.

Rental
Assistance and
Supportive
Housing
San Benito County
Rental assistance
and supportive
housing for
HOPWA
participants
$442,158
10 households with
HIV/AIDS will remain
stably housed and
receive supportive
health services.

B Administration Housing
3% is designated
by HUD for
Program
Administration
$51,330 -
TOTAL $2,311,524

TABLE 14: DETAILED HOPWA-PSH PROJECTS
# HOPWA
Activities
Department/Agency
Partner Description
Est. FY
2025-
2026
Funding
Proposed Outcome
A
Rental
Assistance and
Supportive
Housing
Bay Area Community
Health
Rental
assistance and
supportive
housing for
HOPWA
participants
$643,107
40 households with
HIV/AIDS will remain
stably housed and
receive supportive
health services.

B Administration Housing
3% is designated
by HUD for
Program
Administration
$19,889 -
TOTAL $662,996

A. Rental Assistance and Supportive Services [HOPWA / HOPWA-PSH]

Bay Area Community Health will provide rental assistance and supportive services for low-income individuals living with HIV/AIDS and their families through both HOPWA and HOPWA-PSH funding. HOPWA-PSH specifically provides eligible households with permanent supportive housing, which includes a continuous legal right to remain in the housing unit through a renewable lease or legally binding occupancy agreement after the first year of residency. In addition to housing assistance, participants must have ongoing access to supportive services provided by qualified service providers.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

San Benito County partners with the City of San Jose, which is a major entitlement jurisdiction in the Metropolitan Statistical Are. Housing Department staff coordinates with San Benito County staff to administer approximately $300,000 annually in rental assistance for eligible residents. Under HUD regulations, the City may use up to 3% of the annual HOPWA allocation for administrative costs related to program management and compliance.

B. Administration [HOPWA / HOPWA-PSH]
The Housing will utilize the additional resouces up to the combined 6% statutory cap for the administration of the two programs, HOPWA and HOPWA-PSH.

Conclusion

The priorities, programs, and funding allocations outlined in the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025- 2026 Annual Action Plan reflect a strategic, data -informed approach to addressing the most pressing housing and community development needs in San José.

By refining the City's goals and emphasizing measurable outcomes, the Plans aim to maximize the impact of limited federal resources.

The public service programs are scheduled for competitive rebidding in winter 2025.

The three priority areas: 1. reducing unsheltered homelessness; 2. increasing housing affordability; and 3. strengthening communities, remain consistent with those in the previous five-year Consolidated Plan.

The continuity of priorties allows the City to build upon past progress while continuing to align resources with community-identified needs and HUD priorities. A continued focus on alignment, outcomes, and community engagement will ensure that HUD-funded activities remain effective, outcome-driven, and responsive to community needs over the next five years.

EVALUATION AND FOLLOW-UP

Following City Council approval of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, Housing Department staff will review and confirm proper procurement and then finalize funding agreements with service providers. These agreements will include detailed scopes of service, contract budgets, performance measures, and outcome targets aligned with the priorities outlined in the Plans. The Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan will be submitted to HUD by the required deadline of August 16, 2025. Once approved by HUD, the final versions of the Plans will be posted on the Housing Department’s website at www.sanjoseca.gov/housingconplan

and will be made available by U.S. mail upon request.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

In addition, capital projects identified in the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan will require further development and interdepartmental coordination. Upon City Council adoption of the Plan, the Housing Department, in collaboration with the City Manager’s Budget Office and relevant City departments, will work to finalize project scopes and ensure all program and regulatory requirements are met. Prior to the execution of any contracts for capital projects, staff will complete all applicable environmental reviews in accordance with the National Environmental Policy Act and the California Environmental Quality Act.

At the close of each program year, the City is required to submit a Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) to HUD, which summarizes progress toward the goals identified in the previous year’s Annual Action Plan. The Housing Department will present the FY 2024–2025 Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report to City Council in fall 2025.

COST SUMMARY/IMPLICATIONS
HUD released its FY 2025 allocations for communities on May 13, 2025, which covers the City’s annual entitlement amounts for FY 2025-2026. This report summarizes the expenditure plan for the City's federal formula funds received from HUD, which includes FY 2025-2026 annual entitlement funding of $13,083,062, $500,000 in anticipated program income, and $23,014,042 from previous years’ funding for a combined total of $36,597,104.

Ordinarily, these amounts would be programmed in the 2025-2026 Adopted Operating Budget within the HOME Investment Partnership Program Fund ($20.8 million), the Community Development Block Grant Fund ($12.0 million), and the Multi-Source Housing Fund ($3.7 million). However, many federal agencies are imposing new terms and conditions on federal grant recipients that would require active support of federal immigration enforcement, as well as the prohibition of policies and programs supporting diversity, equity, and inclusion. It is likely that City could receive specific notice requiring certification of compliance to the new conditions to receive its allocation of the grants.

For example, HUD has imposed compliance with all Executive Orders to receive Continuum of Care grants, grants received through the County of Santa Clara that directly benefit unhoused individuals residing in San José. The Administration continues to monitor the status of federal funding and will bring forward recommendations to recognize the receipt of these funds through a future budget action, as appropriate.

COORDINATION

This item has been coordinated with the City Attorney’s Office and City’s Manager’s Budget Office.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

PUBLIC OUTREACH

This memorandum will be published on the City’s Council Agenda website in advance of the June 3, 2025, City Council meeting.

In accordance with federal regulations, jurisdictions are required to hold at least two public hearings to receive community input on the Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan and associated funding priorities. The City of San José’s adopted Community Participation Plan exceeds this requirement by mandating three public hearings: one prior to the release of the draft Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan, and two additional hearings for review and adoption.

To fulfill this requirement, the Housing Department presented the proposed funding priorities and strategies to the HCDC on March 13, 2025. On May 8, 2025, HCDC reviewed and provided additional input on the draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan. The June 3, 2025, City Council hearing serves as the final public hearing, during which the City Council is expected to consider and adopt the final Plans. Following adoption, the Housing Department will submit the Plans to HUD by the required deadline.

All public comments received, both verbal and written along with the City’s responses will be included in the appendices of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025- 2026 Annual Action Plan as part of the formal submission to HUD.

COMMISSION RECOMMENDATION AND INPUT

On March 13, 2025, Housing Department staff presented the proposed funding strategies to the HCDC to obtain input on the draft priorities and activities and to conduct a public hearing. On May 8, 2025, staff returned to HCDC to present the full draft of the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan for additional review and comment. A summary of all public comments received to date, including input from Commissioners, is provided in Attachment C to this memorandum.

CEQA

Not a Project, File No. PP17-009, Staff Reports, Assessments, Annual Reports, and Informational Memos that involve no approvals of any City action. Specific development projects that are funded because of the Annual Action Plan are subject to project- specific CEQA clearance.

HONORABLE MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL
May 12, 2025
Subject: Actions Related to the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

PUBLIC SUBSIDY REPORTING

This item does not include a public subsidy as defined in section 53083 or 53083.1 of the California Government Code or the City’s Open Government Resolution.

/s/
Erik L. Soliván
Housing Director

The principal author of this memorandum is Annette Tran, Interim Senior Development Officer, Housing Department. For questions, please contact Cupid Alexander, Deputy Director, at [email protected]
or (669) 314-3884.

ATTACHMENTS:

A – Community Outreach and Survey Results
B – Draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan C – Summary of Public Comments
Attachment A – Community Outreach and Survey Results
Please note that the notes for every outreach event are not included. This appendix is not meant to be comprehensive, but rather demonstrate the range of outreach activities conducted, organizations and community members consulted, and input received.

Engagement Events Date Year Day

Attendees
Focus Groups on Housing Needs

1. Disability Community January 19 2022 evening 22

2. Veterans January 25 2022 day 17

3. LGBTQ+ January 25 2022 evening 4

4. African Ancestry January 31 2022 evening 3

5. Formerly Homeless (Second Street Studios) February 2 2022 day 4

6. LGBTQ+ February 15 2022 evening 19

7. Affordable Housing Residents (Kings Crossing) March 7 2022 afternoon 4

8. Indigenous Peoples March 16 2022 evening 1

9. Residents with Disabilities and Affordable Housing September 12 2024 morning 13 subtotal focus groups 87
Stakeholder Meetings

1. City's Developer Roundtable September 15 2021 morning 5

2. BIA South Bay RPC Meeting March 3 2022 day 4

3. Destination: Home/County/City Coordination Meeting on Homelessness April 28 2022 morning 12

4. Sacred Heart Housing Action Committee August 1 2022 Evening 6

5. VTA August 8 2022 morning 5

6. Equity Advisory Group (EAG) August 23 2022 day 9

7. SPUR San José Board of Directors August 24 2022 day 26

8. California Apartment Association September 2 2022 morning 1

9. Silicon Valley Leadership Group September 12 2022 afternoon 1

10. City and County Community Advocate for Homelessness October 17 2022 afternoon 15

11. People Acting in Community Together (PACT) October 18 2022 morning 7

12. Carpenters Union October 18 2022 afternoon 1

13. Law Foundation October 19 2022 afternoon 3

14. Schools Collaborative October 27 2022 afternoon 32

15. Carpenters Union January 30 2023 morning 1

16. REAL Coalition September 14 2023 morning 5

17. Department of Aging and Adult Services August 14 2024 afternoon 3

18. LEAB Executive Committee October 3 2024 afternoon 9

19. LEAB Board October 17 2024 afternoon 13

20. City Digital Divide Team October 22 2024 afternoon 3

21. Office of Emergency Management November 1 2024 afternoon 3

22. Lead Based Paint Consult w HD Maintenance Team November 8 2024 morning 3

23. Fair Housing Consortium December 9 2024 morning 8

24. LUNA December 11 2024 morning 1

25. SCCHA December 11 2024 afternoon 2

26. SOMOS Vecinos Activos December 19 2024 afternoon 19

27. Homelessness Response Department Consult January 13 2025 afternoon 3

28. PACT February 18 2025 afternoon 6
subtotal stakeholder meetings 206
Strategy Working Groups

1. Access to Rental Housing January 14 2022 morning 25

2. Development Barriers - For-profit Developers February 24 2022 afternoon 8

3. R/ECAP areas and anti-displacement issues February 24 2022 evening 45

4. Development Barriers - Nonprofit Developers February 25 2022 morning 6 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan Community Engagement Efforts 1 5. R/ECAP areas and neighborhood investment March 7 2022 afternoon 19

6. Homeownership April 5 2022 afternoon 7

7. Areas of High Opportunity April 6 2022 evening 19

8. Homeownership April 8 2022 afternoon 10

9. R/ECAP areas and neighborhood investment April 8 2022 afternoon 14

10. Access to Rental Housing April 8 2022 afternoon 23

11. Areas of High Opportunity April 8 2022 evening 15
subtotal stakeholder meetings 191
Public Community Meetings

1. San José virtual Community Meeting January 30 2025 evening 4

2. San José Community Meeting at Seven Trees February 5 2025 evening 4 subtotal stakeholder meetings 8
Tabling at Community Events

1. Vietnamese American Organization Community Day August 27 2022 day 75

2. Mexican Heritage Plaza Election Resource Fair November 5 2024 day 20 subtotal tabling 95
On-line and Written Survey

1. Survey 2024-2025 Nov 1- Jan 10 2024-25 N/A 405
992
Participants without surveys 587
Survey Nov 1, 2024 to Jan 10, 2025
English 335
Spanish 56
Vietnamese 9
total: 405
Estimated outreach (duplicated) participants count
2 Survey Results
3 Q1. What is your age?
Answer Choices English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percent 18-24 13 13 3%
25-34 38 1 39 10%
35-44 63 10 2 2 77 19%
45-54 74 25 1 100 25%
55-64 77 18 3 98 24%
65 or older 70 2 4 2 78 19%
Total 335 56 9 5 405
Answer Choices Total Percent
18-24 13 3%
25-34 39 10%
35-44 77 19%
45-54 100 25%
55-64 98 24%
65 or older 78 19%
Total 405
3%
10%
19%
25%
24%
19%
AGE
18-24
25-34
35-44
45-54
55-64
65 or older
4 Q2. Are you the head of household?
English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percent
yes 262 39 7 3 311 77%
no 73 17 2 2 94 23%
5 Q3. Does anyone in your household have a physical or mental disability? English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percent
yes 122 15 1 2 140 35%
no 213 41 8 3 265 65%
6 Q4. What is your gender
English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percent
Identifies a 77 10 4 1 92 23%
Identifies a 246 46 5 4 301 74%
other 12 12 3%
335 56 9 5 405
7 Q5. Are you a homeowner or renter?
Answer Choices English Spanish Vietnamese Chinese Total Percent Homeowner 188 7 1 3 199 49%
Renter 147 49 8 2 206 51%
335 56 9 5 405
8 2025-2030 Residential Needs Surve
94043
,:ount�
ltc,� ·= 0w
94040 Sunnyvale
95014
Saratoga
[ill
�,, [ill ---
a/Jr a Cruz Mountains
D City Council District
CC Zip Codes
# Responses
1-6
7-12
/alley
13-19
I Cruz
Sa
'-
95035
Soquel
Demonstration
State Forest
788ft
Mountain
95132
95020
County of Santa Cl;ira� California State Parks, Esri, TomTom, Garmin, SafeGraph, METI/NASA, USGS, Bureau otJ--and Management, EPA, NPS, USDA, USFWS, Esri, NASA, NGA, USGS, FEMA /
-:,..I.- _,....._ l
Q6
9 Q7. Select box that best represents you:

English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percentage
Resident 299 41 9 4 353 90%
Business owner 5 2 1 8 2%
Services provider 8 1 9 2%
Public agency 3 1 4 1%
Community-based organization/non-profit 10 7 17 4%
391
10 Q8. Rank your Needs
High Moderate Low
Improve city facilities that provide public services 166 195 44 405 Create more jo
bs available to lower-income resid
ents 209 134 62 405
Improve non-profit com
munity services 222 114 69 405
Create addi
tional affordable housing available to lower‐income residents 274 60 71 405 0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Improve city facilities that provide public
services
Create more
jobs available to lower-income
resi
dents
Improve non-profit com
munity services
Create additio
nal affordable housing available
to lower-income resi
dents
Overall Needs
Low Moderate High
11 Q9. Rate the following issues for your household
Serious Problem Moderate Problem Not a Problem Total
Availability of job training opportunities 94 123 188 405 Childcare se
rvices 97 86 222 405
Substance ab
use services/treatments 99 81 225 405
Education 99 117 189 405
Transportation 105 140 160 405
Elderly care 106 134 165 405
Availabilit
y of health care 119 137 149 405
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Availability of job training opportunities
Childcare services
Substance abuse services/treatments
Education
Transportation
Elderly care
Availability of health care
Moderate Problem Serious Problem
12 Q10. What are the things that make it difficult for you or other adults in your households to find and/or keep work? (check all that apply) total
Do not have a high school diploma or GE 36
Other 48
Do not speak English well 58
Disability 69
Need affordable childcare 70
Need job training 71
Caring for family member who is sick or 75
Do not have a college degree 76
Need transportation 77
No job opportunities 82
Nothing 142
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160
Do not have a high school diploma or GED
Other
Do not speak English well
Disability
Need affordable childcare
Need job training
Caring for family member who is sick or disabled
Do not have a college degree
Need transportation
No job opportunities
Nothing
What are the things that make it difficult for you or other adults in your household to find and/or keep work? (check all that apply)
13 Q11. Please rank the following Housing Needs for lower-income residents of San José: Highest Priority, Moderate Priority, Low Priority:

High Moderate Low
Owner-occupied housing rehabilitation 97 186 138
Rental housing rehabilitation 151 194 97
Housing accessibility improvements 156 197 88
Energy Efficiency and sustainability improvements 164 167 99 Code enforcement 185 182 59
Down payment assistance 192 149 102
Healthy homes 218 146 70
Permanent supportive rental housing for homeless 239 131 64 Rental assistance for homeless 240 144 60
Affordable housing for other special needs residents 254 146 41 Affordable rental housing 259 116 58
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Owner-occupied housing rehabilitation
Rental housing rehabilitation
Housing accessibility improvements
Energy Efficiency and sustainability improvements
Code enforcement
Down payment assistance
Healthy homes
Permanent supportive rental housing for homeless
Rental assistance for homeless
Affordable housing for other special needs residents
Affordable rental housing
Low Moderate High
14 Q12. Please rank the following Public Facilities Needs for San José: Highest Priority, Moderate Priority, Low Priority:
high moderate low
Facilities for pe
ople with HIV/AIDS 101 187 113
Parking facilities 116 134 153
Senior Cente
rs 143 196 61
Recreation fac
ilities 143 182 77
Parks facilities 149 181 72
Centers for
people who are disabled 169 179 52
Childcare cen
ters 181 153 66
Youth Center
s 188 169 43
Educational facilit
ies 194 146 60
Drop-in day ce
nters for people who are homeless 211 121 70
Health care fac
ilities 216 136 49
Homeless facilit
ies (temporary housing and emergency shelters) 263 82 57 Facilities for children who are abused, abandoned and/or neglecte 269 92 40 Mental health c
are facilities 277 97 27
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Facilities for people with HIV/AIDS
Parking facilities
Senior Centers
Recreation facilities
Parks facilities
Centers for people who are disabled
Childcare centers
Youth Centers
Educational facilities
Drop-in day centers for people who are…
Health care facilities
Homeless facilities (temporary housing and…
Facilities for children who are abused,…
Mental health care facilities
low moderate high
15 Q13-Q14 Please rank the following Public Services Needs for lower-income residents of San José: Highest Priority, Moderate Priority, Low Priority:

High Moderate Low
Services for persons with HIV/AIDS 102 177 125
Lead-based paint/lead hazard screens 150 143 110
Tenant/landlord counseling services 156 150 98
Services to increase neighborhood and community engagement 157 168 80 Financial literacy 160 151 57
Senior Centers 187 165 53
Fair housing education and legal support 190 131 83
Transportation Services 193 155 56
Legal Services 197 133 74
Housing counseling for lower-income homebuyers and owners 197 118 89 Childcare 199 146 59
Neighborhood cleanups (trash, graffiti, etc) 199 138 30 Youth Services 208 146 50
Crime awareness/prevention services 213 129 63
Disability Services 216 137 52
Employment training services 230 139 36
Battered and abused spouse services 232 127 45
Access to fresh and nutritious foods 246 110 48
Services for children who are abused 260 106 38
Homeless services 260 93 50
Emergency housing assistance 264 89 50
Mental health services 280 103 21
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Services for persons with HIV/AIDS
Lead-based paint/lead hazard screens
Tenant/landlord counseling services
Services to increase neighborhood and community engagement Financial literacy
Senior Centers
Fair housing education and legal support
Transportation Services
Legal Services
Housing counseling for lower-income homebuyers and owners Childcare
Neighborhood cleanups (trash, graffiti, etc)
Youth Services
Crime awareness/prevention services
Disability Services
Employment training services
Battered and abused spouse services
Access to fresh and nutritious foods
Services for children who are abused
Homeless services
Emergency housing assistance
Mental health services
Low Moderate High
16 Q15. Please rank the following Infrastructure and Neighborhood Improvement Needs for San José: Highest Priority, Moderate Priority, Low Priority:
high moderate low
Public art 71 160 174
Landscaping im
provements 96 177 132
Neighborhood si
gnage 109 143 153
Community ga
rdens 112 174 119
Trails 128 196 81
New or renova
ted playgrounds 130 183 92
Sidewalk impr
ovements 156 175 74
Accessibility im
provement to public facilities for people with disabilities 168 161 76 Acquisition an
d clearance of vacant lots 170 158 77
Stormwate
r and drainage improvements 187 175 43
Slowing traffic s
peeds 190 139 76
Water/sewer i
mprovements 193 166 46
Street improv
ements 202 166 37
Lighting impro
vements 208 134 63
Cleanup of co
ntaminated sites 256 114 35
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Public art
Landscaping improvements
Neighborhood signage
Community gardens
Trails
New or renovated playgrounds
Sidewalk improvements
Accessibility improvement to public facilities for people with disabilities Acquisition and clearance of vacant lots
Stormwater and drainage improvements
Slowing traffic speeds
Water/sewer improvements
Street improvements
Lighting improvements
Cleanup of contaminated sites
Chart Title
low moderate high
17 Q16. Please rank the following Economic Development: Job Creation in Low-Income Neighborhoods Needs for San José: Highest Priority, Moderate Priority, Low Priority:
high moderate low
Public improvement to commercial/industrial sites 103 157 124 Microenterprise assistance for small business expansion (5 or fewer employees) 149 152 92 Storefront improvements in low-income neighborhoods 158 155 74 Financial assistance for lower-income residents for business expansion and job creation 204 124 68 Job training for people who are homeless 242 118 35
0 50 100 150 200 250 300
Public improvement to commercial/industrial
sites
Microenterprise assistance for small business
expansion (5 or fewer employees)
Storefront improvements in low-income
neighborhoods
Financial assistance for lower-income residents
for business expansion and job creation
Job training for people who are homeless
low moderate high
18 Q17. Do you feel there are common/pressing broadband internet problems (e.g., high-speed connectivity, availability of providers, etc)? English Spanish VietnameseChinese Total Percent
yes 133 27 4 2 166 41%
no 99 10 3 3 115 28%
don't know 103 19 2 0 124 31%
19 Meeting Notes
20 Feb 18, 2025, 10am to 11am
City of San Jose Housing Department Policy Team/PACT Meeting Attendees: 7
Questions and discussion:

What is % of m
ental health spending, how many people are being served? Is all the federal money spent? Does the other funding fall in line with these priorities? It doesn’t look like homelessness is going away.
6 congregations working on housing, go back to their committees, to share this information, 4 focus, access to affordable housing, new methods to obtain, tenant preferences and guaranteed basic income.

There were 13 programs for affordable housing, what happens to them when BAHFA and measure 5 goes away?
How much funding comes from private funding v public funding? How much private funding is currently being used for affordable housing?
21 ConPlan Public Meeting #1 (Zoom)
January 30, 2025, 6pm to 7pm
RSVPs: 42
Attendees: 4 community members
Discussion:
• Legal Services Funding (Albert’s Question):
o Albert asked if legal services are funded
o Response: Last year, ~$400,000 was allocated for Fair Housing. This year, funding includes three additional legal service programs, including a neutral tenant-landlord mediation program and educational workshops for tenants and landlords.
• Modifying the ConPlan (Albert’s Question):
o Can the ConPlan be modified/updated as there are changes in priorities as the years go on?
o Response: The ConPlan serves as the foundation, but updates and amendments can be made annually through the AAP or at any time during the year. o Community input is always welcome.
• Action Plan & Funding Flexibility:
o The Action Plan applies only to HUD grants. While funds are flexible, they remain limited in the broader funding landscape.

ConPlan Public Meeting #2 (In-Person) at Seven Trees Community Center February 5, 2025, 6p to 7pm
Attendees: 4 community members
Discussion:
• Reducing Time to Housing for Unhoused Individuals:
o A concern raised was the difficulty in securing housing due to long waitlists, and difficulty in finding the right place for their needs (family) o Response: The team suggested resources to get help. For example, calling the Here4You Hotline (County) to get access to transitional housing and other support services based on their need.

22 Policy Team/Grants Team/Fair Housing Collaborative made up of Senior Adult Legal Assistance (SALA), Asian Law Alliance (ALA), Project Sentinel (PS) and Law Foundation (LF) 12/09/2024 10am-1030am
Attendees: 6

Discussion/Notes:
• Next five years will be a tough time for our clientele, how is the city bracing for any anticipated change?
o Outreach is going to be a big part to make sure residents feel safe and protected • Policy Priority: Income discrimination and country of origin/immigration status, during COVID residents with no legal status were targeted in lockouts by landlords o Concern this is what will happen in the next 4 years
• Concerns of self evicting, being vulnerable to illegal lockouts, avoid benefits in fear of exposing status
• Support:
o Campaign/outreach about tenant rights
• Continue to have convenings to work together after the conplan, resources are very limited, not enough money, already met case goals by over 50%
o Ongoing funding and not one time funding
• State bar has a lot of one time funding that consortium got for 3 years, but that is funding is ending
o A lot of supplemental funding is going to be gone
o Good data to get: how many people were turned away because of lack of funding • Most of the work is eviction defense, and not fair housing protection • Takes a lot of support low income seniors and persons with disability, exclusively working wth those cases
o Outreach is really critical
• Seeing some race based cases, including things related to hate crimes • Digital barrier for many seniors as everything is increasing online

23 Lived Experience Advisory Board
City of San José Housing Department
October 17, 2024, 6pm to 7:00pm via Zoom
13 Participants

Discussion

• Federal government needs to give more money.
• Funds should go to community land trusts for capacity building. • Bring small city values to big city.
• There are a lot of individualized programs. Funds should be focused on children, programs for families and especially for children living on the street. • Funds should be spent on the people, to get them off the street. Don’t spend money on things the City does not need.
• Funds should be spent on job readiness programs and employment initiatives. • People do not trust the agencies who are currently serving homeless. Take suggestion of the people being served and diversify to other agencies. • There are a lot of families experiencing homelessness including undocumented people. Housing situation is concerning. Can give suggestions but concerned about what the City is doing with suggestions.
• City lacks follow through. Feedback given is not used. There is a lot of distrust. • For people living in their cars, eliminate expenses incurred with tows, late registrations, etc. that can bring on an avalanche of issues. • Ask people experiencing housing issues what they need. • Allocating resources to people exiting out of system or vocation programs like goodwill, or that offer professional development skills. This is especially needed in BIPOC community.
• More advocacy for tenant rights. Need more lawyers to help. People need help to guide them through complicated housing issues.
• Focus on providing more affordable housing.

24 10/9/2024 6pm to 7pm via Zoom
LEAB Executive Committee
Participants: 9
• Rapid re hou
sing is not permanent housing and should not be counted as such • Legal aid and renter control needed. People are not getting proper notice of eviction or inspections.
• Foster youth and homeless youth should have automatic vouchers • People are having to work 3 jobs to afford a one bedroom, this is not an equitable standard of living
• Focus on families with children
• Senior housing and health benefits should be entitled • Low and mod income limits help working class but do nothing for homelessness • Prevention services should come from multiple providers, not just a few • More long term vouchers needed in county
• 150.00 general assistance from county is not sufficient • More innovative programs to subsidize other aspects of life (medical, gas, gym, transportation, etc)
• Need a more holistic way of serving people. A voucher should be foundational. If no economic advancement, people are at a loss.
• People can’t get into GED programs for free
• Make it easier for people to stay together, especially families. Vouchers should be flexible so they can be combined with others so people can live together in multiple bedroom apartments. • Move away from funding shelters to permanent housing
25 Residents with Disabilities and Affordable Housing
City of San José Housing Department
September 12, 2024, 10am to 11:00am via Zoom
13 Participants
Discussion
o Lack of extremely affordable housing, for many members in our community especially those that do not have income.
o Hard to find units that have any of the accessibility standards. At times, they may be rented to other members with another disability that does not necessarily need certain accommodation within that particular unit. o Because Federal and state standards are nominal, residents are having trouble finding units with basic accessibility EX. Units with tubs vs showers. o Individuals had trouble with leases due to exiting jail or hospital with no credit . o Individuals have different abilities, one model or footprint of models does not meet everyone’s needs.
o Individuals that need more support, consider in residential homes with a team of staffed individuals 3-4 people vs 1-2 people staffed.
o Include collaborative space in home and building to be more inclusive, spaces that build connections.
o Universal Design Standards from the Kelsey: https://thekelsey.org/learn- center/design-standards/
o Many individuals have sensory sensitivities, using the universal design, designers and developers should consider affordable materials to make walls more sound proof.
o Consider voucher utilization for people with disabilities at interim sites in light of new HUD information.
o It would be beneficial to have a tracking mechanism or registry of units to match accessible units to individuals who need those modifications. This would be useful for the City to know and individuals looking for specific housing needs once unit becomes available.
o SB 37 Caballero (D) Older Adults and Adults with Disabilities Housing Stability Act creates a rental assistance pilot program for older adults and adults with disabilities who are homeless or at risk of homelessness. The co-sponsors SCDD, the Corporation for Supportive Housing, Justice in Aging, LeadingAge California, and the United Way of Greater Los Angeles have a great sign -on and action site for signing on to their letter and a helpful fact sheet for SB37. 26 1
Vietnamese American Organization
Community Day Event
Survey & Outreach
Housing Element Update
August 27 Tabling Event
27 2

Table of Contents

1)  Engagement Overview  2
2)  Demographics  3
3)  Survey Results  4

1)  Engagement Overview
On August 27, 2022, the Vietnamese American Organization hosted a Community Day at the Vietnamese American Cultural Center. It was organized as an event to promote community involvement, celebrate culture, as well as, entertain, unite, inspire, and empower the community. The event was filled with live music, great games, tasty food, refreshing drinks, community resources, and more. Community members, from young and old, attended.

The Cit
y of San José hosted a booth at the Community Day to inform community members about the Draft 2023‐2031 Housing Element update, answer questions, and administer surveys.

The objective of this engagement effort was to increase outreach to and engagement from the Vietnamese and Asian Americ
an community, who represent a significant proportion of the demographics of the City of San José but have been historically underrepresented in prior engagement efforts.

The booth was staffed by a City staff member from the Department of Housing, a bilingual Vietnamese consultant, and a Vietnamese event volunteer. They stood available to answer questions, administe
r surveys, and facilitate conversation. Presentation boards about the project were displayed for viewing, with handout copies available for attendees to take. All the materials were translated into Vietnamese. Free snacks were also provided. Event attendees stopped by the table at their own convenience and interest.

As a result of this effort, the City of San José received 58 survey responses and interacted with
an even larger number of attendees.

28 3

2)  Demographics
Most attendees were Vietnamese. This was also validated by survey responses. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate). Survey respondents could select multiple answers.

Additionally, some survey respondents also identified with one or more of the following protected classes:
● Immigrant (11)
● Non‐English speaker (8)
● Person of color (5)
● Military veteran or active service member (5)
● Section 8 voucher holder (2)
● Person with a disability (2)
● Non‐
US citizen (1)
However, 25 survey respondents answered “None” or chose not to answer.

29 4

3)  Survey Results

1. What ZIP code do you live in?
Most survey respondents indicated that they live in 95122 (11), 95111 (8), 95121 (7), 95116 (4), 95112 (3), and 95132 (2). However, there was also representation from the following zip codes:
95173, 95148, 95138, 95136, 95135, 95133, 95129, 95127, 95125, 95113, 95035, 95010, 95008, 94587, 94500, 94087.

2. What is your housing situation?
Two thirds of survey respondents indicated that they or their family rent their home or "room”.

Nearly a third of survey respondents indicated that they or their family own their home. Note:
56 question responses (97%  response rate).

30 5

3. Including yourself, how many people live in your household? Note: 57 question responses (98% response rate).

4. Who else lives with you?
Most survey respondents live with their immediate family. A quarter live with children under 18 years old. Note: 57 question responses (98% response rate). Survey respondents could select multiple answers.

31 6

5. What is your annual household income?
A majority of survey respondents indicated that their annual household income is below $50,000. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate).

6. The amount you currently spend on housing is?
Almost half of survey respondents indicated that they think the amount they spend on housing is too high. Note: 58 question responses (100% response rate).

32 7

7. Which housing needs are most important to you?
Affordability, being in a good neighborhood, and having long‐term / permanent housing were among some of the most important needs for most survey respondents. But a smaller number still indicated that having housing that could accommodate a person with disabilities or aging adults; is in close proximity to family, friends, and community; has social services; can accommodate a large household; and can accommodate raising children are also impor tant.

One person added that they would like for the opportunity to move out and live independently for their family. Note: 52 question responses (90% response rate). Survey respondents could select up to 3 answers.

33 Developer Roundtable
City of San José Housing Department
September 15, 2021, 8am to 9am via Zoom
5 Participants

Meeting Notes/Questions
How to do use commercial parcels for housing?
The only reason we are not achieving housing #s is because of city and state policies. GP – Signature Project discourages housing. IHO discourages production of AH. We have been talking about this for 11 years since GP and no one in
City Hall wants to take a leadership role to fix this.

Have to look at constraints. Unless city looks in mirror, the inventory will not produce what it thinks. Last HE was an exercise in bureaucratic requirements.

Needs to be a lot of education of new affable housin
g developments
Look at developers as a partner – use their real world experience.

We expect to see the Siting Policy as a list of constraint. Real constraints – price of land – ability to move forward. And projects coming thru entitlements but will never break ground – not just in SJ but also in other areas of region esp on Peninsula as land pri
ces and development cost have really accelerated. The
city needs to do a thorough analysis of costs & feasibility.

Despite rules that state imposes, it’s up the cities to do a good job.  You have to educate council offices on how different this is thi
s cycle.
34 Assessment of Fair Housing Disability Focus Group Meeting Notes January 19, 2022, 5pm to 630pm
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: Housing Choices, Silicon Valley Independent Living Center and The Kelsey 22 Participants in 2 groups (Mix of ages, Latinx, African Ancestry, South Asian) What are some of t he biggest obstacles you or your clients have ha d to overcom e in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Not enough affordable, accessible housing.
• Need more services programs.
• Housing is too expensive.
• Rent increases – too frequent and happens even in subsidized housing. • Waiting lists for housing are too long.
• It takes too long to find a place.
• Forms are difficult to understand and fill out.
• Temporary housing has lots of hoops. Hard for parent to navigate on behalf of child. • Low turnover among occupants of subsidized housing.
• Denial of reasonable accommodation requests.
• Hard to get reasonable accommodations.
• Hard to find apartments that accept Section 8 vouchers. • Hard to find home that fits the size and income of the family. • Disabled people are at a big risk of displacement. They live with family, overcrowding, etc. • Difficult to navigate the different disability agencies, their programs and requirements. • Tying affordable housing to area medium income (AMI) is problematic. Supplemental Security Income (SSI) is 25% AMI but cannot access apartments below 50% AMI. • SSI does not cover rent.
• Difficult to find information or help to find housing for people with disability. • 50% AMI is too high. Need integrated multi-income housing, extremely low income and below. • Section 8 is tied to Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH). If disabled and not currently homeless it is difficult to get vouchers.
• Section 8 housing is hard to get. If you do have it, it is so hard to find a landlord that will accept.

Delays in inspections have been a barrier, especially during COVID. • Section 8 income discrimination is still an issue.
• Those on fixed income are most at risk of losing housing • The City is set up to prioritize segregate housing, not integrated. • Steps in home are barriers.
• Lack of closed captioning and lack of information in Spanish is a barrier. • Lack of awareness of benefits of keeping aisle space clear. • Lack of awareness of how able-ism and how racism go together. • Lack of awareness of needs of non -physical disabilities and how these need to be addressed.

Accommodations are more physically oriented. Kelsey is only one place. Need to address existing housing programs.
35 • The process of obtaining and maintaining accessible housing is draining. Mental health suffers.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Make Section 8 vouchers automatic and available to anyone with a disability or anyone in SSI disability program.
• Provide a guide to obtaining housing for people with disabilities. • All homes should have universal design features.
• Housing should be made so that one can age in place.
• More Section 8 vouchers and remove (or subsidize) barriers so that they can be utilized. Make it adaptable for renters.
• Support for applying for Section 8 and applying for housing, including help in filling out forms. • Utility support for disabled folks.
• Cognitive functioning folks needs services, not just universal design. • Create a city-wide housing coordinator who can provide support and assistance. • Link support services with housing.
• Doorways needs to have accessibility descriptions including mobility and sensory. • Provide affordable housing for people exiting institutional or congregate settings. • Increase integrated, supportive housing for people with and without disabilities. • Design a way to find out status of waiting list without repeatedly calling property manager. • Build more housing.
• Inclusive design standards should be built across the board. • Center the experience of people with disabilities.
• Provide wheelchair accessible bathrooms at events.
• Housing Department needs to have a better baseline understanding of what accessibility is available in housing stock.
• Need to address non-physical disability needs. Necessary to honor the person and their needs. • Affordable housing providers need to have adequate staff to review accommodation requests. • Housing needs to be in better locations where it is safe to live. • Discounts for cell phones as they are important for access in these times. • Increase home ownership opportunities.
• The City needs to be held accountable for providing affordable housing for people with disabilities. • More services that are tied directly to housing.
• More education for landlords and tenants on Section 8. • Down payment assistance.
• Need accountability and incentives to produce more housing. Incentives for landlords and developers produce more accessibility. Incentives for tenants to go to trainings. Everyone needs to be able to get the information they need to produce and access accessible housing. • Project home key and innovative models need to be accessible for physical and cognitive access. • ADU initiatives need to be accessible.
• Information needs to be provided in plain language. Information should be in multiple languages in accessible format. Also, ASL translation. The more these services are developed, the better the relationship with the community will be.
36 LGBTQ+ Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 25, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partner: Billy DeFrank LGBTQ+ Community Center
4 Participants (Various ages, mix of White and Asian)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Housing is hard to find and not very affordable.
• Reduce barriers for trans people to find shelter. Many shelters require identification as male or female with rigid/traditional definitions of gender. Some buildings require sobriety which is a barrier.
• City has the long list of services on their homeless brochure. A lot of those don’t apply. Average person would not know where to start with that list.
• Shrinking services.
• Long waiting lists.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • More affordable, welcoming housing in general.
• More LGBTQ+ specialized shelters (New Haven cited as a good example but not enough beds to handle demand; Arena Hotel across from Billy DeFrank Center given as a potential site). • Resources for more LGBTQ+ / aware service staff, retention, training, etc. • Domestic violence shelters are open to victims of partner abuse but should also be open to adult victims of parental abuse (e.g. of queer youth fleeing unsafe family situation). • More LGBTQ+ targeted outreach.
• Services (mediation, counseling, intervention) for LGBTQ+ folks who live in shelters or Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) who have to deal with homophobic or transphobic neighbors (other shelter/PSH residents) or service staff. • More mental health services to stay in housing.
• Need policies and funding aimed to help housing needs of LGBTQ+ community. Need to center the voices of LGBTQ+ community in the policy and solution discussion. There is an urgency, and desperation, to solve these housing issues that does not seem to be understood by leadership at the City of San José.
37 Veterans Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 25, 2022, 2pm to 330pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partner: Supportive Services for Veterans Families Collaborative 17 Participants (mix of men and women, White, African Ancestry and Latinx) What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• 290 status is a barrier. Veterans who have 290 status are ineligible for vouchers so they are stuck in a loop of homelessness. There is a lack of clarification for “category 1” and what charges pertain, so that one would know if they are exempt and available for a voucher. Also, unclear if there is there a legal process required for those who fall into category 1. • Most affordable units for veterans tend to be in the roughest neighborhoods. Instances of people afraid of gangs or experienced vandalism of vehicles or units. • A lot is just placement. Demographics, age or income doesn’t match and it causes rotation.

Communal fit, mental and physical needs aren’t there.
• Lack of affordable, suitable units for disabled veterans. • Severe mental health and substance abuse problems are overlooked, and they get denied housing. It is hard to prove that discrimination. Owners seem to be getting creative if their reasons for denying housing.
• Getting turned down for units due to Section 8 voucher. • Limited supply of accessible senior housing. Long wait lists. This results in comprises. • “Mom and Pop” owners unwilling to make modifications such as door widening for roll in shower.
• A lot of “Mom and Pop” buildings don’t have elevators, so that limits people to the first floor for accessibility. Ramps aren’t always an option.
• There can be so many “filters” to what is needed for a suitable home for a veteran. There is already a limited supply of housing, then the scope narrows with a veteran’s needs and it is practically impossible to find a home.
• Not having a subsidy option creates problems for people falling in a loop of not having enough money for housing but ineligible for vouchers.
• Most owners unwilling to navigate reasonable accommodations requests without bringing outside support. Not every veteran is eligible for assistance for rehab costs associated with accommodation requests. Veterans Administration barely covers medical care costs, let alone rehab costs. Also, owners lose out on rent during accommodation construction. • Mostly owners have been ok with accepting service or emotional support animals, sometimes they need a gentle reminder that the must accept them. The challenge lies in making sure veteran has all documentation needed for service animal. • Care Coordination Project (CCP) mandates a threshold for Vulnerability Index - Service Prioritization Decision Assistance Tool (VISPDAT). Often, veterans are miscategorized or their assessment was performed improperly making then ineligible for CCP. 38 • Not enough supply of housing for those way below 30% AMI. They might not have a chronic health issue, or another extenuating circumstance that gets them benefits but they are still in need of housing. They are some veterans who are disabled, unable to work, but are not Veterans Administration (VA) connected so they are unable to secure housing. The units are just not unavailable.
• There is a problem of owner burnout caused by lack of support for behavioral issues. Owners then avoid letting service providers know when there are units available.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide a funding source for permanent supportive housing without Housing and Urban Development (HUD) involved. HUD creates a lot of barriers. • Revive or create landlord appreciation committees to grant awards to grantees. Mayor could announce these awards at the Veterans Day parade.
• Incentivize relationships with property developers. They will have stable tenants and incomes amongst veterans. This fact needs to be highlighted and brought into incentivize relationships with property developers so that they are incentivized to build. • Create a fund for repairs and modifications.
• Create a funding for damages. This should be available to all veterans, despite the type of assistance they have.
• Build more housing for veterans. Put veterans to work. Put the homeless population to work as well.
• Create incentives to recruit owners for scatter site veterans housing programs. Also, continuous incentivized bonuses to keep housing veterans as well as provide housing for veterans. • Voucher programs should not clump veterans together – that is the point of voucher programs. • Need more forums for coordination.
o Create a mediation program for veterans and property owners. There are so many issues that come up that if they could be addressed early on, in a civil manner, that would really help. There is tension amongst police and communities, so going that route can be hard.
o Need orchestrated plan on how to handle issues in certain areas, so we wouldn’t get clumps.
• More collaboration with probation offices to understand ideal housing conditions for veterans. • Address barriers to the 290 status issue:
o Increase non-HUD and non-VASH funding for this population. o More collaboration with parole. Find out what is ideal for person with that background and if they have any relations with someone in community that could help assist in housing placements.
o If not still on parole, shouldn’t have any living restrictions o County should create maps to show areas of cities where those with 290 status can live in the city. This will make their placement much easier. 39 African Ancestry Focus Group Meeting Notes
January 31, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
3 Participants (all African Ancestry adults)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Middle income earners need housing. There seems to be support for lower and upper. These middle-income earners are working professionals. Someone who makes 100k can get a section 8 voucher.
• Systemic racism exists for home loans and financing. Hard to prove. Systemic racism for black people when they sell their homes, appraisal bias. They often don’t get fair market value. • Average person would not know where to go to get redress on appraisal bias. Filing complaint with state agency is a long process. If you get a letter from them that you can’t be helped, then you are back at square one.
• Government doesn’t listen. Over 240 people testified at County meeting to stop prison, 2 people testified in favor. They voted in favor. There is a deep distrust of government. • Most black people who have come to this valley come for jobs, so they are transplants. They often lack family and social support networks. That makes it hard when they are working long hours. They lack a safety net if there is a gap in finances or income. They are tired. • South bay lacks black culture or African ancestry culture. There are a lot of anti-black vibes in San José, especially from people who speak at City Council meetings. • Lack of middle-class black families in San José.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Develop underused land as affordable housing.
• Black people are not concentrated in one area of San José, so development of housing targeting black people should be dispersed as well.
• Offer real down payment assistance, like 300k for a 1 mil home purchase. • Low-income households need financial support.
• Designate areas where lots are vacant for starter homes. These homes can be reasonably priced small homes that let folks get their foot in the door.
• Black population in San José is 3% to 4% of entire population so it should not be so hard to find funding, whereas in other cities the black population is much bigger. • The County just voted to create a prison instead of services. We need more affordable housing, more mental health services. Government needs to stop fighting over jurisdiction and just do more programs.
• More resources for mental health.
40 • Clean up trash around the encampments. Provide more places for them to go, provide counseling, treatment and services.
• Need to invest in black culture in San José. People go to Oakland because it is lacking in San José.
• We need more black people in City staff, in places of business, etc. If you want black people to stay in San José, you need to invest in places for black people. • Build a hospital for the homeless.
• African ancestry homeownership assistance needs to be targeted and much higher. This will help to create generational wealth.
• Hold residential developers accountable. There needs to be a place in all development plans for inclusion for black, low-income folks.
• If you can’t target based on race, target based on district, or a specific income range. • Reparations. Galvanize and educate people/elected leaders. Look at what Evanston, Ilinois has done. Try to get people elected to make this a reality. • Give guidance for home ownership. Provide or require courses on in financing or how to maintain a house.
41 Formerly Homeless Focus Group Meeting Notes
February 1, 2022, 12pm to 1pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department Partner: 2nd Street Studios 5 Participants (all residents, some seniors, some African Ancestry) What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• There are a lot of issues with the management of 2nd Street Studios by Abode services:
o A lot of complaints go unaddressed.
o Security does not enforce rules. They are unprofessional. They get into fist fights with residents.
o Points of access are breached all the time.
o Management disregards emails from residents on the daily. o There has been flooding which has caused fiberglass to hang from ceiling. It causes breathing issues and harms pets.
o Not providing services that was promised – onsite mental health services, medical clinic and convenience store.
o No mental health staff for 6 to 8 months.
o General lack of support from Abode or onsite managers. o Management lacks respect for tenants and speaks down to them. o There is no sign for 2nd street studios, this lends itself to a lack of pride in the place. o Estimate 80% of people living at 2nd street studios are not meant to be there. o Lease violations are not being enforced.
o Staff seems to make up or change rules.
o Tenant was assaulted onsite and has not gotten redress. The police have not responded. Property manager won’t respond. Afraid to leave their unit. The attacker still comes onto the property. Tenant can’t get any help. o They don’t take these concerns, or the concerns raised by the resident board seriously. o Residents are trying their best to go thru the grievance process to hold them accountable, but it is not working.
o Frequent staff turnover.
o Notified by newsletter that there are two interns on staff this month. That is not adequate.
o People sleep in their cars in carport, then wait for people to open the doors to access the building. Security is lacking.
o There is no mental health clinician onsite. So, when people act up, they get a lease violation, and can get evicted.
• Tenants make complaints to the City regarding Abode, and instead of following up with tenants, the City follows up with Abode. Nothing gets resolved. • People in the public sneer at tenants from 2nd street studios. If you see police or ambulance onsite, or people hanging out, it is because proper services are not being provided. 42 • Unclear what services Abode is meant to provide.
• Other permanent supportive housing tenants share the same frustrations as 2nd street studios.

We all lack support.
• Issues with the housing first model – services are voluntary, so someone who has mental health challenges can cause terror in the building.
• Issues with the VI-SPDAT assessment to get housing
o It forces people to lie to get score up.
o You might not even know about it. Tenant on the street for 10 years, didn’t know about the assessment for 9 of those years.
o Overvalues when you have a voucher, not whether you would be open to supportive services.
o Needs to be updated so that people can get off the street more quickly. o Trauma occurs when living on the street. A lot of focus is needed for an accurate assessment to determine best placement.
o Tenant with 35 arrests from living on the street was shot to the top of list, even though there are other people who are more vulnerable because of being victims of rape or having been on the street much longer.
o To properly discuss changes to the assessment, need another meeting. It is a very emotional topic.
• People are not acclimated to living on their own. They struggle to pay bills, buying groceries, buy furniture, etc. 2nd Street studios is suppose to be supportive housing not affordable housing.
• Evictions are like death notices, because you can’t get a voucher after an eviction.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide an independent review council to handle complaints in projects like this (2nd street studios).
• Staff at 2nd street studios needs to be trained on how to work with formerly homeless/homeless individuals.
• Provide training to providers on how to work with formerly homeless individuals. • Outreach workers should provide VI-SPDAT assessment on the spot. A homeless person might not feel comfortable going into an office or may have trouble getting transportation to get to an office. Homeless have all their gear with them, hard for them to travel for an appointment. • Need more case managers to help with the processes, to get approved by housing authority. 43 LGBTQ Focus Group Meeting Notes
February 15, 2022, 530pm to 7pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: San José State University Pride Center, Billy DeFrank, LGBTQ Youth Space 19 Participants (White, Asian, Latinx)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Hard to function without adequate housing, it is essential, and it is not provided. • Government should be helping LGBTQ+ but they are not, and that is shameful. • People should not have to hit their lowest point before they are eligible for help/assistance. The City is not helping.
• Systemic demonization. From housing, to health care, criminal justice, etc. • People need to be unhoused to receive support. There are people who live in unsafe living conditions, out of a car, are couch surfing, or participate in survival crimes who also need support/housing.
• LGBTQ+ folks are disconnected from their support groups, often at a young age. • Such a need for housing, when people are left with little to no options, they live in their cars because there is no where else to go.
• People are often stuck in physically or mentally unsafe living conditions due to lack of housing resources, availability, and affordability. In these situations, not only does health suffer it makes it hard to hold down a job.
• There has been an increase in LGBTQ+ homeless youth during pandemic. • Takes emotional and mental labor to navigate a bureaucratic system not designed to handle unique situations.
• Everyone is tired.
• 20 shelter beds are not enough in a city of 1 million. • “Zero tolerance of retaliation” policies are seemingly meaningless, as the City does not investigate.
• Conditions in shelters around marijuana or alcohol use, documentation and criminal history render many people in need ineligible. Need help, not judgement. • Programs that are available, are often overcrowded and underfunded. • There are only three organizations that are LGBTQ friendly/trans affirming: New Haven Inn, Covenant House and Bill Wilson Center. They are all overwhelmed. • Need dignified space. Need own space when dealing with mental health issues like depression and anxiety.
• Agencies don’t have the ability to place people quickly. • Issues with shelters:
44 o Unavailable.
o Not enough.
o Rules that don’t make sense.
o Not affirming to trans people.
• Examples of impacts due to lack of housing:
o People getting kicked out of parents' home after coming out. o Abuse at home.
o Couch surfing.
o Forced to work as an escort.
o Living in car.
• Knowledge gaps of services since people are decentralized, then people aren’t in reliable contact with each other and where services aren’t being advertised in any significant publicly visible capacity. In addition, there are language barriers and trust issues. • Issues with VI-SPDAT
o Measures do not seem valid. Not enough weight on mental/emotional well-being. o Measuring in of itself seems problematic. Vulnerability should not be measured in this way. Everyone who needs help should get it.
o Lacks validity in what qualifies as high risk.
o Questions rely on self-selection, which intersects badly with people who feel guilty for asserting their right to exist.
• City Council meetings may as well be in a different language they are so hard to understand. All the jargon is alienating. Unclear how to participate and advocate in government processes. • Resources are often colorists against black and brown people. Some examples include:
o There is a stereotype that Asian parents are naturally colder to their children. Situations of abuse are often overlooked due to this belief.
o High rate of police violence against people of color. This can become dangerous when there is a police referral.
• Even if someone is experiencing discrimination, there is little to no help. o Law Foundation is overloaded and overworked.
o Often resources are not accessible – conflicts with jobs, costs and language are examples of barriers.
o Long wait times. Often delays in response.
• Discrimination from landlords:
o Bullying.
o Reduce amenities.
o Receiving different treatment than other non-LGBTQ+ neighbors/tenants.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Provide housing. And make it accessible.
• Allow LGBTQ+ persons to be a part of the policy and decision-making processes. Not just based on surveys. Examples of benefits of this:
o Input on how to design a shelter – charging station, changing rooms (things that policy makers might not think of because they lack lived experience.) 45 • Prioritize trans folks in housing development and policy discussions. Available in multiple languages, including multiple Asian languages.
• Provide more support for queer people.
• More beds are needed. The need is immediate. Needed it 5 years ago. • Need more money into the agencies that are supporting LGBTQ+ and people experiencing homelessness.
• Need safety nets for people who have to leave their living situation. • Conditions around marijuana and alcohol use in shelters needs to be addressed. Requirements (for housing/assistance) need to be unconditional.
• Allow queer folks to be housed together. This will allow them to feel safe and build community which are things that keep mental health most stable.
• Provide a safe multi-unit housing building assists people towards long-term transitional housing • Provide support in understanding government processes and how to advocate within those systems.
• Build programs designed and led by trans community. Start with a pilot. Consider a committee. • Compensate people for their time, energy and emotional burden of sharing their stories and missing obligations.
• Assure that recommendations provided are seen and funded. Not just reported. • Empower the community but don’t over burden. Be cautious about tokening a representative and then putting all of the burden on them.
• Need majority representation or own safe space.
• Need trans affirming employers.
• Eliminate discrimination in short term shelters.
• One day or one workshop trainings for staff are good, but not good enough. • Need more information in Spanish and other languages. • Need to grow resources so we are not stuck with an assessment tool like the VI-SPDAT. • Need leaders to be held accountable.
46 Affordable Housing Resident Focus Group Meeting Notes March 7, 2022, 1145am to 1pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
Partners: Kings Crossing
4 Participants (White, Latinx)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• Need deep services for people with disabilities, mental health issues. • People need help putting together the documentation to get services. • People have become more mistrustful of govt programs and don’t want to share information (afraid of being deported because of documentation, etc.) • Lack of technology for people to be able to download information and forms; for elderly it is especially difficult.
• Nonprofit orgs typically re-syndicate and extend affordability (as opposed to for profit owners); tax credit investors did pull out during the beginning of the pandemic; development and number of funding sources (each with its own regulatory agreement) have become more complicated and are also therefore more complicated to manage.
• Pushback from NIMBY’s: we don’t want those people in our neighborhoods. Neighbors assume all future residents are criminals. Helps that the City and the County back development.

Examples:
o Help with design/color palette to help with community relationships. o Programming community space for local nonprofits, use local artists. • More property management issues with permanent supportive housing and rapid rehousing.

Need more connection to services, more services.
• Catholic Charities provides services but need more partners funded and ability to refer. • Staffing and turnover rates for service providers are tremendous. • Reasonable accommodations are very rarely not approved. Even when denied, provide proactively options. Annual fair housing training is great. Key is to have consistent policies and procedures (forms, who approves, etc.).
• Getting people to meetings is a challenge in zoom times. Good to post information in lobby, elevators, common areas, offices. Can’t trust just email or online. E-mail blasts don’t work. • During COVID, individual meetings were held to go through step by step of the process. Property management had most the documents.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Build trust so that people understand that Charities’ priority is to keep people housed.

Examples of how to do this:
47 o Provide workshops re documentation and the process of applying/recertification.

Explain why and what documentation is needed. Also, provide standardized documents.
• Neighborhood preference would help. People want people from their neighborhood to be served by the housing that is going in. Affirmative outreach to make sure that their community is served.
• More workshops for people and support for people to fill out applications and certifications.

Education on what are roles and responsibilities of tenants and landlords. 48 Indigenous Peoples Group Meeting Notes
March 16, 2022, 5pm to 630pm via zoom
City of San José Housing Department
2 Participants (Indigenous Peoples)
What are some of the biggest obstacles you or your clients have had to overcome in trying to get (and maintain) stable housing?
• High rent costs
• 184 grant available, but no one available at City or County to assist. • Overcrowding.
• Rents are so high, people choose between rent and other necessities such as food or medicine. • Long commutes if you can’t afford to live in San José but you work in San José. And the costs to commute are high – 40/day for gas, or 400/month for ACE train. Can get free VTA with ACE pass.
• Hard for young adult children to “grow up and move out of the house,” because costs are so high, so many children stay at their parents' house or couch surf with friends. • Increase in utility costs.
• Lack of resources for housing referrals.
• Need more staff and resources for home visits, food assistance and health case management. • Difficult for case managers to stay in touch with clients because they don’t have a PO box or a phone.
• Shelters won’t allow pets or certain medications, but pets often are the only companions some people have.
• Most tribes in San José don’t have federal recognition so those tribal members miss out on benefits.
• Discrimination. Landlords lack cultural sensitivity.
• At the Indian Health Center, average 2 to 3 calls a day regarding need for housing or housing issues in general.
• Big need for affordable housing.
• Lack of funding/resources for modifications for people with disabilities such as ramps, bars, etc. • Housing that people can afford often has its own issues like dumping, trash in streets, homeless, homeless using bike lanes and/or poor lighting.
• To access care through the County, you need to have a Santa Clara County address. This leads to a lot of doubling up.
• People are moving away every day.
• Many American Indian families have moved out of the area in the past 10 years because of the high cost of living. They have either moved to areas in the Central Valley were it is a bit more affordable or have move back to their reservations or other locations in the country. • Many American Indians do not have more than a high school degree and cannot afford to live in the Bay Area any longer, most are stuck in low end paying jobs. • The majority of American Indians in Santa Clara County live on the Eastside of San José as well as in Morgan Hill and Gilroy.
49 • Many of older American Indians have also passed away within the past five years. • Affordable Housing is very much needed for American Indian families in San José as well as Santa Clara County, like many there are sometimes 5 or more people living in the same location to afford rent.

What do you think government agencies (city, county, housing authority) should be doing to eliminate/reduce those problems (described in answer to question above)? • Agencies/City/Housing Department should have an American Indian point of contact. Should have flyer and information available.
• Need help or a faster process for getting federal tribal recognition. • Need resources/assistance from state/local government for non-federally recognized tribes. • Need support for Indian advocacy. Used to have a group of 6 to 8 advocates that went to capital. Need support for urban Indians to advocate for themselves. • Need an advocate/navigator in the Housing Department who people can contact. A direct line. • Need relationship building/trust. A lot of historical trauma exists. • Need increases in education and access.
• More buildings and apartments need to be accessible.
• Build more housing for homeless people.
• Increase case management to help people apply for housing. • Provide free phones.
• Provide more information/resources for nonprofits to share. • Provide stipend or grants for super commuter public service/nonprofit employees. Provide a shuttle like Google does. Provide support in organizing carpools. • Preserve affordable housing.
• Set aside units for Native American/Alaskan families. 50 1

Meetings Summaries
01/14/22 Access to Rental Housing for Protected Classes City staff joined the bi-monthly meeting of The Santa Clara County Eviction and Landlord/Tenant Dispute Collaborative to get feedback on accessing rental housing. The group discussed barriers residents face in accessing rental housing, trends in fair housing issues and brainstormed ways to improve access.

The most pressing barrier cited in accessing housing was affordability. The group agreed that many of the issues that renters face are caused by high housing costs like displacement, overcrowding and lease violations. Other barriers discussed included large security deposits, adverse credit, or bankruptcy.

Attendees noted the court eviction process favors short timelines puts tenants at a disadvantage.

Lacking support and resources, tenants struggle to navigate the eviction process and often end up with default evictions, which compromises their ability to apply for future rental housing.

The group highlighted the additional challenges the pandemic has placed on tenants and landlords.

They expressed the state has been slow to process emergency rental assistance applications and that the lack of funds and lack of information on rental assistance application status has caused problems for both landlords and tenants. One attendee noted that while landlords may be aware of a tenant’s application for rental assistance, they might look for other reasons to evict the tenant, often citing noise or lease violations. While tenants may have protections under expanded state and local laws, attendees expressed frustration in educating tenants and property owners on the complex, inconsistent and rapidly changing laws.

When discussing fair housing issues in accessing rental housing, attendees shared that discrimination based on disability continues to be most common. One fair housing practitioner stated that about 2/3 of landlords they encounter are unwilling to grant a reasonable accommodation request. The group noted differing perspectives and interpretation of reasonable accommodation standards make them difficult to resolve. They also predicted these issues to escalate due to the passage of a new state law effective 1/1/22 that adds additional requirements for disabled residents who want to live with support animals. Other types of discrimination identified were discrimination based on race/national origin, families with children, source of income and language. Specific examples of discrimination included owners reluctant to rent based on appearance of resident, discrimination based on source of income, denying access to parts of property and domestic violence victims being evicted for domestic violence events.

When the discussion turned toward solutions, the group focused on education, funding, and improved renter protections. The group agreed early intervention education, in multiple languages/formats widely accessible, would help address the escalation of common landlord/tenant issues to eviction. The group acknowledged the challenge of providing current information to tenants due the quick changing nature of these laws. Likewise, landlords are often unaware of the changing laws, and would benefit from reliable and consistent information streams. Ideas for promoting education and access included keeping eviction centers open beyond the pandemic, increasing mediation services, staffing hotlines and funding for these programs. Attendees expressed that the lack of funding continues to be a challenge in providing services, and by increasing funding with less limitations would greatly improve service provision.
51 2

Lastly, the group gave specific ideas on expanding or adjusting rules to improve renter protection including expanding tenant right to sublease, including homes built after 1979 under the Apartment Rent Ordinance, and eliminating counting immediate family members against occupancy limit.

02/24/22 Market-Rate Housing Developer Meeting
The discussion looked at various development standards, on-site and off-site requirements, fees and exactions, processing or permit procedures, and non-governmental factors to assess pain points in the development of housing in San José. Attendees expressed that development standards should be evaluated on a case-by-case basis and that some of these standards should be re-evaluated all together—like private/public open space requirements. In some cases attendees expressed a need for long-term consistency where standards are open to interpretation and they suggested that redundancies be removed wherever possible across the board.

Road improvements and stormwater treatment and retention proved particularly challenging for both on- and off-site requirements because each have major ramifications. Road improvement involves multiple regional organizations like PG&E which adds red tape and can forestall certificate of occupancy significantly. Stormwater treatment and retention, as expressed in the meeting, often requires levels of detail at the Planning level that is also covered at the Building Department level and only adds redundancy—further impacting timelines.

Park impact and affordable housing or inclusionary housing fees were the most straining. Attendees expressed that parkland fees are not standardized and one attendee pointed out that they bought an empty lot next to their project, dedicated that to the City as a park, and the City used those fees to fund another park project. Attendees also expressed that housing policies and the associated fees are layered such that it creates a nightmare of red tape, and that escalation of fees can skyrocket estimates, leading to development being unable to pencil.

Overall, those in attendance expressed very long wait times for permits and processes—approximately 15 months on average. They site Historic Preservation, Fire, and Planning, and CEQA, Planning Commission, and General Plan amendment hearings as major hurdles. Many of the attendees expressed a desire to have more than one General Plan hearing a year.

The non-governmental factors that affected the attendees largely boiled down to regional agencies’ lack of cooperation with the City.

Overall, the attendees felt that the processes in place should be streamlined and that some departments like Public Works and Planning should, instead of being fee recovery, be General Fund funded in such a way as to promote long-lived leadership in these departments who develop relationships with developers.

52 3
02/25/22 Affordable Housing Developer Meeting
City staff met with affordable housing developers to gather feedback on land use controls, on- and off- site requirements, fees and exactions, processing and permit procedures, and non-governmental factors that impact generation of these housing types in San José. In total there were six participants and five staff which were broken down into two breakout rooms.

Attendees identified open space as a limiting factor for affordable development because requirements aren’t broken down by category—studio vs. three-bedroom apartment, for example. State streamlining law, though, has alleviated some of this strain but there are other things that make the state streamlining less attractive, like requiring prevailing wage rates for labor among other things, and it would be more beneficial to have a streamlining-adjacent City ordinance that would help achieve mixed- income developments. A city streamlining program, however, should be sensitive to requiring higher building heights and densities because this can shift affordable projects away from being able to pencil because that can drastically shift costs.

All attendees agreed that the city and state policy framework needs to be consistent not only for Planning but all other departments as well and that the Attorney’s Office should prepare such a framework moving forward. It was suggested that, because the State level legal system is shifting so rapidly and there are issues with keeping items consistent, the City should make findings for ‘grandfathering in’ developments who began the process under one state law prior to amendments.

Transportation demand management measures should be categorically exempt from affordable housing, one attendee suggested, because many affordable developments already incorporate many of these measures by-nature. Other attendees agreed that TDM measures and off-site road improvements are strenuous, and they cite coordination with regional partners like PG&E as tedious and burdensome. Suggestions include a single person or department that could coordinate with regional players as a point of contact between them and the developer.

Fees and fee estimates could also benefit from a single person or persons within each department being the main point of contact. Some point toward implementation of the ‘Ruth Model’—Ruth being a dedicated point of contact for affordable housing—for all departments as being largely beneficial in all aspects of affordable housing implementation. Attendees also felt that the earlier the fees and estimates can be provided, the better, and that all fees, waivers, and other aspects should be included upfront. One attendee suggested that, if possible, providing raw data on past and current projects could be one method to give a more accurate estimate by extrapolating the projects bottom line expenses.

Processing and permit procedures tend to take on average between 9 months to a year even when using permit streamlining. The reality, as one attendee puts it, is that 30-day letters take around 60 to 90-days because departments are overwhelmed and understaffed. If one large comprehensive meeting could take place with all departments this would go a long way to alleviating the time constraints many projects face. While not discussed by attendees, the ‘grandfathering’ aspect discussed previously would likely help this process as well because attendees expressed frustration when, in some cases meetings on this scale occur, policies change three months down the line. 53 4
Some attendees expressed frustration with streamlining being weakened with the additional Tribal Consultation requirements. Staff mentioned that this is likely a new requirement that will become naturalized and easier to deal with once it becomes a commonly incorporated aspect of projects.

Everyone agreed that the biggest challenges outside city control are state level funding applications and timelines because of the ever-changing nature of state regulatory frameworks. 54 Draft 2025-2030
Consolidated Plan and
2025-2026
Annual Action Plan

Attachment B – Draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and 2025-2025 Annual Action Plan

2 Contents
Executive Summary ...................................................................................................................................... 4 The Process ................................................................................................................................................... 9 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b) ............................................................................. 9 PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l).................................................................................. 10 PR-15 Citizen Participation ...................................................................................................................... 16 Needs Assessment ...................................................................................................................................... 18 NA-05 Overview ...................................................................................................................................... 18 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c) .................................................................... 20 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ........................................ 28 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2) ............................ 32 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2) .................................. 36 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2) ..................................................... 37 NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b) .......................................................................................................... 39 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c) .................................................................................... 43 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d) ............................................................ 49 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f) ....................................................... 53 Housing Market Analysis ............................................................................................................................ 55 MA-05 Overview ..................................................................................................................................... 55 MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2) ............................................................................. 56 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing – 91.210(a) .............................................................. 62 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a) ...................................................... 65 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b) .................................................................................... 68 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services - 24 CFR 91.210 (c) .................................................................. 70 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services - 24 CFR 91.210 (d) ........................................................... 73 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing - 24 CFR 91.210 (e) .................................................................... 76 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets - 24 CFR 92.215 (f) ........................................... 82 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion ....................................................................................... 88 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low- and Moderate-Income Households-

91.210(a))(4), 91.310(a)(2) ...................................................................................................................... 92 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation- 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3) ............................................................................ 94 Strategic Plan .............................................................................................................................................. 95 SP-05 Overview ....................................................................................................................................... 95

3 SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1) ............................................................................................ 96 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2)......................................................................................................... 97 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b) ................................................................................ 99 SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2) ................................................................. 102 SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k)................................................................................ 108 SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4) ................................................................................................... 113 SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c) ......................................................... 115 SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h) ................................................................................. 117 SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d) ............................................................................................ 119 SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i) ......................................................................................... 123 SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j) ............................................................................................... 124 SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230 ................................................................................................................... 126 Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan .............................................................................................. 128

4 Executive Summary

1. Introduction
The Consolidated Plan (ConPlan ) is designed to assist communities in the development of goals of providing decent housing, viable urban communities, a suitable living environment, and expanding economic opportunities primarily for low- and moderate-income persons. The ConPlan will assist the City of San José (City) in building relationships between all levels of government and the private and non-profit sectors to carry out goals and objectives identified in the planning process to meet community needs.

The City works to strengthen and revitalize communities through four federal grant programs it receives from the Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to invest. The four federal programs are the Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME I nvestment Partnerships (HOME), Housing Opportunities for People with AIDS (HOPWA), and Emergency Solutions Grants (ESG) Programs.

2. Objectives And Outcomes Identified In The Plan Needs Assessment Overview Qualitative and quantitative data to inform the five-year priorities for funding includes the Assessment of Fair Housing, data obtained through stakeholder consultation and participation, and the Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) data pro vided by HUD. Other sources to determine needs include the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element as mandated by the State of California and Santa Clara County’s Community Plan to End Homelessness for 2020-2025.

Needs identified in the analysis of data include needs for vulnerable populations including San José’s significant number of low-income households and the need for affordable housing units. Our strategy for community improvement using CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA funds will focus on three broad goals.

These goals are:

1. Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness – Expand housing access and self -sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

2. Increase Housing Affordability– Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing housing.

3. Strengthen Communities – Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

3. Evaluation Of Past Performance
The City is responsible for ensuring compliance with all rules and regulations associated with the CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA entitlement programs. Evaluating past performance is critical to ensuring that the City and its subrecipients effectively implement activities that align with the strategies and goals identified in the five-year Con Plan and Annual Action Plans (AAP).

To assess program performance, the City conducts quarterly performance evaluations of subrecipients providing public services and implements ongoing monitoring to track progress toward program goals.

Subrecipients are required to submit quarterly progress reports detailing participant data, including

5 demographic information, activity outputs, and program-specific outcome measures. The City also completes quarterly progress review reports for each funded program, assigning an overall performance rating. These evaluation reports enable the City to measure progress against annual targets and collaborate with subrecipients to adjust goals and improve program effectiveness, as needed.

Before program implementation, the City works with subrecipients to establish outcome measures that align with goals and strategies outlined in the AAP. For homelessness programs, performance outcomes are also aligned with the Continuum of Care (CoC) performance measures, align with the strategies in the Santa Clara County’s Community Plan to End Homelessness, and are developed in coordination with the City’s Homelessness Response Division.

In addition to the quarterly review of progress reports, the City conducts an annual risk assessment for all subrecipients to determine the appropriate level of risk-based monitoring – low-, moderate-, or high-risk.

Monitoring site visits are determined and scheduled based on risk level, ensuring that all subrecipients receive monitoring at least once every two years to maintain compliance with City requirements and federal regulations. These monitoring efforts provide additional opportunities to evaluate p rogress toward program goals and ensure that federally -funded programs remain effective, accountable, and compliant.

The following highlights key accomplishments from the FY 2020-2021 CAPER, demonstrating progress toward the 2020-2025 Con Plan goals:

• Spending Priority #1: Respond to Homelessness and its Impact on the Community 2,929 households and individuals received services to address homelessness. Of these, more than 839 were female heads of household.
• Spending Priority #2: Increase and Preserve Affordable Housing Opportunities 788 households and individuals benefited from services aimed at increasing or preserving affordable housing opportunities.
• Spending Priority #3: Strengthen and Stabilize Communities 2,344 participants were served through community development initiatives. Of these, 586 were female heads of household. 1,889 participants received direct services such as leadership training, meals, childcare, and legal services. 394 participants received services related to community development initiatives, including job training and emergency or home repairs. • Spending Priority #4: Promote Fair Housing Choices Through Services 175 households received fair housing investigations or legal representation services. Of these, 13 were female heads of household.

The following highlights key accomplishments from the FY 2021-2022 CAPER, demonstrating progress toward the 2020-2025 Con Plan goals:

• Spending Priority #1: Respond to Homelessness and its Impact on the Community 1,404 households and individuals received temporary housing, case management, and supportive services. An additional 304 individuals were served in overnight warming locations.

6 • Spending Priority #2: Increase and Preserve Affordable Housing Opportunities 426 households received housing or rental assistance to support affordable housing stability. • Spending Priority #3: Strengthen and Stabilize Communities 783 individuals benefited from safety net services, leadership development workshops, social visits, transportation, childcare, and wellness checks. Approximately 24,657 meals were delivered to low-income seniors to promote health and nutrition. • Spending Priority #4: Promote Fair Housing Choices Through Services 202 households received fair housing investigations or legal representation services. Of these, 31 households received legal representation for eviction proceedings.

The following highlights key accomplishments from the FY 2023-2024 CAPER, demonstrating progress toward the 2020-2025 Con Plan goals:
• Spending Priority #1: Respond to Homelessness and its Impact on the Community 1,163 households and individuals received temporary housing, case management, and supportive services. Outreach efforts also engaged an additional 1,017 individuals experiencing or at risk of homelessness.
• Spending Priority #2: Increase and Preserve Affordable Housing Opportunities 70 households received housing and rental assistance, utilizing the remaining CARES Act funding to maintain stable housing.
• Spending Priority #3: Strengthen and Stabilize Communities 1,098 individuals benefited from safety net services, leadership development workshops, social visits, transportation, childcare, and wellness checks. Additionally, approximately 35,000 meals were delivered to low-income seniors to support nutrition and wellness. • Spending Priority #4: Promote Fair Housing Choices Through Services 155 households received fair housing services, including 33 fair housing investigations and 37 legal representations. Additionally, 22 education and outreach presentations were provided to low-income residents to promote awareness of fair housing rights.

The following highlights key accomplishments from the FY 2023-2024 CAPER, demonstrating progress toward the 2020-2025 Con Plan goals:

• Spending Priority #1: Respond to Homelessness and its Impact on the Community 684 individuals received individualized support on housing options. Of those, 198 individuals exited 684 outreach services to permanent or temporary housing placements.

• Spending Priority #2: Increase and Preserve Affordable Housing Opportunities 84 low-income households affected by HIV/AIDS remained stably housed and received supportive health services

• Spending Priority #3: Strengthen and Stabilize Communities 438 low-income seniors received nutritious meals and in-person health check -ins. Additionally, 343 individuals participated in neighborhood engagement programs, gaining access to leadership training, education programs, or basic supportive services. A tota l of 1,088 individuals received

7 phone-based legal assistance referrals to improve their housing stability. A total of 664 housing units were inspected to ensure compliance with housing and blight codes.

• Spending Priority #4: Promoting Fair Housing Choices Through Services 184 individuals received fair housing services. Of these, 142 improved their housing stability through legal education, while 42 gained housing stability through legal representation. Among those receiving legal representation, at least one or more of the following outcomes were achieved: 11 prevented evictions, 26 obtained opportunities for other housing options, and 7 retained or preserved their housing placement.

For the upcoming FY 2025-2026 the following priorities are included in the ConPlan:

• Spending Priority #1: Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness – Expand housing access and self- sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness; • Spending Priority #2: Increase Housing Affordability – Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing housing; and
• Spending Priority #3: Strengthen Communities – Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

These three priorities build upon the goals established in the previous five-year plan while refining the City’s strategic focus. The updated priorities consolidate the previous priorities to reflect current community needs, emphasize the urgency of addres sing unsheltered homelessness, and integrate fair housing and economic opportunity efforts into a broader community development framework. This more focused approach is intended to improve alignment with available resources, emphasize measurable outcomes, and respond more effectively to current community needs. All federally funded activities must support at least one of the three priorities identified in the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan.

4. Summary Of Resident Participation Process And Consultation Process To encourage broad and meaningful community participation, the City used various community outreach methods, including public meetings, a community survey, and stakeholder consultations. Community outreach and engagement was conducted from September 2021 t hrough February 2025. The City considered and incorporated input received through several years of outreach and engagement on a range of housing and community development topics for the 2023 -2031 Housing Element. Stakeholders have urged City staff to integrate public feedback from all recent housing-related outreach to help identify housing needs. This approach was intended to recognize, value, and act on the contributions of the many community members who have shared their needs and ideas with the City, particularly those in protected classes who experience disproportionate barriers to civic engagement. Community meetings were held in San José, one in person at the Seven Trees Community Center , and one via Zoom. These meetings were designed to solicit public input from a broad range of constituents on the highest community development and housing needs.

8 In addition to community meetings, 46 focus groups and small stakeholder meetings were held, as well as pop-up tabling at community events. These small format meetings were held to ensure that feedback was obtained from community members who did not feel comfortable taking on -line surveys, or who typically do not come to City -sponsored outreach meetings. The staff ensured that large and small outreach meetings were held both on weekdays and weekends, during daytime and evening hours.

Stakeholders were consulted during public workshops, over the phone, over email and in meetings. Such stakeholders included but were not limited to, housing providers, health and social services groups, organizations representing protected classes, broadband internet providers, and emergency management organizations. The purpose of the consultations was to understand professionals’ perspective on affordable housing, homeless services, potential disproportionate needs of lower -income groups, and barriers to affordable housing.

A broad community outreach survey asked questions designed to elicit feedback about needs for housing, community facility needs, special needs services, homeless, economic development, and other supportive community programs . The survey also asked about the community’s experience with housing discrimination, awareness of tenant housing rights, home lending, housing affordability, and information related to home maintenance and condition. The survey was open to the public in on -line format from October 1, 2024, to January 10, 2025. The surveys were provided in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese.

The ConPlan was also informed on priority needs through input the City has received from community stakeholders and homeless service providers who contributed to the Community Plan to End Homelessness 2020-2025. A list of all outreach activities can be found in Appendix A.

5. Summary Of Public Comments
A summary of all comments received can be found in Appendix B: Public Comments.

6. Summary Of Comments Or Views Not Accepted And The Reasons For Not Accepting Them All comments and views were accepted.

7. Summary
The City of San José conducted several public meetings and hearings to review and gather input for the 2025-2030 ConPlan. In addition, the City held stakeholder meetings with multiple community and regional organizations and agencies providing services to low-income and populations experiencing homelessness. The City reviewed several reports to inform the development of this Plan, including the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element and The 2020-2025 Santa Clara County Community Plan to End Homelessness. Please see PR-10 for other documentation reviewed.

9 The Process
PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies 24 CFR 91.200(b)

1. Describe agency/entity responsible for preparing the Consolidated Plan and those responsible for administration of each grant program and funding source

The following are the agencies/entities responsible for preparing the ConPlan and those responsible for the administration of each grant program and funding source.

Table 1 – Responsible Agencies
Agency Role Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator SAN JOSE Department of Housing
HOPWA Administrator SAN JOSE Department of Housing
HOME Administrator SAN JOSE Department of Housing
ESG Administrator SAN JOSE Department of Housing

Narrative
Consolidated Plan Public Contact Information
Grants Management
City of San José, Department of Housing
200 E. Santa Clara Street, 12th Floor
San José, CA 95113
Erik L. Solivàn, Director

10 PR-10 Consultation - 91.100, 91.200(b), 91.215(l)

1. Introduction

From September 2021 to February 2025, stakeholders were consulted during public workshops, over the phone, and in -person at their offices. Such stakeholders included, but were not limited to, housing providers, health and social services groups, organizations representing protected classes, housing developers, and emergency management organizations. The purpose of the consultations was to understand professionals’ perspective on affordable housing, homelessness services, potential disproportionate needs of lower-income groups, and barriers to affordable housing.

The County of Santa Clara is a key partner in coordinating the work of many agencies and carrying out the strategies and goals of this ConPlan.

• Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction’s activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health and service agencies (91.215(I)).

The City of San José contracts with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority to administer the Housing Choice Voucher program. T here are no public housing units in the City. However, community and stakeholder meetings discussed how to enhance coordination and develop new approaches between housing providers and legal advocates, private and governmental health agencies, mental healt h service providers, and other stakeholders that use funding for eligible activities, projects, and programs.

• Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness.

The Santa Clara County Continuum of Care (CoC) is a multi-sector group of stakeholders dedicated to ending and preventing homelessness in the County of Santa Clara (County). The CoC is considered by HUD to be a Major City CoC, and is one of 48 CoCs that cover the 50 largest cities in the U.S. The CoC primary responsibilities are to coordinate large-scale implementation of efforts to prevent and end homelessness in the County. The Santa Clara CoC Board (CoC Board) governs the CoC, representing its members and serving as the driving force dedicated to supporting and advancing a systemic approach aimed at preventing and ending homelessness in the County).

The CoC Board is comprised of five ex-officio members from the County of Santa Clara, City of San José, City of Morgan Hill, Santa Clara Housing Authority, and Destination: Home, as well as seven at-large members chosen to represent individuals with lived experience and homeless service providers within the CoC. Destination: Home is a public-private partnership committed to collective impact strategies to end chronic homelessness and leads the development of community-wide strategy related to the CoC work.

The County Office of Supportive Housing serves as the Collaborative Applicant for the CoC and is responsible for implementing by-laws and protocols that govern the operations of the CoC. The Office of Supportive Housing is also responsible for ensuring that the CoC meets the requirements outlined under the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH).

11 The City of San José is committed to ending homelessness, aligning our goals with a county-wide community action plan developed by the CoC. The Community Plan to End Homelessness 2020-2025 outlines strategies that serves as our roadmap for ending homelessness:
• Strategy 1 – Address the root cause of homelessness through system and policy changes • Strategy 2 – Expand homelessness prevention and housing programs to meet the need • Strategy 3 – Improve the quality of life for unsheltered individuals and create healthy neighborhoods for all

The City of San José has established a robust supportive framework encompassing interim, permanent, and preventative solutions. The Policy and Planning team leads initiatives aimed at addressing the systemic issues that contribute to homelessness through policy reforms, while the Homeless Response Division collaborates with the Grants Management team to implement homeless prevention and diversion initiatives.

An essential function of ending homelessness is to ensure efficient coordination with CoC partners. This coordination utilizes a coordinated entry system that involves a community-wide intake process that matches individuals facing homelessness with the appropriate community resources. In Santa Clara County, this process begins at an access point where clients complete a standardized assessment using the VI-SPDAT tool. This assessment evaluates each household’s specific needs to determine the best housing intervention to address their situation. Eligible households are placed into a community queue to connect them with the best fit housing program, such as transitional housing, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, or other supportive services programs.

Currently, the City of San José funds programs including, rapid rehousing, homelessness prevention, supportive parking, emergency interim housing, and other supportive services programs aimed at those who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness. Those who qualify for these programs through the coordinated entry system may be enrolled in a City-funded program. Additionally, the City of San José funds capital improvement projects for agencies that assist chronically homeless individuals, families, veterans, and unaccompanied youth. Our aim is to elevate the living standards for those experiencing homelessness while simultaneously enhancing the community as a whole.

All homelessness programs utilize the CoC’s Quality Assurance Standards as a benchmark and model for program policies and procedures. All programs have measurable goals and regular progress reviews to assess the effectiveness of the programs. Aggregate data is provided to the CoC and is readily available through the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS).

• Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards and evaluate outcomes, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the administration of HMIS.

The City of San José utilizes ESG funds to support programs aimed at ending homelessness, including assisting individuals in regaining permanent housing stability after experiencing a housing crisis or homelessness. In January 2023, the City released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), which included Citywide Outreach and Engagement. HomeFirst, the subrecipient, was selected to administer and

12 implement the ESG program, beginning July 2023, for two fiscal years. Additionally, ESG funds supports County of Santa Clara’s operation of HMIS.

As the County’s ESG recipient, the City continues to coordinate with public and private partners to ensure that the local CoC meets all Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act requirements. This coordination includes:

• Coordination with the County: Assessing and analyzing service needs to avoid duplication of efforts in ESG-funded programs.

• Evaluating Program Outcomes: Monitoring the outcomes of ESG-funded projects and reporting them to HUD.

• Coordinated Entry System: Operating and participating in a system that provides comprehensive assessments of individuals’ and families’ needs for housing and services. This includes policies to address the needs of domestic violence survivors seeking shelter or services from non-victim service providers.

• Standards for CoC Assistance: Establishing and adhering to standards for providing CoC assistance, including evaluating eligibility, prioritizing transitional housing, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing assistance. This includes determining the percentage or amount of rent each program participant must pay while receiving rapid re-housing assistance.

• Planning and Evaluation: Planning for the allocation of ESG funds and reporting on the performance of ESG-funded programs.

The County’s Office of Supportive Housing (OSH) oversees the administration of HMIS, utilizing Clarity Human Services software. This system meets and exceeds HUD requirements for HMIS compliance, ensuring accurate data collection, reporting, and performance monitoring across a network of service providers.

All City-funded homelessness programs are required to participate in HMIS. To strengthen efforts to improve data quality, the City a five-member data team trained in HMIS operations. All City program managers regularly review HMIS data to verify that subrecipients are accurately entering and entering data. Additionally, the City’s data team conducts extensive data quality checks every first and third quarter to ensure consistency, accuracy, and compliance when reviewing quarterly report data against HMIS records.

• Describe Agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdictions consultations with housing, social service agencies and other entities.

For agencies, groups, organizations and others who participated in the ConPlan process, please see Table 2, below.

13 Table 2 – Agencies/Organizations/Types
Agency/group/
organization
Agency/group/
Organization type
What section of the Plan was
addressed by Consultation?
How was the
Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the
anticipated outcomes of the
consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Bay Area
Community
Health
Services – Health

Services – Persons
with Disabilities

Services – Persons
with HIV/AIDS

Services – Elderly
Persons
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Non-homeless special
needs
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

California
Apartment
Association
Regional
Organization
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,

Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

County of Santa
Clara-
Office of
Supportive
Housing
Other government
–
Regional

Continuum of Care
Needs Assessment,
Housing,
Non-homeless
special
needs, Strategic Plan
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

Destination Home Services –
Homeless

Services – Housing

Services – Children
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Homelessness Needs
(Chronically
homeless, Families
with children,
Veterans,
Unaccompanied
youth),
Homelessness
strategy
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan. Fair Housing
Consortium – Law
Foundation,
Project Sentinel,
Senior Adult Legal
Services and
Asian Law Alliance
Services – Fair
Housing
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

14 Lived Experience
Advisory Board
Services –
Homeless

Services – Persons
with Disabilities

Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Homelessness Needs
(Chronically
homeless, Families
with children,
Veterans,
Unaccompanied
youth),
Homelessness
strategy
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

People Acting in
Community
Together (PACT)
Regional
Organization
Needs Assessment,
Housing Market Analysis
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan
Sacred Heart
Housing Action
Committee
Services –
Homeless

Services – Persons
with Disabilities

Services – Elderly
Persons

Regional
organization
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Homelessness
Needs

Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan. San Andreas
Regional Center
Services – Persons
with Disabilities

Regional
organization
Needs Assessment,
Housing Market Analysis
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

SOMOS Mayfair Services – Children

Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Non-homeless
Special needs
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

San José Digital
Divide Team
Government-Local Needs Assessment,
Broadband internet needs

Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

San José Office of
Emergency
Management and
Housing
Department
Maintenance
Government-Local Needs Assessment, Lead-
based
Paint Strategy

Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

San José Office of
Emergency
Management
Government-Local

Services- Homeless
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Homelessness
Needs
Representative(s) contributed
narrative and data to answer
questions relevant to the ConPlan.

2. Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting

Not applicable.

Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan

15 Table 3 – Other local / regional / federal planning efforts Name of Plan Lead Organization How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Envision San José 2040
General Plan
City of San José The City’s General Plan provides a policy and implementation framework to help the City meet its
regional housing needs allocation. This effort aligns with the Strategic Plan's goal to assist in determining areas for investment.

City of San José Housing
Element (2023-2031)
City of San José The Housing Element is one of seven State-mandated elements of the City’s General Plan. It is the only
element that must be certified by the State and has very specific requirements on how to assess housing needs.

The Housing Element provides a policy and
implementation framework to help the City meet its
regional housing needs allocation. Consultation of this plan aligns with the Strategic Plan's goal to assist in the creation and preservation of affordable housing
opportunities.

Continuum of Care Regional Continuum
of Care Council
The Continuum of Care addresses homelessness in the
community through planning and facilitates
collaboration between social service providers.

Consultation of this plan aligns with the Strategic Plan's goal to support activities to respond to homelessness in the community.

Sexually Transmitted
Infections (STI) and HIV
Epidemiology Annual
Report, 2023
Santa Clara County
Department of Public
Health
Provides data on the prevalence and incidence of HIV in the county, and other STI in the county. Includes trends in STI and HIV cases, as well as data on testing and
treatment.

Community Plan to End
Homelessness in Santa
Clara County 2020-2025
County of Santa Clara-
Office of Supportive
Housing
The Countywide Community Plan to End Homelessness is
a five-year plan to guide government, nonprofits, and
other community members on best practices regarding
funding, programs, priorities and needs. Consultation of this plan aligns with the Strategic Plan's goal to support activities to respond to homelessness and its impacts on the community.

3. Describe cooperation and coordination with other public entities, including the State and any adjacent units of general local government, in the implementation of the Consolidated Plan (91.215(l)).

The Santa Clara County Entitlement Jurisdictions are collaborating on preparation of their 20 25-2030 Consolidated Plans. City staff meets monthly in a CDBG Coordinators meeting with Santa Clara County jurisdiction staff as well as County staff to coordinate and share updates.

Narrative (optional):

Please see above.

16 PR-15 Citizen Participation

1. Summary of citizen participation process/Efforts made to broaden citizen participation Summarize citizen participation process and how it impacted goal-setting

Outreach for the City of San José’s 2025-2030 ConPlan was conducted in several ways: a community outreach survey in both online and paper formats, public meetings, stakeholder interviews, and public hearings. Significant outreach efforts were made to residents, faith-based organizations, educational institutions, housing services, and health and social service organizations, including organizations providing services to people experiencing homelessness, persons with HIV/AIDS, senior citizens, and lower-income populations to satisfy requirements per 24 C.F.R. § 91.900: Consultation; local governments.

One community meeting was held via zoom on January 30,2025, and another was held in San José on February 5, 2025. The community meetings were designed to solicit public input. Interpretation services were offered for both meetings, and Spanish language interpretation was requested and provided at both community meetings. Engagement activities at the meetings were used to gather input on the highest community and housing needs.

The February 5, 2025, public meeting was held at:

Seven Trees Community Center
3590 Cas Drive,
San José, CA 95111

A community outreach survey was publicized through social media, newsletters, eblasts (sent to approximately 3,025 recipients), and community -based organizations. The survey asked questions designed to elicit feedback about needs for housing, community facility needs, special needs services, homeless, economic development, and other supportive community programs, and the community’s experience with housing discrimi nation, awareness of tenant housing rights, home lending, housing affordability, and information related to home maintenance and condition. The surveys were open to the public from November 1, 2024, to January 10, 2025. See Appendix A for Community Engagement and Survey Results.

Efforts to reach populations underrepresented in the planning process included discussions regarding the survey with various housing, social service, faith -based, and other organizations that provide services to the protected classes and lower-income households. The surveys were provided in English, Spanish, Vietnamese, and Chinese.

17 Table 4 – Citizen Participation Outreach
Sort
Order
Mode of
Outreac
h
Target of Outreac
h
Summary of
Response/
Attendance
Summary of
Comments
Received
Summ
ary of
Comm
ents
not
Accept
ed
and Re
asons
URL (If applicable)
1 Public
Meetings
Broad community
outreach to all
members of the
public and
targeted outreach
to service
providers,
beneficiaries, and
grant recipients.

A total of 8
people attended
two community
meetings.

See PR-10 & 15 All
comm
ents
were
accept
ed.

See Appendix
2 Survey Broad community
outreach to
members of the
public and
interested
stakeholders.

A total of 405
Regional Needs
Surveys were
collected during
the open period.

The paper and
online survey
was available in
Spanish, English,
Chinese and
Vietnamese
See PR-15 All
comm
ents
were
accept
ed.

See Appendix

18 Needs Assessment
NA-05 Overview

1. Needs Assessment Overview
The primary source of data used in this needs assessment are the HUD Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) special tabulations created through the U.S. Census’ American Community Survey (ACS), which incorporate HUD -specified criteria relating to housing needs, HUD -defined income limits and household types. This needs analysis predominantly uses data drawn from ACS’ most recent datasets.

The data in this section include basic information about households by income as well as the number of renters and homeowners who experience various types of housing distress at various income levels. The following outlines the income categories used in this report:

• Area median income (AMI):
o Extremely Low-income: 0-30% AMI
o Very Low-income: 30-50% AMI
o Low-income: 50-80% AMI
o Moderate-income: 80-120% AMI
o Median Income: 100% AMI

• HUD adjusted median family incomes (HAMFI):
o Extremely low-income: 0-30% HAMFI
o Very low-income: 30-50% HAMFI
o Low-income: 50-80% HAMFI
o Middle-income: 80-100% HAMFI
o Upper income 100% HAMFI and above

Note: Area Median Income (AMI) and HUD Adjusted Median Family Income (HAMFI) are functionally the same when referring to lower-income populations. However, HUD uses HAMFI to determine Fair Market Rents, which guides eligibility for many of its programs including Housing Choice Vouchers (i.e. Section 8).

AMI is an industry term used more generally, but often refers to income limits for income -restricted affordable housing. The use of each term is noted throughout the ConPlan.

Household Type
Small families – defined by HUD as households with four or fewer persons -- represent just under 50 percent of all households in San José, while large families (five or more persons) represent about 13 percent of the total households. In addition, senior households (with at least one person 62 years old or older) make up 33 percent of the City’s total number of households. Lastly, there are 42,488 households with one or more child aged six or younger, representing 13 percent of households. All told, there are about 324,340 households in San José.

Income Level
Of the total number of households, 44 percent earn lower incomes (below 80 percent of median):

• 17 percent extremely low income

19 • 13 percent very low income
• 14 percent low income
• 10 percent middle income
• 46 percent median income and above

Household Type
According to CHAS 2016-2020, there is a total of 324,340 households in San José of which 17 percent are extremely low-income; 13 percent are very low -income; and 14 percent are low-income. 44 percent of households in San José earn between 0 to 80 percent of the area median income. Small family households represent the largest share of extremely low-income households, accounting for 30 percent in the income category and five percent of total households.

Housing Problems
Cost burden (households spending more than 30 percent of gross income on housing costs) is experienced by 42,585 households earning less than the median , representing 13 percent of total households in the City. Severe cost burden (cost burden greater than 50 percent of income) is experienced by 45,909 lower- income households representing 14 percent of total households in the City.

In terms of overcrowding, there are about 14,405 below-median income households that experience 1.01-

1.5 people per room, representing four percent of total households in the City , while 8,105 households earning below median experience severe overcrowding, defined as more than 1.51 people per room. All rooms are counted in these metrics.1 For example, a dwelling unit with two bedrooms, a living room and a kitchen has four rooms; therefore, if five persons live in this unit, it is considered overcrowded (1.25 persons per room). This represents about three percent of all households in the City; however, other standards – such as the persons-per-bedroom metric – may not consider this overcrowding.

Housing Problems by Tenure
Of households earning less than median income, renters experience housing problems more than owners:
in terms of sheer numbers, renters with housing problems account for 63 percent of all households below median with some housing problem (substandard housing, overcrowding, or rent burden). Renters experience severe overcrowding over five times more than owners , and o f those renter households experiencing severe overcrowding, 31 percent extremely low income.

Overcrowding is the third -highest housing problem experienced among households below the median .

Overcrowding among renters is three times that of owners. Overall, renters at 80 percent AMI and below account for 68 percent of all overcrowded households.

As compared to other housing problems, severe cost burden —housing costs greater than 50 percent of income—is experienced more equally between renters and owners at or below 100 percent AMI. Renters’ rates of severe cost burden exceed owners’ by about 24 percent.

1According to the US Census Bureau, 'Rooms' refers to enclosed areas within a private dwelling which are finished and suitable for year-round living. The number of rooms in a private dwelling includes kitchens, bedrooms and finished rooms in the attic or basement. The number of rooms in a private dwelling excludes bathrooms, halls, vestibules and rooms used solely for business purposes.

20 NA-10 Housing Needs Assessment - 24 CFR 91.205 (a,b,c)

1. Summary of Housing Needs
Table 5 - Housing Needs Assessment Demographics
Demographics Base Year: 2015 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change Population 1,000,865 1,029,410 3%
Households 314,295 324,340 3%
Median Income $84,647.00 $117,324.00 39%

Data Source: 2000 Census (Base Year), 2016-2020 ACS (Most Recent Year)

According to Census data, the population of San José grew 3 percent between 2015 and 2020, during which time the median income increased by 39 percent. This demonstrates that while San José experienced a slight population and household growth, the substant ial increase in median income indicates a shift of higher-earning households.

2. Number of Households Table
Table 6 - Total Households Table
0-30%
HAMFI
>30-50%
HAMFI
>50-80%
HAMFI
>80-100%
HAMFI
>100%
HAMFI
Total Households 54,264 42,060 45,680 31,809 150,525
Small Family Households 16,130 17,530 19,605 15,425 88,674 Large Family Households 5,145 6,745 8,150 4,559 16,850
Household contains at least one person 62-74
years of age 13,669 10,630 11,850 7,890 27,989
Household contains at least one person aged
75 or older 12,100 6,445 5,705 3,140 8,170
Households with one or more children 6 years
old or younger 7,040 7,400 7,695 5,039 15,314

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

There are nearly 142,004 households in San José earning lower incomes, that is, earning less than 80 percent of median income, representing 44 percent of total households. Overall, small households represent the largest group of households at 49 percent of the total. 14,440 households with one or more children aged six or younger earn less than 50 percent of median income (very low income). In addition, large family households (five or more people) represent more than 27 percent of all households earning lower incomes.

21 3. Housing Needs Summary Tables
3a. Housing Problems (Households with one of the listed needs) Table 7 - Housing Problems Table
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-
30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Substandard
Housing -
Lacking
complete
plumbing or
kitchen
facilities 1,100 375 325 60 1,860 245 80 115 60 500
Severely
Overcrowded -
With >1.51
people per
room (and
complete
kitchen and
plumbing) 2,130 2,440 1,550 720 6,840 170 295 425 375 1,265 Overcrowded -
With 1.01-1.5
people per
room (and
none of the
above
problems) 3,305 3,275 3,270 1,085 10,935 380 1,065 1,160 865 3,470 Housing cost
burden greater
than 50% of
income (and
none of the
above
problems) 18,990 6,030 1,015 80 26,115
9,8
49 5,410 3,385 1,150 19,794
Housing cost
burden greater
than 30% of
income (and
none of the
above
problems) 5,520 6,940 8,795 4,225 25,480
2,7
80 3,500 6,220 4,605 17,105

22 Table 7 - Housing Problems Table
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-
30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total
Zero/negative
Income (and
none of the
above
problems) 1,410 0 0 0 1,410 880 0 0 0 880

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

3b. Housing Problems 2 (Households with one or more Severe Housing Problems: Lacks kitchen or complete plumbing, severe overcrowding, severe cost burden) Table 8 – Housing Problems 2
Renter Owner
0-30% AMI >30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Having 1 or
more of
four
housing
problems 25,530 12,120 6,160 1,940 45,750 10,644 6,850 5,085 2,455 25,034 Having
none of
four
housing
problems 10,570 10,900 15,965 11,610 49,045 7,525 12,190 18,470 15,804 53,989 Household
has
negative
income,
but none
of the
other
housing
problems 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

23 3c. Cost Burden > 30%
Table 9 – Cost Burden > 30%
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-80%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Small Related 10,500 8,200 4,910 23,610 3,080 3,660 4,715 11,455 Large Related 3,625 2,525 1,255 7,405 775 1,525 1,730 4,030 Elderly 9,100 2,190 1,060 12,350 7,374 3,450 2,615 13,439 Other 7,015 3,775 3,830 14,620 1,905 920 1,125 3,950
Total need by
income
30,240 16,690 11,055 57,985 13,134 9,555 10,185 32,874

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

3d. Cost Burden > 50%
Table 10 – Cost Burden > 50%
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Small Related 0 0 3,295 3,295 2,490 2,285 0 4,775
Large Related 0 0 695 695 590 770 320 1,680
Elderly 5,935 830 120 6,885 5,484 2,060 980 8,524
Other 0 6,195 1,995 8,190 1,645 0 0 1,645
Total need by
income
5,935 7,025 6,105 19,065 10,209 5,115 1,300 16,624

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

24 3e. Crowding (More than one person per room)
Table 11 – Crowding Information – 1/2
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total 0-
30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
>80-
100%
AMI
Total

NUMBER OF HOUSEHOLDS
Single family
households 4,205 4,450 3,340 1,210 13,205 315 925 975 685 2,900 Multiple, unrelated
family households 900 1,070 1,230 475 3,675 250 415 630 535 1,830 Other, non-family
households 485 230 320 124 1,159 4 20 0 25 49
Total need by
income 5,590 5,750 4,890 1,809 18,039 569 1,360 1,605 1,245 4,779

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

Table 12 – Crowding Information – 2/2
Renter Owner
0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total 0-30%
AMI
>30-
50%
AMI
>50-
80%
AMI
Total
Households
with Children
Present

4. Describe the number and type of single person households in need of housing assistance.

There are 67,674 householders living alone, accounting for 21 percent of total households (326,767), according to the 2019-2023 American Community Survey (ACS) 5-year estimates; of these, 33,876 are male, and 33,798 are female. San José also has a significant number of seniors living alone. Of the total number of households, 8 percent (25,144) are seniors (persons 65 years and older). In the 15 to 34 age group, four percent (13,057 persons) live alone. The age cohort with the highest number living alone is 35 to 64 years, totaling nine percent of households, or 29,473 persons.

Of all householders living alone, three percent (10,677) are living below the federal poverty line, as reported by the 2019-2023 ACS five-year estimates. Of non-family households over 65 years, 1,778 males and 4,683 females lived below the poverty level.

5. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance who are disabled or victims of domestic violence, dating violence, sexual assault and stalking.

25 The City of San José 2022 Point-In-Time (PIT) Count counted 134 homeless families on the night of the count, an increase from the 2019 count of 98 families. Surveys were administered and resulted in 549 unique surveys collected in the City of San José. Results from the survey showed that 10 percent of all survey respondents reported currently experiencing domestic/partner violence or abuse. When asked about experiences of ever being physically, emotionally, or sexually abused by a relative, or another person they have stayed with (spouse, partner, sibling, parent) in their lifetime, 30% indicated that they have been.

In 2022, the Domestic Violence Advocacy Consortium, comprised of five domestic violence confidential victim services providers in Santa Clara County, reported that 1,705 victims accessed emergency housing.
2 This represented 534 households: 48% with children and 52% single adult households. Of those that reported income, 100% of survivors across all household sizes have low, very low, or extremely low-income status based on the 2021 HUD AMI. Breaking it down, 89% of survivors reported extremely low income, 7% very low-income, and 3% low-income (18% did not report their income).

In 2023, there were four domestic violence-related deaths, all four were murder victims.3 2023’s number of domestic violence-related deaths is less than the average occurring in Santa Clara County over the last 13 years- an average of 7.9 domestic violence-related deaths every year. However, in 2024, the Santa Clara County District Attorney shared the number of domestic violence cases rose 142% over the past five years.4

6. What are the most common housing problems?

The most common housing problem is severe cost burden (cost burden greater than 50 percent of income) and is experienced by 45,909 in the 0-100 percent AMI households, representing 14 percent of total households in the City. Cost burden (households spending more than 30 percent of gross income on housing costs, including utilities) is experienced by 42,585 in the 0-100 percent AMI households, representing 13 percent of total households.

About 14,405 households earning less than median income experience overcrowding, defined as 1.01-

1.5 people per room, representing 4 percent of all households in the City, while 8,105 below median- income households experience severe overcrowding (more than 1.51 people per room) representing 2% of all households in the City. In terms of households with children present, more than 21,000 lower-income renter households and nearly 7,200 lower-income owner households are overcrowded.

As noted above, all rooms are counted in these metrics.5 For example, a dwelling unit with two bedrooms, a living room and a kitchen has four rooms; therefore, if five persons live in this unit, it is considered overcrowded (1.25 persons per room). However, other standards – such as the persons-

2 https://safechatsv.org/annual-data-reports/
3 https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/exjcpb1551/2025-01/2023-dvdrt-report-final.pdf?VersionId=RYodNhbZFg2xvEA1B4xWCpRgFyEeCyVH 4 https://sanjosespotlight.com/domestic-abuse-violence-cases-overwhelm-silicon-valley-bay-area-santa-clara-county-district-attorney-da- prosecutors/
5 According to the US Census Bureau, 'Rooms' refers to enclosed areas within a private dwelling which are finished and suitable for year -round living. The number of rooms in a private dwelling includes kitchens, bedrooms and finished rooms in the attic or basement. The number of rooms in a private dwelling excludes bathrooms, halls, vestibules and rooms used solely for business purposes.

26 per-bedroom metric – may not consider this overcrowding.

Substandard housing is experienced by 2,360 households earning less than median.

7. Are any populations/household types more affected than others by these problems?

See the discussion previous to this section.

8. Describe the characteristics and needs of Low-income individuals and families with children (especially extremely low-income) who are currently housed but are at imminent risk of either residing in shelters or becoming unsheltered 91.205(c)/91.305(c)). Also discuss the needs of formerly homeless families and individuals who are receiving rapid re- housing assistance and are nearing the termination of that assistance.

Total households with one or more children 6 years old or younger and earning lower incomes account for 7 percent of households in the City. These households – especially those that are extremely low income -- are vulnerable to becoming homeless because of insufficient incomes and potential unforeseen financial challenges—a significant cause of homelessness. Many households are one paycheck away from being homeless because they lack sufficient discretionary income to remain stably housed.

From 2020-2023, 4,913 households in Santa Clara County were served by Rapid Re-housing. 71% of clients who exited rapid rehousing programs went on to obtain permanent housing. 6 9. If a jurisdiction provides estimates of the at-risk population(s), it should also include a description of the operational definition of the at-risk group and the methodology used to generate the estimates:

The City describes “At risk” of homelessness as defined by HUD under § 576.2 of the ESG Program Interim Rule and § 578.3 of the CoC Program Interim Rule.7

10. Specify particular housing characteristics that have been linked with instability and an increased risk of homelessness.

As mentioned above, households that are most vulnerable to becoming homeless because of insufficient incomes and potential unforeseen financial challenges—a significant cause of homelessness. According to the 2022 Homeless Survey from the City of San José’s Homeless Census, survey respondents stated the primary events or conditions that led to homelessness are as follows:

• 22 percent – Lost Job
• 18 percent – Alcohol or Drug Use

6 https://files.santaclaracounty.gov/migrated/SOH%202023%20report%20-%20web.pdf?VersionId=eB6wP4JcGgaE0TQ7ONeZFBGJj0qFq20u 7 https://www.hudexchange.info/homelessness-assistance/coc-esg-virtual-binders/coc-esg-homeless-eligibility/four-categories/at-risk-of- homelessness/

27 • 16 percent – Argument with Family/Friend
• 15 percent – Eviction
• 13 percent – Divorce/Separation/Breakup

11. Discussion
See discussion above.

28 NA-15 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2)

1. Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction
HUD identifies four housing problems:

A. Housing unit lacking complete kitchen facilities
B. Housing unit lacking complete plumbing facilities
C. Overcrowded with more than 1 person per room not including bathrooms, porches, foyers, halls, or half-rooms.

D. Cost burdened, with household paying more than 30 percent of income toward housing costs (including utilities)

To enable an analysis of “Disproportionately Greater Need,” a baseline has been established to show the percent of households in the community experiencing housing problems. The number of households that have one or more of the four housing problems in the jurisdiction as a whole, divided by the total number of people in that jurisdiction as a whole (Tables 13 –16) was used to establish baseline percentages for those experiencing housing problems by income category. These baseline percentages are:

• 82 percent for 0–30 percent of AMI
• 77 percent for 30–50 percent of AMI
• 58 percent for 50–80 percent of AMI
• 48 percent for 80–100 percent of AMI

These baseline percentages have been used to assess whether any subgroup shown in the following Disproportionately Greater Need Tables (Tables 13–16) are experiencing disproportionately greater housing problems/needs. Per HUD’s definition, a disproportionately greater housing problem or need exists when the numbers of a racial or ethnic group at a given income level experience housing problems at a rate greater than 10 percent or more than the income level as a whole. As previously indicated, the greatest contributor to the City’s documented housing problems relates to lack of affordable housing and high-cost burden.

29 0%-30% of Area Median Income
Table 13 - Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30% AMI
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 42,630 6,590 2,710
White 10,450 2,060 955
African American 2,360 150 130
Asian 13,730 2,630 945
American Indian, Alaska Native 120 25 0
Pacific Islander 215 4 0
Hispanic 14,800 1,560 585
Table 13 - Disproportionally Greater Need 0 - 30% AMI
Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

30%-50% of Area Median Income
Table 14 - Disproportionally Greater Need 30 - 50% AMI
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 29,899 8,820 0
White 8,139 3,620 0
African American 1,200 330 0
Asian 6,825 2,335 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 80 10 0
Pacific Islander 105 30 0
Hispanic 13,030 2,360 0

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

30 50%-80% of Area Median Income
Table 15 - Disproportionally Greater Need 50 - 80% AMI
Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 24,130 17,260 0
White 6,375 5,905 0
African American 905 570 0
Asian 6,550 4,530 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 65 90 0
Pacific Islander 55 125 0
Hispanic 9,470 5,760 0

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%
80%-100% of Area Median Income
Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100% AMI Housing Problems Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 14,165 15,520 0
White 4,210 5,420 0
African American 545 605 0
Asian 4,450 4,755 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 10 35 0
Pacific Islander 129 25 0
Hispanic 4,485 4,335 0
Table 16 - Disproportionally Greater Need 80 - 100% AMI Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than one person per room, 4. Cost Burden greater than 30%

31 2. Discussion
Disproportionate need regarding housing problems between subgroups is summarized in the table below.

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

Table 17 – Disproportionally Greater Need: Housing Problems Housing Problems 0%-30% of
AMI
30%-50% of
AMI
50%-80% of
AMI
80%-100% of
AMI
Jurisdiction as a whole 82% 77% 58% 48%
White 77% 69% 52% 44%
African American 89% 78% 61% 47%
Asian 79% 75% 59% 48%
American Indian, Alaska Native 82% 89% 42% 22%
Pacific Islander 98% 78% 31% 84%
Hispanic 87% 85% 62% 51%

32 NA-20 Disproportionately Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems – 91.205 (b)(2)

1. Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction
HUD identifies the four severe housing problems as:

1. Housing unit lacking complete kitchen facilities

2. Housing unit lacking complete plumbing facilities

3. Overcrowded with more than 1.5 person per room not including bathrooms, porches, foyers, halls, or half-rooms.

4. Cost burdened, with household paying more than 50 percent of income toward housing costs (including utilities)

0%-30% of Area Median Income
Table 18 – Severe Housing Problems 0 – 30% AMI
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 34,925 14,295 2,710
White 8,665 3,850 955
African American 1,920 585 130
Asian 10,175 6,185 945
American Indian, Alaska Native 85 60 0
Pacific Islander 80 139 0
Hispanic 13,220 3,140 585

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4. Cost Burden over 50%

33 30%-50% of Area Median Income
Table 19 – Severe Housing Problems 30 – 50% AMI
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 19,504 19,215 0
White 4,859 6,900 0
African American 785 740 0
Asian 4,730 4,430 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 70 15 0
Pacific Islander 30 105 0
Hispanic 8,750 6,640 0

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4. Cost Burden over 50%

50%-80% of Area Median Income
Table 20 – Severe Housing Problems 50 – 80% AMI
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 10,875 30,515 0
White 2,350 9,930 0
African American 170 1,300 0
Asian 3,160 7,920 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 39 115 0
Pacific Islander 0 180 0
Hispanic 5,005 10,225 0

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

*The four severe housing problems are:

1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4. Cost Burden over 50%

34 80%-100% of Area Median Income
Table 21 – Severe Housing Problems 80 – 100% AMI
Severe Housing Problems* Has one or more
of four housing
problems
Has none of the
four housing
problems
Household has
no/negative
income, but none
of the other
housing problems
Jurisdiction as a whole 5,420 24,260 0
White 980 8,645 0
African American 100 1,060 0
Asian 1,590 7,615 0
American Indian, Alaska Native 0 45 0
Pacific Islander 125 30 0
Hispanic 2,555 6,260 0

Data
Source:CHAS
2016-2020

*The four severe housing problems are: 1. Lacks complete kitchen facilities, 2. Lacks complete plumbing facilities, 3. More than 1.5 persons per room, 4. Cost Burden over 50%

35 2. Discussion
Disproportionate need regarding housing problems between sub-groups is summarized in the table below. Cells with darker highlights indicate the subgroups with the most significant issues and those with lighter highlights indicate subgroups that should be monitored.

Table 22 – Disproportionally Greater Need: Severe Housing Problems Severe Housing Problems 0%-30% of
AMI
30%-50% of
AMI
50%-80% of
AMI
80%-100% of
AMI
Jurisdiction as a whole 67% 50% 26% 18%
White 64% 41% 19% 10%
African American 73% 51% 12% 9%
Asian 59% 52% 29% 17%
American Indian, Alaska Native 59% 82% 25% 0%
Pacific Islander 37% 22% 0% 81%
Hispanic 78% 57% 33% 29%

Data
Source:CHAS
2016-2020 CHAS

36 NA-25 Disproportionately Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens – 91.205 (b)(2)

1. Assess the need of any racial or ethnic group that has disproportionately greater need in comparison to the needs of that category of need as a whole.

Introduction:

Housing costs have the potential to cause housing problems in a community. If housing costs are high relative to household income, there will be a higher incidence of cost burden and, potentially overcrowding. This section determines whether a subgroup experiences cost burden disproportionately.

Table 23 – Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI
Housing Cost Burden ≤30% 30-50% >50% No / negative
income (not
computed)
Jurisdiction as a whole 196,840 65,429 54,279 3,005
White 77,840 20,604 16,259 990
African American 5,060 2,550 2,795 145
Asian 69,015 20,295 15,500 1,050
American Indian, Alaska
Native 425 90 140 0
Pacific Islander 660 304 110 0
Hispanic 39,265 19,620 18,235 730

Data
Source:
2016-2020 CHAS

2. Discussion:

Table 24 – Disproportionally Greater Need: Housing Cost Burdens AMI Housing Cost Burden ≤30% 30-50% >50%
Jurisdiction as a whole 62% 20% 17%
White 67% 18% 14%
African American 48% 24% 26%
Asian 65% 19% 15%
American Indian, Alaska Native 65% 14% 21%
Pacific Islander 61% 28% 10%
Hispanic 50% 25% 23%

Data
Source:CHAS
2016-2020
No disproportionate need was found across all categories.

37 NA-30 Disproportionately Greater Need: Discussion – 91.205(b)(2)

1. Are there any Income categories in which a racial group has disproportionately greater need than the needs of that income category as a whole?

California Government Code Section 8899.50 requires public agencies to administer programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing and avoid actions materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.

Examination of disproportionate need among different subgroups allows the City to avoid actions materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing under California law.

Disproportionate need regarding housing problems was found in the extremely low-income, very low- income, and middle-income brackets. With respect to extremely low-income and very low-income households, percentages of two subgroups exceed the baseline percentage of 85 percent for the jurisdiction: American Indian/Alaska Native and Pacific Islander households are disproportionately impacted. With respect to the middle-income category, Pacific Islanders have disproportionate housing problems. However, for both income brackets, the absolute number of households disproportionately impacted is quite small.

Disproportionate need was found in the extremely low-income, very-low income, and middle-income brackets. 78 percent of Pacific Islanders households that are extremely low-income have one or more severe housing problems. 82% of American Indian/Alaska Native households that are very low-income have severe housing problems. In the middle-income category, 29% of Hispanic households have severe housing problems. While 81% of Pacific Islander households have a severe housing problem, compared with 18 percent of the jurisdiction as a whole, the absolute number of households impacted is quite small – just 155 households.

No disproportionate need was identified in Housing Cost Burden across all four categories.

2. If they have needs not identified above, what are those needs?

Not applicable.

3. Are any of those racial groups located in specific areas or neighborhoods in your community?
As shown in Map 1, minority concentrated tracts are located in central, north, and in the most western part of the City.

Map 1 is attached in AD-25 under the Grantee Unique Appendices.

38 Map 1: Minority Concentrations. Source: ACS 2020 5-year

39 NA-35 Public Housing – 91.205(b)

The Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) assists households through public housing as well as Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher program. In 2020, SCCHA launched a lottery -based Section 8 interest list that remains open so anyone can apply at any time. There are around 42,800 households currently on the interest list. SCCHA also develops, owns, and manages more than 2, 900 affordable rental housing units throughout the County. SCCHA’s programs are targeted toward LMI households, and more than 80 percent of client households are extremely low -income families, seniors, veterans, persons with disabilities, and formerly homeless individuals.

In 2008, SCCHA was selected by HUD to become a Moving to Work (MTW) agency. This federal demonstration program allows greater flexibility to design and implement innovative approaches for providing housing assistance. The goals of the MTW program are to • Ensure Santa Clara County Housing Authority is a partner of choice in Santa Clara County • Collaborate with diverse partners to holistically support the needs of low-income communities • Develop new ways of thinking and implementing solutions to serve residents and communities • Increasing the value and unit count of SCCHA’s portfolio to ensure sustainable resident success

Additionally, SCCHA has used Low Income Housing Tax Credit financing to develop and recapitalize of most of its housing portfolio. The agency is an active developer of restricted affordable housing and has either constructed, rehabilitated, or assisted with the development of more than 30 affordable housing developments that service a variety of households, including special needs households.

Totals in Use
Table 25 - Public Housing by Program Type
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
# of
Units
with
Vouchers
in Use 0 22 0 13,654 1,967 11,687 765 11 41

*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition Data
Source:

Santa Clara County Housing Authority

40 Characteristics of Residents

Table 26 – Characteristics of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose
Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Average
Annual
Income
NA 28,733 NA 23,467 13,615 25,125 24,969 24,728
Average
Length of
Stay
NA 16.8 NA 14.8 4.8 16.5 5.7 6.8
Average
Household
Size
NA 2.3 NA 2.1 1.4 2.2 1.4 3.4
# Homeless
at
Admission
0 0 0 954 490 464 159 5
# of Elderly
Program
Participants
(>62)
0 9 0 6,854 965 5,880 414 3
# of
Disabled
Families
0 9 0 6,481 782 5,699 218 9
# of
Families
requesting
Accessibility
Features

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
# of

HIV/AIDS
program
participants

NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA
# of DV
victims NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA

Data Source: Santa Clara County Housing Authority

41 Race of Residents
Table 27 – Race of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type
Race Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
White 0 1 0 6,143 1,061 5,082 453 85 100
African
American 0 0 0 1,842 193 1,649 215 8 30
Asian 0 20 0 5,165 583 4,582 42 8 33
American
Indian/Alaska
Native
0 0 0 306 78 228 19 7 7
Pacific
Islander 0 1 0 133 32 101 25 5 4
Other 0 0 0 65 20 45 11 0 3
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition

Data
Source:

Santa Clara County Housing Authority

Ethnicity of Residents
Table 28 – Ethnicity of Public Housing Residents by Program Type Program Type
Ethnicity Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project
-based
Tenant
-based
Special Purpose Voucher
Veterans
Affairs
Supportive
Housing
Family
Unification
Program
Disabled
*
Hispanic 0 1 0 4,495 656 3,839 168 74 85
Not
Hispanic 0 21 0 9,156 1,310 7,846 597 39 92
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition

Data Source: Santa Clara County Housing Authority
Section 504 Needs Assessment

1. Describe the needs of public housing tenants and applicants on the waiting list for accessible units:

Not applicable. SCCHA does not own any public housing units located in San José.

42 2. Most immediate needs of residents of Public Housing and Housing Choice voucher holders

Depending on program type, as shown in Table 23, households have an average income between $13,615 and $28,733; this presents the economic hardship that most program participants endure. Housing Choice Voucher programs are administered in Santa Clara County through the Moving to Work HUD program and are designed to increase housing choices and facilitate self -sufficiency through education and employment opportunities.

3. How do these needs compare to the housing needs of the population at large

Housing vouchers serve the most vulnerable populations, including seniors, extremely low-income households, and individuals with disabilities. Despite proven to increase housing stability, voucher holders face discrimination and have difficulty finding housing. 8 Since holders are among the poorest,
they are also at greater risk of negative educational, health, and economic outcomes.

In addition, a great need exists for San José lower-income residents that do not use the Housing Choice Voucher program, especially because of possible rent increases and housing cost burdens. According to CHAS 2016-2020, there is a total of 324,338 households in San José, of which 17 percent is extremely low-income; 13 percent is very low-income; and 14 percent is low-income. These three categories total 44 percent of San José’s population; however, only four percent of all households in San José have access to Housing Choice Vouchers.

4. Discussion

See above.

8 https://www.cohenmilstein.com/case-study/housing-choice-vouchers-section-8-mass-action/

43 NA-40 Homeless Needs Assessment – 91.205(c)

1. Introduction:

California Government Code Section 8899.50 requires public agencies to administer programs and activities relating to housing and community development in a manner to affirmatively further fair housing and avoid actions materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing.

Examination of disproportionate need among different subgroups allows the City to avoid actions materially inconsistent with its obligation to affirmatively further fair housing under California law.

The Santa Clara County Continuum of Care receives approximately $40 million annually in federal funding from the US Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). It is required that CoCs receiving HUD funding report on the number of individuals and families experiencing homelessness within their communities. On February 23 and 24 of 2022, a Point-in-Time (PIT) count was conducted in San José. The PIT count is conducted every two years. The number of homeless in San José increased to 6,650 in 2022 from 6,097 in 2019, a 9 percent increase. In addition to the PIT count of the homeless population, surveys of persons experiencing homelessness were taken to contribute to a more comprehensive data collection to determine needs. To collect data regarding individuals staying in shelters throughout the County, data was obtained from the HMIS system administrators for Santa Clara County.

In additional, San Jose routinely conduct numerous studies to accurately count its homeless population.

For a summary of the latest reporting, visit https://www.sanjoseca.gov/your-government/departments- offices/housing/resource-library/homeless-reports.

The total of 10,028 persons experienced homelessness in Santa Clara County as described in the 2022 PIT count, of which 66 percent were counted in San José. Most homeless services and shelters are located in San José, which in part accounts for the majority of persons experiencing homelessness located in San José.

Families experiencing homelessness in San José account for over two-thirds of those in the County as a whole; however, as reported, 94 percent of homeless families are sheltered, which is a much higher rate than for other homeless populations. Veterans who are homeless account for 5 percent of the homeless population in the City, similar to the Countywide count of homeless veterans at 7 percent. However, 79% of homeless veterans in both the City and County are unsheltered, an even higher proportion when compared to 75% of the City’s overall homeless population being unsheltered. • Persons in Households with Adults and Children
According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census and Survey Report, there were a total of 134 households with adults and children and 401 persons in households with adults and children experiencing homelessness. Female family members accounted for 59% of the families experiencing homelessness subpopulation.

44 • Persons in Households with Only Children
According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census and Survey Report, there were a total of 20 persons in households with only youth who were experiencing homelessness. Persons in Households with Only Children are defined in the PIT count as unaccompanied youth or individuals under the age of 18 living without an adult. Approximately 51% of persons in households with only youth experiencing homelessness identified as female; 48% identified as male; 65% identified as White, 24% identified as African American, 2% identified as American or Alaskan Native, 5% identified as Asian, 2% identified as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 4% identified as Multi-Race or Other. 28% of persons in households with only youth cited a lost job as the primary cause of homelessness, 15% cited alcohol or drug abuse, 15% cited eviction, 13% cited argument with family/friend, and 10% cited incarceration. 33% of respondents reported experiencing drug or alcohol abuse, 19% reported experiencing PTSD, 18% reported psychiatric or emotional conditions, 7% reported chronic health problems, 5% reported traumatic brain injury, 2% reported physical disability, and 1% reported having HIV/AIDS.
• Chronically Homeless Individuals
According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census and Survey Report, there were 1,906 individuals who experienced chronic homelessness. 60% of survey respondents experiencing chronic homelessness identified as male. 55% identified as White, 23% as African American, 10% as American Indian or Alaska Native, 5% as Asian, 0% as Native Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 5% as Multi-Race or Other. 43% identified as Hispanic. 24% of respondents cited Lost Job and Alcohol or Drug abuse as the most common causes of homelessness.
• Veterans
According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census Survey and Report, there were 336 veterans experiencing homelessness in 2022. 87% of survey respondents who were veterans identified as male. 56% identified as White, 26% as African American, 11% as American Indian or Alaska Native, and 12% as Multi-Race or Other. 27% cited Alcohol or Drug Use as the primary cause of their homelessness. 58% of respondents reported experiencing PTSD, 58% reported experiencing a physical disability, 55% reported experiencing a psychiatric or emotional condition, 48% reported experiencing drug or alcohol abuse, 45% reported experiencing chronic health problems, 26% reported experiencing a traumatic brain injury, and 10% reported experiencing HIV/AIDS. • Unaccompanied Youth
Unaccompanied Youth are defined in the PIT count as unaccompanied young adults or individuals between the ages of 18 and 24 living without an adult According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census and Survey Report, there were a total of 993 unaccompanied young adults experiencing homelessness. Individuals ages 18 to 24 are considered to be young adults. Approximately 51% of unaccompanied youth experiencing homelessness identified as female and 48% identified as male. 65% identified as White, 24% as African American, 2% American or Alaskan Native, 5% as Asian, 2% as Native

45 Hawaiian or Pacific Islander, and 4% as Multi-Race or Other. 28% of unaccompanied youth cited job loss as the primary cause of homelessness, 15% cited alcohol or drug abuse, 15% cited eviction, 13% cited argument with family/friend, and 10% cited incarceration. 33% of respondents reported experiencing drug or alcohol abuse, 19% reported experiencing PTSD, 18% reported psychiatric or emotional conditions, 7% reported chronic health problems, 5% reported traumatic brain injury, 2% reported physical disability, and 1% reported having HIV/AIDS.
• Persons with HIV
According to the 2022 San José Homeless Census and Survey Report, 2% of homeless individuals reported having HIV/AIDS. 10% of veterans, 5% of families, and 1% of youth and young adults reported having HIV/AIDS.
• Number Becoming Homeless Each Year
Of the universe of homeless individuals enrolled in Emergency Shelter, Safe Haven, and Transitional Housing between July 2023 and June 2024, 3,294 individuals reported they were homeless for the first time.
• Number of Days Persons Experienced Homelessness
Of the universe of homeless individuals enrolled in Emergency Shelter and Safe Haven between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024, the average number of days persons experiencing homelessness is 842 days; the median number of days is 548.
9 Of the universe of homeless individuals enrolled in Emergency Shelter, Safe Haven, and Transitional Housing between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024, the average number of days persons experiencing homelessness is 1809.71 days; the median number of days is 822. 10 Of the universe of homeless individuals enrolled in Emergency Shelter, Safe Haven, and Permanent Housing between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024, the average number of days persons experiencing homelessness is 760.64; the median number of days is 796.5. 11 Of the universe of homeless individuals enrolled in Emergency Shelter, Safe Haven, Transitional Housing, and Permanent Housing between January 1, 2024 and December 31, 2024, the average number of days persons experiencing homelessness is 2151 days; the median number of days is 836.12 • Number Exiting Homelessness Each Year

Of the universe of individuals enrolled in Street Outreach between July 2023 and June 2024, 1,992 exited a housing program (Permanent Supportive Housing, Rapid Rehousing) or exited to a permanent

9 Inflow - VI-SPDAT with City Affiliation 2024
10 ibid
11 ibid
12 ibid

46 housing destination from a non-housing program.13

2. If data is not available for the categories "number of persons becoming and exiting homelessness each year," and "number of days that persons experience homelessness," describe these categories for each homeless population type (including chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth):

Not applicable.

3. Estimate the number and type of families in need of housing assistance for families with children and the families of veterans.

The subpopulation of “Families” is defined by HUD as, “a household with at least one adult member (persons 18 or older) and at least one child member (persons under 18).” The PIT counted 276 families with 898 members as homeless in the County—86% were sheltered, and 16% were unsheltered. In the City of San José, 134 families and 401 individual family members were counted – 94% were sheltered and 6% were unsheltered.

4. Describe the Nature and Extent of Homelessness by Racial and Ethnic Group.

Respondents to the surveys also reported racial and ethnic demographic data. Respondents’ top four responses were 66% White, 20% African American, 15% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 5% Asian. 46% of respondents reported they were of Latino/Hispanic ethnicity.

See the following tables for the demographic makeup of the chronically homeless, homeless veterans, and homeless youth populations for San José.

Table 29 – Chronic Homelessness by Race
Chronic Non-Chronic
American Indian/Alaska Native 10% 9%
Asian 5% 5%
African American 23% 14%
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0% 3%
White 58% 55%
Hispanic/Latino 43% 45%
Multi-Racial/Other 5% 15%
* Chronic N = 130; Non-Chronic N = 311

Data
Source:

City of San José Point-In-Time Count 2022, City of San José 2022 Homeless Census and Survey https://www.sanJoséca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/92524/638054026112130000

13 City of San José Affiliated Homeless Inflow, Housing Placements, and Retention, Q4 FY24.

47 Table 30 – Veterans Experiencing Homelessness by Race Veterans Non-Veterans
American Indian/Alaska Native 11% 9%
Asian 0% 5%
African American 26% 16%
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0% 2%
White 56% 56%
Multi-Racial/Other 7% 12%
* Veterans N = 27; Non-Veterans N = 411

Data
Source:

City of San José Point-In-Time Count 2022, City of San José 2022 Homeless Census and Survey https://www.sanJoséca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/92524/638054026112130000

Table 31 – Youth and Young Adults Experiencing Homelessness by Race American Indian/Alaska Native 2%
Asian 5%
African American 24%
Native Hawaiian/Other Pacific Islander 0%
White 65%
Multi-Racial/Other 4%
* Youth and Young Adults N = 55

Data
Source:

City of San José Point-In-Time Count 2022, City of San José 2022 Homeless Census and Survey https://www.sanJoséca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/92524/638054026112130000

5. Describe the Nature and Extent of Unsheltered and Sheltered Homelessness.

The total of persons experiencing homelessness in Santa Clara County in the 2022 PIT count was 10,028— 23 percent sheltered and 77 percent unsheltered. The total for San José accounts for 66 percent of the total homeless in the County, or 6,650 persons. San José, as the largest City in Santa Clara County, has the majority of homeless services and shelters in the County. The table below illustrates the trend of sheltered versus unsheltered homeless in the City of San José, which has fluctuated over the years. While homelessness increased overall in 2022, a positive development was 695 more individuals accessing shelter, the highest over a nine-year period.

Table 32 – Point-In-Time Homeless Population by Shelter Status 2013 2015 2017 2019 2022 2019-2022
Net Change
Sheltered 1,110 1,253 1,119 980 1,675 +695
Unsheltered 3,660 2,810 3,231 5,117 4,975 -142
Total 4,770 4,063 4,350 6,097 6,650 553
Table 32 – Point-In-Time Homeless Population by Shelter Status

48 Data
Source:

City of San José Point-In-Time Count 2022, City of San José 2022 Homeless Census and Survey https://www.sanJoséca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/92524/638054026112130000

Table 33 – Population Experiencing Chronic Homelessness 2017 2019 2022
Unsheltered 89% 85% 81%
Sheltered 11% 15% 19%
Table 33 – Population Experiencing Chronic Homelessness Data
Source:

City of San José Point-In-Time Count 2022, City of San José 2022 Homeless Census and Survey https://www.sanJoséca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/92524/638054026112130000

6. Discussion:

To assist populations experiencing homelessness in San José and counteract the impacts on the community, the City of San José’s Housing Department developed the Homelessness Response Framework, which uses a Coordinated Assessment System beginning with an Outreach Team that serves as the first point of entry to get unsheltered residents into systems of care. At the outset of outreach, staff and subgrantees help unsheltered residents to access basic needs. Individuals experiencing homelessness are then added to the Coordinated Assessment System and matched with the appropriate housing program.

49 NA-45 Non-Homeless Special Needs Assessment - 91.205 (b,d)

1. Introduction:

The City of San José accepts funding on behalf of its metropolitan statistical area under the HOPWA program. This section describes the housing and supportive service needs of low-income persons living with Human Immunodeficiency Virus/Acquired Immunodeficiency Syndrome (HIV/AIDS), or people infected with the human immunodeficiency virus (PLWH) and their families. In addition, this section describes the needs of Special Needs populations including seniors (62 years and older) and persons with disabilities (including developmental disabilities).

HOPWA
Table 34 – HOPWA Data
Current HOPWA formula use:

Cumulative cases of AIDS reported 5,102
Current HIV surveillance data:

Number of Persons living with HIC (PLWH) 3,922
Area Prevalence (PLWH per population) 205
Number of new HIV cases reported last year 171

Data
Source:

CDC HIV Surveillance

HIV Housing Need (HOPWA Grantees Only)
Table 35 – HIV Housing Need
Type of HOPWA Assistance Estimates of Unmet Need
Tenant based rental assistance 100
Short-term Rent, Mortgage, and Utility 0
Facility Based Housing (Permanent, short-term, or
transitional) 0

Data
Source:

HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet

2. Describe the characteristics of special needs populations in your community:

HIV/AIDS
Acquired immunodeficiency syndrome (AIDS) is a chronic, potentially life-threatening condition caused by the human immunodeficiency virus (HIV). By damaging the immune system, HIV interferes with the body's ability to fight the organisms that cause disease. As of December 31, 2023, a total number of 7,224 individuals diagnosed with HIV had been reported to the County. Of these, 5,102 (71%) were diagnosed with AIDS. A cumulative number of 2,810 (39%) persons with HIV infection were known to have died, including 2,701 with a diagnosis of AIDS. The most affected age group consists of individuals

50 between 25 and 44 years old, highlighting the need for targeted outreach to young and middle-aged adults. Demographic disparities in HIV/AIDS persist with Latino/Hispanic individuals disproportionately impacted, accounting for 60% of new HIV diagnoses in 2022. Additionally, men who have sex with men (MSM) represent a significant portion of those affected. These disparities underscore the urgent need for culturally competent prevention, treatment, and support services to address the unique challenges faced by these populations. Expanding access to healthcare, education, and community-based interventions is crucial to reducing transmission rates and improving health outcomes for individuals living with HIV/AIDS.

Senior Population
Senior households (ages 65 and older) face multiple challenges in accessing and maintaining access to reasonably-priced housing. Many live on fixed incomes and are more likely to experience physical limitations including reduced mobility or chronic health conditions. The primary housing needs for seniors stem from limited incomes, high healthcare costs, and physical limitations.

According to the 2023 5-year ACS, San José is home to 139,756 seniors, representing 14% of the total population. Of this group, 47,249 (34%) have physical limitations, and 17,104 (10%) live below the poverty level. While the City’s overall population declined by 4% between 2019 and 2023, the senior population grew by 9%.

According to the 2017-21 CHAS data, San Jose has 60,115 lower-income seniors (age 62 & older). 36,880 or 61% of them are owners and 23,235 or 39% are renters.

With this rapid growth, demand for affordable senior housing is expected to rise significantly. Currently, approximately 100,303 households of 324,340 total households in San José include at least one senior, but restricted affordable housing and low-cost private market housing meet only a fraction of the coming need.

Disabled Population
Approximately 94,971 people with physical limitations reside in the City of San José, according to the 2023 5-year ACS. However, there is a significant gap in housing accessibility for this population. Given the diverse range of residents' physical needs, appropriate housing features can vary widely. These features include wheelchair ramps, grab bars, and specialized bathroom designs. Community feedback indicates a shortage of housing that can accommodate those with physical limitations. There are also limited resources to locate and secure such accommodations.

Key gaps in housing coverage include affordability, support services, supportive housing and physical accommodations to housing. To address these challenges, the City has implemented reasonable accommodation procedures. Chapter 20.160 of the Zoning Code outlines who can request accommodations, the application requirements, and the criteria for approval. These procedures enable modifications to standard development regulations to better serve individuals with disabilities.

Female Head of Households
According to the 2023 5-Year American Community Survey (ACS), 11.5 percent of San José households

51 (39,407 households) are female-headed family households. Female-headed households with children face unique housing challenges. They often deal with pervasive workplace and societal conditions that result in their earning lower wages. About 12 percent of the female-headed family households in San José fall below the poverty level, compared with 5 percent of all San José families at this income level.

The City currently has 1,070 emergency shelter beds and transitional housing beds that serve homeless residents, including families with a female head of household and survivors of domestic violence.

3. What are the housing and supportive service needs of these populations and how are these needs determined?

See discussion above.

4. Discuss the size and characteristics of the population with HIV/AIDS and their families within the Eligible Metropolitan Statistical Area:

The County of Santa Clara’s Public Health Department reported that as of December 31, 2023, a total number of 7,224 individuals diagnosed with HIV had been reported. Of these, 5,102 (71%) were diagnosed with AIDS. A cumulative number of 2,810 (39%) persons with HIV infection were known to have died, including 2,701 with a diagnosis of AIDS. In 2023, 3,922 current County residents were living with HIV, including 2,832 (72%) first reported with HIV in the County and 1,090 (28%) out of jurisdiction cases.

For new cases, 171 were reported in 2023, most of which are male (84 percent). While data for African American residents are often masked due to smaller case counts, both African American and Hispanic residents have consistently experienced the highest rates over the years, highlighting growing disparities between these communities and White populations. From 2010 to 2023, rates among Asian/Pacific Islander and White males have decreased, whereas rates among Hispanic residents have continued to rise.

There was an increase in the proportion of cases in the County from 2021 to 2023, reaching 10.4 cases per 100,000 people. In 2023, the rate of new diagnoses for males ages 13 and older (17.3) was nearly eight times higher than the rate for females (2.2).

5. If the PJ will establish a preference for a HOME TBRA activity for persons with a specific category of disabilities (e.g., persons with HIV/AIDS or chronic mental illness), describe their unmet need for housing and services needed to narrow the gap in benefits and services received by such persons. (See 24 CFR 92.209(c)(2) (ii)) Traditionally, the City has funded two Tenant-Based Rental Assistance (TBRA) programs: one funded by HOME dollars, and another by HOPWA funds. The HOME TBRA Program is matched with local funds to increase capacity in the Rapid Rehousing System. The program will continue to provide housing subsidies and case management services to employed or employable homeless populations, including families with children, domestic violence survivors, and persons with HIV/AIDS.

The goal of the City’s Rapid Rehousing Program is to help up to 300 households at any given time to locate and secure appropriate rental housing, assist with time-limited subsidies based on the rent of the

52 identified unit, and help the participants increase their incomes so they can graduate out of the Rapid Rehousing Program and pay their rent in full.

53 NA-50 Non-Housing Community Development Needs – 91.215 (f)

1. Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Facilities:

Community members were given a chance to give input on what they think should be the top priorities for City investment of federal funds from HUD over the next five years. With respect to public facilities, residents noted the need for additional homeless facilities providing services and other resources so residents can receive proper care. Another comment suggested developing more community facilities to empower residents to become more involved in their neighborhood.

Residents who completed the survey were able to assign a priority value of low, medium, or high to 14 different public facility types. The three highest-ranked facility types were:

1. Mental health care facilities

2. Facilities for children who are abused

3. Homeless facilities (temporary housing and emergency shelters)

2. How were these needs determined?
Residents of San José were able to complete a needs survey and/or attend community meetings to give input on community needs. These responses were collected and analyzed to determine the needs described above.

3. Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Improvements:

Residents expressed a need for more equitable investments in parks and recreational activities in neighborhoods, so that all residents can experience a higher quality of life. They shared an interest in having “walkable neighborhoods” where housing, community centers, schools, and parks are within walking distance.

Residents who completed the survey were able to assign a priority value of low, medium, or high to 15 different public improvement types. The three improvement types that were ranked as the highest priority were:

1. Clean-up of contaminated sites

2. Lighting improvements

3. Street improvements

4. How were these needs determined?
Residents of San José were able to complete a needs survey and/or attend community meetings to give input on community needs. These responses were collected and analyzed to determine the needs described above.

54 5. Describe the jurisdiction’s need for Public Services:

Participants emphasized that while more affordable housing is necessary, it is also important that these developments are located within high-resource and high-quality neighborhoods that are safe, clean, and close to schools, health clinics, transit, and other services. When discussing support services, they emphasized coordination with the County so that residents have access to a variety of support services, particularly for those in substance use recovery and for residents experiencing homelessness and using controlled substances.

Residents who completed the survey were able to assign a priority value of low, medium, or high to 24 different public service types. The three service types that were ranked as the highest priority were:

1. Mental health services

2. Emergency housing assistance

3. Homeless services

6. How were these needs determined?

Residents of San José were able to complete a needs survey and/or attend community meetings to give input on community needs. These responses were collected and analyzed to determine the needs described above.

55 Housing Market Analysis
MA-05 Overview

1. Housing Market Analysis Overview:

San José has remained consistently one of the most expensive housing markets in the country and in 2024, it was ranked as the number 1 worst U.S city to purchase a home. 14 The most recent market data
shows that renters must earn about $124,360 a year to afford the average monthly rent for a 2- bedroom apartment of $2,802.15 The median single-family home price is currently $1,616,000.16 Buyers must earn $391,350 a year to afford a median priced single family home.17

In 2024, there was weak residential permit activity. The City has issued approximately 192 residential building permits; all of which were for multifamily market rate housing. According to the City’s Housing Element, the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG) estimates that the City is projected to accommodate approximately 20 percent of the Bay Area’s regional housing growth, or almost 130,000 housing units by 2040.18

14https://sanJoséspotlight.com/san-José-has-highest-home-prices-in-nation-us-cities-united-states/ 15City of San José, Housing Market Update, Third Quarter 2024 16 ibid
17 ibid
18 City of San José, 2014-2023 Housing Element, January 27, 2015, III-2

56 MA-10 Number of Housing Units – 91.210(a)&(b)(2)

1. Introduction
The housing stock of San José in 2023 was made up of 51% single family detached homes, 11% single family attached homes, 6% multifamily homes with 2 to 4 units, 28% multifamily homes with 5 or more units, and 3% mobile homes.19
Areas where new development is likely to occur include the Downtown, North San José, Diridon Station area and approved Urban Village Plan areas; and these areas have environmental clearance at the level of zoning and development standards with near-term infrastructure impacts and mitigation measures already identified within environmental clearance documents.20 San José’s Specific Plan areas include “Planned Communities” that are designed to accommodate residential infill development.

Residential development permit activity is generally low and the City is not on target to meet its housing goals.
21 In 2024, the City saw a 41% decrease in permits for multifamily units year-over-year (from 2,498 to 1,472) and a 19% increase for ADUs (from 470 to 558).22 Table 36 – Residential Properties by Unit Number
Property Type Number %
1-unit detached structure 176,440 52%
1-unit, attached structure 38,710 11%
2-4 units 22,245 7%
5-19 units 30,550 9%
20 or more units 58,135 17%
Mobile Home, boat, RV, van, etc 12,030 4%
Total 338,110 100%

Data Source: 2019-2023 ACS

19 2019-2023 ACS
20 2023-2031 Housing Element, Chapter 5, Adequate Sites for Housing 21 City of San José, Housing Market Update, Third Quarter 2024 22 2024 Housing Element Annual Progress Report Memorandum to City Council, March 6, 2025, https://sanjose.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=13916378&GUID=CBDE158C-D563-4BCC-827E-115AB00EEFEC

57 Table 37 – Unit Size by Tenure
Owners Renters

Number % Number %
No bedroom 805 0% 13,545 10%
1 bedroom 3,345 2% 36,890 26%
2 bedrooms 29,330 16% 50,255 36%
3 or more bedrooms 150,019 82% 40,145 29%
Total 183,499 100% 140,835 101%

Data Source: 2019-2023 ACS

2. Describe the number and targeting (income level/type of family served) of units assisted with federal, state, and local programs.

The City contracts with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) to administer San José's Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program. This is SCCHA’s largest rental assistance program with about 17,000 participants Countywide. By law, the Housing Authority must provide 75% of the vouchers to applicants whose incomes do not exceed 30% of the area median income (extremely low income).

In addition to the Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program, in San José there are 232 affordable housing developments that contain a total of 19,428 units. These units are deed-restricted with active affordable restrictions, and the breakdown is listed in the following table.

Table 38 – Deed Restricted Affordable Units
Category ELI Units
(0-30%
AMI)
VLI
Units
(30-50%
AMI)
LI Units
(50-80%
AMI)
Mod
Units (80-
120%
AMI)
Res.

Mgr
Units
Other
HUD
Units
Total
Affordable
Units
Under Construction 672 493 1,234 133 - - 2,532
Family Housing 1,068 6,105 5,577 844 15 1,284 14.732
Senior Housing 932 2,715 885 1 4 349 4,870
Special Needs Housing 674 870 109 1 3 0 1,657
Total 3,346 10,183 7,805 979 22 1,633 23,791

Data Source: Source: Affordable Apartments in San José as of 2/26/2025, City of San José

3. Provide an assessment of units expected to be lost from the affordable housing inventory for any reason, such as expiration of Section 8 contracts.

The table below is from the 2023 -2031 Housing Element for the City of San José and lists the dates that affordable units are expected to convert to market rate. According to the table below, units at risk of conversion to market rate within the next eleven years include 1,405 affordable units, 1,297 of which are non-elderly units.

58 Table 39– Affordable Units at Risk of Conversion to Market Rate

Name
Type of
Assistance
Received*
Nonprofit
Sponsor
?
Affordability
Expiration
Date
Total
Affordable
Units
Total
Elderly
Units
Total Non-
Elderly
Units

Risk
Arbor Apartments - 1582 Kooser
Road
HUD assisted 8/31/2025 122 122 H
Villa Torino - 29 West Julian
Street
City funded 9/30/2025 85 85 H
Almaden Garden Apartments
947 Branham Lane
HUD assisted 4/30/2026 36 36 H
San José Apartments
1500 Cunningham Avenue
HUD assisted 9/30/2026 214 214 H
Willow Lake - 1331 Lakeshore
Circle
Inclusionary 8/4/2027 12 12 H
YWCA Villa Nueva 375 S. 3rd
Street
City funded Y 3/4/2028 62 62 M
Enclave / Siena at Renaissance
4349 Renaissance Drive
City funded &
Inclusionary
4/13/2028 271 271 M
Masson Building Rehabilitation
161 West Santa Clara Street
80%
redevelopment
funds
7/31/2028 4 4 M
Giovanni - 85 S. 5th Street City funded &
HUD 202
Y 11/12/2028 24 24 0 M
Hoffman – 5629 Hoffman Court City funded Y 10/28/2029 4 4 H Monterey Grove 6100 Monterey
Road
Inclusionary 11/4/2029 34 34 H
Burning Tree - 239 Burning Tree City funded 4/1/2030 1 1 Waterford Place - 1700 N. 1st
Street
Inclusionary 4/5/2030 36 36 H
Market Gateway Housing 535 S.

Market Street
Inclusionary 4/21/2030 22 22 H
Village @ Museum Park 465 W.

San Carlos Street
Developer
agreement
2/1/2031 19 19 H
101 San Fernando
101 E. San Fernando St.

Inclusionary 8/29/2031 65 65 H

59 North Park The Cypress I 65 Rio
Robles East
Inclusionary 10/29/2031 35 35 H
North Park The Cypress II 75 Rio
Robles East
Inclusionary 10/29/2031 37 37 H
College Park
190 Ryland Street
Inclusionary 12/14/2031 46 46 H
Casa Camino - 96 South 10th
Street
City funded 4/1/2032 4 4 H
Santa Familia - 4984 Severance
Drive
City funded Y 4/28/2032 79 79 L
Avenida Espana Gardens 181
Rawls Court
City funded &
Tax Credit
Y 10/26/2032 84 84 0 L
Lion Villas - 2550 S. King Road Tax credits 5/24/2029 109 109 M

TOTAL AFFORDABLE UNITS AT RISK OF EXPIRING: 1,405 108 1,297 *Note: “City funded” includes assistance from the City of San José and the former San José Redevelopment Agency.

Data Source: City of San José Housing Element 2023-2031

4. Does the availability of housing units meet the needs of the population?

No. According to CHAS 2017-2021, there is a total of 324,375 households in San José. Of total households, 16% are extremely low income; 12% are very low income; 15% are low income. In San José, 44% of households earn between 0 to 80% of the area median income. The family type that experiences extremely low income the most are small family households, accounting for 5% of total households.

Elderly households make up 9% of total households in the City.

Based on the data in Table 33, there is a total of 18,365 assisted units for low-income households, 1,046 of which are under construction. Additionally, housing data available from the Santa Clara County Housing Authority indicates that the agency administers 13,654 Section 8 Housing Choice Vouchers in the City of San José. Together, these units would make up 9% of total housing stock, not nearly enough to accommodate the 44% of households in San José that earn between 0 to 80% of the area median income.

In addition, the graph below shows the 2023 to 2031 Regional Housing Need Allocation of units permitted at the end of the two years into its eight-year cycle, showing that the City has met 6% of its market-rate permit goals and 12% of its affordable housing permit goals.

Figure 1 – Cumulative RHNA Residential Building Permit Performance

60 5. Describe the need for specific types of housing:

More than half (52%) of the property types in the City are single-family detached structures; the second highest (17%) are multi-unit structures with 20 or more units. Other property types are spread somewhat evenly across single-family attached, 2-4 units, and 5-19 units (Table 31). Owners represent more than 56% of all occupied units. In addition, 80% of 3-bedroom units are owner occupied, while only 20% of 3-bedroom units are renter occupied.

There is a need for assisted affordable housing for lower-income households in San José, including larger units for families and small units to accommodate the aging population. Households experiencing the most need are in the extremely low-income bracket. Of the 324,375 households in San José, 16% (51,115) are extremely low income.23 Table 33 shows there 2,384 assisted units in the city that are affordable to households in this income bracket; however, there are 40,515 very low-income households and only 8,743 assisted units in the city are affordable to them. There are 50,165 low- income households and 6,066 assisted units are affordable to these households. Further, the most common household type in the extremely low-income bracket (accounting for 5% of total households) are small family households, indicating a need for larger, 2- to 3- bedroom units. Elderly households in the extremely low make up 9% of total households in the City, indicating a need for smaller 1-bedroom and studio units.

23 2017-2021 CHAS
600 (8%) 814 (11%) 1,514 (17%) 1,232 (12%)
4,160 (12%)
1,726 (6%)
5,886 (9%)
7,544 7,544 8,687
10,711
34,486
27,714
62,200
0 10,000
20,000
30,000
40,000
50,000
60,000
70,000
ELI VLI LI MOD Total
Affordable
Total Market
Rate
Total All
Housing
Sixth Cycle RHNA Production Total RHNA Goal

61 6. Discussion

See above.

62 MA-15 Housing Market Analysis: Cost of Housing – 91.210(a)

1. Introduction

If housing costs are high, relative to household income, there will be a higher instances of cost burden and, potentially, overcrowding. According to HUD, households that pay more than 30 percent of income on housing are considered cost burdened and may have difficulty affording other necessities such as food, clothing, transportation and medical care. This section analyzes the cost of housing in the City.

2. Cost of Housing

Table 40 – Cost of Housing
Base Year: 2009 Most Recent Year: 2020 % Change
Median Home Value 609,500 925,800 52%
Median Contract Rent 1,491 2,117 42%

Data Source: 2000 Census (Base Year), 2016-2020 ACS (Most Recent Year)

Table 41 - Rent Paid
Rent Paid Number %
Less than $500 10,175 7.2%
$500-999 9,170 6.5%
$1,000-1,499 17,440 12.4%
$1,500-1,999 28,515 20.3%
$2,000 or more 75,545 53.6%
Total 140,845 100.0%

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

3. Housing Affordability
Table 42 – Housing Affordability
% Units affordable to Households
earning
Renter Owner
30% HAMFI 11,770 No Data
50% HAMFI 29,715 5,860
80% HAMFI 66,410 10,255
100% HAMFI No Data 16,405
Total 107,895 32,520

Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

4. Monthly Rent

63 Table 43 – Monthly Rent
Monthly Rent ($) Efficiency (no
bedroom)
1 Bedroom 2 Bedroom 3 Bedroom 4 Bedroom
Fair Market Rent 2,383 2,694 3,132 4,011 4,425
High HOME Rent 2,058 2,206 2,649 3,052 3,385
Low HOME Rent 1,713 1,836 2,074 2,203 2,545

Data Source: HUD FMR and HOME Rents, 2024.

5. Is there sufficient housing for households at all income levels? No. Data indicate that there is not adequate housing affordable to LMI households, especially for extremely low- and very low-income households. For example, according to the CHAS 2017-2021 data, there are approximately 51,115 extremely low-income households; however, there are only 11,770 rental units available that are affordable to these households (no data is available on homeowner units).

Further there are an additional 40,515 very low-income households, but only 35,575 units total available at that income level.

6. How is affordability of housing likely to change considering changes to home values and/or rents?
The median single-family home price saw a steady increase from $400,000 in 2008 to a peak of just under $1.8 million in 2024. During this same period, rents increased about three percent. Housing affordability is not expected to improve given these trends.

Table 44 – Median Home Value and Average Rent
Median Home Value and Average Rent
2023 2024 % Change
Median Home Value $1,700,000 $1,800,000 +6%
Average Rent $2,708 $2,802 +3%

Data Source: Median Home Value, Santa Clara County Association of Realtors September 2025. Average Rent, Costar December, 2024

7. How do HOME rents / Fair Market Rent compare to Area Median Rent? How might this impact your strategy to produce or preserve affordable housing? The median gross rent for San José, according to the 2017-2023 American Community Survey 5-Year Estimates, for a 2 bedroom, was $2,683. The HUD Fair Market Rent for a two-bedroom, $3,132, is higher than the average rent in the City, as shown by the Santa Clara County Association of Realtors in the table above, which was $2,802 in 2024. Building permit activity peaked in 2023 at approximately 776 permits per quarter but has since declined to approximately 624 permits per quarter in 2024.24

24 City of San José, Housing Market Update, Third Quarter 2024.

64 According to the number of units available to low- to moderate-income households, there is a substantial need to develop additional affordable units. HUD defines cost burdened families as those who spend 30 percent or more of their income on housing costs, including utilities. Affordable rent for a family of four, earning 80 percent of the median family income would be $3,686. The average rent for a three-bedroom in San José in the third quarter of 2024 was $3,948, which further supports the need for affordable units.25

8. Discussion
See above.

25 City of San José, Housing Market Update, Third Quarter 2024.

65 MA-20 Housing Market Analysis: Condition of Housing – 91.210(a)

1. Introduction

The following section describes the conditions of the housing stock in the City. HUD defines housing “conditions” identifies four areas that address housing conditions:

1. More than one person per room

2. Cost Burden greater than 30 percent

3. Lack of complete plumbing

4. Lack of complete kitchen facilities

The City’s Municipal Code identifies a more detailed list of conditions that constitute substandard housing. As defined in the Code, housing includes buildings, structures, or portions thereof used or designed or intended to be used, for human habitation or the property on which such building is located. Any housing in which there exists any of the following listed conditions is deemed to be substandard housing:

A. Inadequate Sanitation/Ventilation/Space Requirements B. Structural Hazards
C. Hazardous Wiring
D. Hazardous Plumbing
E. Hazardous Mechanical Equipment
F. Faulty Weather Protection
G. Fire Hazard/Inadequate Fire Protection
H. Faulty Materials of Construction
I. Hazardous or Unsanitary Premises
J. Inadequate Maintenance
K. Unhealthy Conditions
L. Inadequate Exits
M. Improper Occupancy

2. Condition of Units
Table 45 - Condition of Units
Condition of Units Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
With one selected Condition 54,670 30% 67,625 48%
With two selected Conditions 2,230 1% 10,825 8%
With three selected Conditions 15 0% 310 0%
With four selected Conditions 0 0% 40 0%
No selected Conditions 126,585 69% 62,040 44%
Total 183,500 100% 140,840 100%

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

66 3. Year Unit Built
Table 46 – Year Unit Built
Year Unit Built Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied
Number % Number %
2000 or later 18,070 10% 28,985 21%
1980-1999 39,425 21% 36,450 26%
1950-1979 111,280 61% 64,135 46%
Before 1950 14,720 8% 11,270 8%
Total 183,495 100% 140,840 101%

Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

4. Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard
Table 47 – Risk of Lead-Based Paint
Risk of Lead-Based Paint Hazard Owner-Occupied Renter-Occupied Number % Number %
Total Number of Units Built Before 1980 126,000 69% 75,405 54% Housing Units build before 1980 with children present 20,593 11% 9,058 6%

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS (Total Units) 2016-2020 CHAS (Units with Children present)

5. Vacant Units
Table 48 - Vacant Units Need for Owner and Rental Rehabilitation Suitable for
Rehabilitation
Not Suitable for
Rehabilitation
Total
Vacant Units 7,060 315 7,375
Abandoned Vacant Units
REO Properties
Abandoned REO Properties

San José’s housing stock is relatively new, with approximately 80 percent of the stock built in 1960 and after26. As a result, the number of homes in San José considered “substandard” is small, with 0.6 percent of all units having incomplete plumbing and one percent having incomplete kitchen facilities, some of which may be located in the same unit.27 To identify deteriorated housing units in the City, staff used the U.S. Census American Community Survey definition of “selected conditions” as a measure of substandard housing. The selected conditions are:
• incomplete plumbing or kitchens
• overcrowding
• 30% or more of the household income spent on rent or monthly owner costs

26 City of San José 2023-2031 Housing Element.
27 U.S. Census Bureau, American Community Survey 5-Year Data (2019-2023), Table B25053, Table B25049

67 According to 2019-2013 ACS, the City has 120,711 units with one selected condition, 12,352 with two selected conditions and 33 with three selected conditions. However, over the course of the 2015-2019 Consolidated Plan Cycle, 1,217 units of homeowner housing was rehabilitated with CDBG funding.

The data show that there is a need for rehabilitation of renter and owner households in the City of San José. Based on the HUD’s definition of the four housing conditions, almost one-half of renters (48 percent), and almost one-third of owners (30 percent) experience one or more of these conditions. In addition, as units continue to age, they will continue to deteriorate and therefore add to the number of units that will be considered substandard housing.

Estimated Number of Housing Units Occupied by Low- or Moderate-Income Families with LBP Hazards In order to estimate the number of housing units in San José that are occupied by low-moderate income families with lead-based paint (LBP) hazards, the age units should be taken into consideration. Although the use of LBP in residential units was prohibited after 1978, for the purposes of this Consolidated Plan, the number of units built before 1980 will be used to determine how many low-moderate income households may be at risk of LBP hazards.

The 2016-2020 American Community Survey (ACS) shows that approximately 201,405 units in San José were built before 1980, and data from the 2016-2020 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) show that 53 percent of total households are occupied by low- to moderate-income persons.

This means 106,745 households may have an LBP risk.

Discussion
Lead-based paint hazards are particularly dangerous for children ages 6 or younger, as they are the most susceptible to exposure, whose effects include damage to the nervous system, decreased brain development, and learning disabilities. The 2016-2020 CHAS data show that there are approximately 29,651 housing units built before 1980 that have children present, putting them at risk of LBP hazards.

68 MA-25 Public and Assisted Housing – 91.210(b)

1. Introduction
As previously noted, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) assists approximately 19,000 households through Section 8. Approximately 18,896 housing vouchers are in use Countywide. The Section 8 waiting list contains 42,800 households, and applicants are pulled from the list through a random lottery process as vouchers become available.

The following tables display the housing assistance maintained by SCCHA in the City of San José. SCCHA has four two-bedroom family public housing units in its portfolio; they are located in the City of Santa Clara. Specific SCCHA data on the number of units or vouchers available is only available for the City of San José (through the Housing Authority of the City of San José, administered by SCCHA) and the County as a whole.

2. Totals Number of Units

Table 49 – Total Number of Units by Program Name
Program Type
Certificate Mod-
Rehab
Public
Housing
Vouchers
Total Project-
based
Tenant-
based Special Purpose Voucher
# of units
vouchers
available
0 23 0 20,226 2,034 16,919 1,540 190 392
# of
accessible
units
0 NA 0 NA 556 NA NA NA NA
*includes Non-Elderly Disabled, Mainstream One-Year, Mainstream Five-year, and Nursing Home Transition

Data
Source:

Santa Clara County Housing Authority

3. Describe the supply of public housing developments:

Not applicable. There are no public housing developments in the City of San José.

4. Describe the number and physical condition of public housing units in the jurisdiction, including those that are participating in an approved Public Housing Agency Plan:

Not applicable. There are no public housing developments in the City of San José.

5. Public Housing Condition

69 Table 50 - Public Housing Condition
Public Housing Development Average Inspection Score
n/a n/a

6. Describe the restoration and revitalization needs of public housing units in the jurisdiction:

Not applicable. There are no public housing units in the jurisdiction.

7. Describe the public housing agency's strategy for improving the living environment of low- and moderate-income families residing in public housing:

Not applicable. There are no public housing developments in the City of San José.

8. Discussion:

Not applicable. There are no public housing developments in the City of San José.

70 MA-30 Homeless Facilities and Services - 24 CFR 91.210 (c)

1. Introduction
Numerous Santa Clara County agencies and other organizations provide services to persons and families experiencing homelessness, and those at risk of homelessness. Services provided by the County include but are not limited to rental housing, healthcare, food, benefits to recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI), school assistance services to school aged children (such as transportation and school supplies), counseling, drug and alcohol rehabilitation, youth programs, financial assistance to veterans and their families for medical and housing, and legal assistance for eviction and other housing-related issues. Various nonprofit organizations provide services including but not limited to shelter services, supportive housing, and transitional housing.

2. Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households

Table 51 – Facilities and Housing Targeted to Homeless Households Emergency Shelter Beds Transitional
Housing Beds
Permanent Supportive
Housing Beds
Year-Round
Beds
(Current &
New)
Voucher /
Seasonal /
Overflow
Beds
Current & New Current &
New
Under
Development
Households with
Adult(s) and
Child(ren)
1755 423 190 352 306
Households with
Only Adults
72 n/a 125 516 91
Chronically
Homeless
Households
n/a n/a n/a 578 113
Veterans 61 n/a 110 0 13
Unaccompanied
Youth
4 27 4

Data
Source:
2023 Santa Clara County Housing Inventory Count, City of San José

3. Describe mainstream services, such as health, mental health, and employment services to the extent those services are use to complement services targeted to homeless persons The County of Santa Clara updated its 2020-2025 Community Plan to End Homelessness (CPTEH) in 2020. The County, local cities, nonprofit advocacy groups, service providers, philanthropic organizations, elected officials, universities, and people with lived experience of homelessness have partnered together to leverage a coordinated system to effectively assist homeless populations.

The City of San José committed to creating a clear vision for how the City would be a partner and leader in executing the CPTEH by publishing its own implementation plan.

71 Since the CPTEH’s implementation through June 2023, 8,856 people have been housed through the supportive housing system and 1,652 people have been served by the Homeless Prevention System.

To ensure residents do not return to homelessness, the goal has been to provide funding to tenants so they may receive proper case management, health care, employment programs, and other services necessary to remain housed.

The CTEPH is monitored for progress and includes:
• Permanent Supportive Housing programs, Rapid Rehousing programs and short-term or one-time assistance
• Case management-staff working closely with formerly homeless supportive housing tenants to help them retain housing
• Services to address mental health and substance use
• Supportive services-assistance with obtaining public benefits such as legal services and employment programs
Primary partners in the 2020-2025 Community Plan to End Homelessness include:
• Abode Services
• City of San José
• Destination: Home
• HomeFirst Services of Santa Clara County
• Santa Clara County Housing Authority
• County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing
• Sunnyvale Community Services
• The Health Trust
• US Department of Veterans Affairs
Regional programs that demonstrate mainstream service connections for the homeless population include:
• The Valley Homeless Health care Program (VHHP) is part of the Santa Clara Valley Medical Center and provides medical services to homeless individuals, including primary care and urgent care. VHHP also manages a Medical Respite program for homeless individuals discharged from hospitals as well as a Backpack Homeless Health Care Program for those in encampments.
• The County’s Social Services Agency expedites the review process of homeless households’ CalFresh applications so that they may receive benefits within three days.

The County’s Behavioral Health Services Department (BHS) coordinates multiple programs to connect homeless individuals with housing or shelter assistance. BHS also treats those going through behavioral health crises.
• The County’s Reentry Resource Center (RRC) provides services to those who have been previously incarcerated and to individuals who are homeless upon release. Services include

72 referrals to drug treatment, housing assistance, food assistance, counseling, and other benefits.
• The County’s Office of Supportive Housing’s (OSH) mission is to increase the supply of housing and supportive housing that is affordable and available to extremely low income and/or special needs households. OSH supports the County mission of promoting a healthy, safe, and prosperous community by preventing homelessness.

4. List and describe services and facilities that meet the needs of homeless persons, particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth. If the services and facilities are listed on screen SP -40 Institutional Delivery Structure or screen MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services, describe how these facilities and services specifically address the needs of these populations.

There are 226 Adult Residential facilities in San José with the capacity to accommodate 3,418 individuals. There are 140 Residential Elder Care Facilities with the capacity to accommodate 3,226 individuals.

The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Santa Clara County provides local listings (all located in San José ) of available licensed and unlicensed group homes, listings of emergency and mental health supportive housing agencies, resources for finding affordable single and family housing, homeless resources, and information on other housing related programs, services and issues (such as resident and/or tenant rights).
28 The City of San José is home to an array of facilities, programs, and services to assist individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Services include:

• Housing for Families with Children
• Domestic Violence, Family & Children Issues
• Drop-In Day Time Service Centers
• Rental & Other Assistance
• Medical, Mental Health & Recovery Programs
• Veterans Services
• Legal Referrals
• Food & Meals
• Youth Services
• Employment/Vocational Services
• VTA Services
• Homeless Outreach

28 National Alliance on Mental Illness, Santa Clara County, https://namisantaclara.org/.

73 MA-35 Special Needs Facilities and Services - 24 CFR 91.210 (d)

1. Introduction

2. HOPWA Assistance Baseline Table
Table 52 – HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet Type of HOPWA Assistance Emergency Shelter Beds
TBRA 97
PH in Facilities 0
STRMU 0
ST or TH Facilities 0
PH Placement 0

Data
Source:

HOPWA CAPER and HOPWA Beneficiary Verification Worksheet

3. Including the elderly, frail elderly, persons with disabilities (mental, physical, developmental), persons with alcohol or other drug addictions, persons with HIV/AIDS and their families, public housing residents and any other categories the jurisdiction may specify and describe their supportive housing needs.

Elderly/Frail Elderly
The population of persons 65 years and over accounts for 139,756 persons, or 14 percent of the City’s population, according to the 2019-2023 American Community Survey. Of the City’s population over 65 years, 34 percent are disabled. Further, 11 percent of seniors age 65 years and over live below the poverty level. As discussed in NA-10, elderly households in the extremely lower-income category make up 32 percent of total lower income households experiencing cost burden.

Senior populations have a wide range of housing needs that include daily care-provider assistance to assisted living various types of care facilities. However, surveys show that the many seniors prefer to “age in place” and services are provided with the City and County that assist seniors to remain in their home for as long as possible.

Residential Care Facilities for the Elderly (RCFE) are regulated by the California Community Care Licensing Division (CCLD) of the Department of Social Services. It provides services to persons 60 years and over. RCFEs are assisted living facilities, retirement homes, and board and care homes.

According to the City’s geocoding and analysis of CCLD data, San José has 140 RCFEs with a total licensed capacity of 3,226 persons.
29 29 California Department of Social Services, Care Licensing Programs, https://www.cdss.ca.gov/inforesources/community-care-licensing

74 Persons with Disabilities
Federal laws define a person with a disability to include any (1) individual with a physical or mental impairment that substantially limits one or more major life activities; (2) individual with a record of such impairment; or (3) individual who is regarded as having such an impairment. A physical or mental impairment includes, but is not limited to, conditions such as orthopedic, visual, speech and hearing impairments, cerebral palsy, autism, epilepsy, muscular dystrophy, multiple sclerosis, cancer, heart disease, diabetes, Human Immunodeficiency Virus (HIV), developmental disabilities, mental illness, drug addiction, and alcoholism.

Approximately ten percent of the City’s population has a disability. 30 Some persons with disabilities
may have self-care and mobility limitations that require special housing design features such as wheelchair ramps, holding bars, special bathroom designs, wider doors, and other design features.

According to information from the Regional Center, there are 15,671 persons with developmental disabilities in Santa Clara County, or approximately 0.8 percent of the County’s population, 9,900 persons with developmental disabilities in the City, or 1% of the City’s population. The California Department of Developmental Services currently provides services to persons with developmental disabilities through a statewide system of 21 regional centers, 4 developmental centers, and 2 community-based facilities. The San Andreas Regional Center serves four counties, including Santa Clara County.

According to the City’s Housing Element, the City of San José ensures housing units remain affordable for a portion of the supportive housing units for persons with disabilities in Santa Clara County. Deed restricted supportive housing units include approximately 95 percent of units that are set aside for seniors and 10 percent are set aside for developmentally disabled individuals.

Table 53 – Affordable Deed Restricted Housing Units in San José for Special Needs Households Affordable Deed Restricted Housing Units in San José for Special Needs Households Seniors 4,412
Developmentally Disabled 446
Physically Disabled 112
People with HIV/AIDS 24
TOTAL IN-SERVICE PROJECTS 4,671

Data
Source:

Affordable Apartments in San José as of 2/26/2025, City of San José

HIV/AIDS
Rental Assistance & Support Services for People Living with HIV/AIDS (PLWH), a program of Bay Area Community Health, assists persons living with HIV/AIDS in the City. Project services include outpatient ambulatory health services, medical case management, early intervention services,

30 https://data.census.gov/table?t=Disability&g=160XX00US0668000

75 mental health services, Substance Use Disorder counseling, and psychosocial support. Housing placement services will include help in locating and obtaining housing such as housing counseling; information and referral to housing; and help securing financial assistance for security deposits and utility deposits. BACH also assesses eligibility for and addresses on a case by-case basis one-time emergency needs (e.g. rental and utility assistance) and costs associated with move-in, such as furniture, beds, and kitchen items. Housing clients are also eligible for additional services provided by Ryan White Care Act funding.

4. Describe programs for ensuring that persons returning from mental and physical health institutions receive appropriate supportive housing
Table 54 – Licensed Care Facilities
Facility Types Number of Facilities Facility Capacity
Adult Residential 226 3,418
Residential Elder Care 140 3,226

Data
Source:

California Department of Social Services, Care Licensing Programs https://www.ccld.dss.ca.gov/carefacilitysearch/

There are 140 Residential Elder Care Facilities in San José with capacity to accommodate 3,226 individuals, and an additional 226 Adult Residential Care Facilities with capacity to accommodate 3,418 individuals. The National Alliance on Mental Illness (NAMI) Santa Clara County provides local listings (all located in San José) of available licensed and unlicensed group homes, listings of emergency and mental health supportive housing agencies, resources for finding affordable single and family housing, homeless resources, and information on other housing related programs, services and issues (such as resident and/or tenant rights).

5. Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. 91.315(e) In addition to tracking the supply of supportive housing in San José, the City continues to work with the Bay Area Community Health and other agencies supportive of the housing needs of persons with HIV/AIDS and support these agencies with the grant the City receives from HOPWA.

6. For entitlement/consortia grantees: Specify the activities that the jurisdiction plans to undertake during the next year to address the housing and supportive services needs identified in accordance with 91.215(e) with respect to persons who are not homeless but have other special needs. Link to one-year goals. (91.220(2))
Please see discussion above.

76 MA-40 Barriers to Affordable Housing - 24 CFR 91.210 (e)

1. Negative Effects of Public Policies on Affordable Housing and Residential Development

As mentioned above in the overview, San José has remained consistently one of the most expensive housing markets in the country making it difficult for residents to afford a home, causing displacement from communities due to market forces. Demand continues to outpace supply. An examination of nongovernmental and governmental constraints that limit development, maintenance and improvement of housing can help create appropriate policy responses.

Constraints that affect the local housing market’s affordability and accessibility are also discussed in the City’s Housing Element.

Market Forces
Financing. The availability of financing is an important aspect of the ability to construct new housing. In San José in recent years, the availability of financing has not been a constraint on the supply of housing. Construction costs as discussed in the next section, have been the most significant constraint. Prior to the COVID-19 pandemic, financing has been generally available at reasonable rates for construction. Rates remained very favorable through the majority of the pandemic, but the market uncertainty caused by the pandemic has made lenders more cautious.

The growth of inflation and rising interest rates may start to have an impact on the availability of financing moving forward, but it remains to be seen what the long-term impact will be in San José.

New construction in San José for multifamily housing is dominated by a handful of very large publicly-traded or privately-held firms and/or real estate investment trusts (REITs), which tend to have easy access to financing or the ability to finance projects themselves. Lenders also tend to favor multifamily rental housing over housing intended for ownership. This is likely due to the higher demand and return on investment with rental housing coupled with the increased associated liability risks with providing for-sale housing types.

Overall, the high demand for housing coupled with the strong regional job market has made San José an attractive location for investment, but other factors have constrained the supply of housing outside of financing availability.

For affordable housing construction, the availability of financing has been constrained by level of subsidy available. In recent years, the competitiveness in obtaining funds has greatly increased especially for Low Income Housing Tax-Credit (LIHTC) financing making it more challenging for projects to obtain sufficient funds to start construction. Developments in San José have had to apply multiple times to receive a LIHTC award delaying the ability to start construction from six months to over two years in some instances. San José, and the larger Bay Area as a region, were recently disadvantaged due to scoring that elevated areas where construction costs were lower. This added to the difficulty in obtain financing. The City advocated for changes in the California Debt Limit Allocation Committee (CDLAC) program guidelines to better position affordable housing developments in San José for future allocations of tax-exempt bonds and tax credits. Some of these

77 changes were implemented in 2022 and in the coming years the City will be tracking the overall impact on affordable housing developments in San José and the Bay Area region as a result of these.

Price of Land. The price of land varies widely across the City of San José given its size, diversity of uses, and built densities. An analysis conducted in 2019 by the City’s consultant, David Paul Rosen and Associates, found that multifamily land prices have been trending upward since the Great Recession. From 2011 to 2015, land prices rose at annual rate of 23.6 percent. From 2015 to 2019, prices continued rising rapidly, particularly amongst properties designated for high density, with those increasing at a rate of 22.9 percent.

In real estate economics, land cost is traditionally somewhat elastic. While underlying land costs are generally informed by recent transactions within a submarket, projects that propose redevelopment of a property also factor in the residual land value — the amount a developer can afford to pay for the land when all other costs and revenues have been considered. Conventional thinking around residual land value suggests that while rents are high in San José, the high costs associated with construction would bring down the price of land. Land values should also take into account any increase in City fees and taxes. However, the above-mentioned analysis found that in San José there is “no apparent correlation between the sales price trends and the City’s land use and development fee regulatory actions affecting land. Rather the trends appear to primarily reflect market and economic cycles.”
A number of factors affect the relative high cost of land in San José:
• Long-term landholders may be less incentivized to sell because they maintain a low tax base on the property;
• Multigenerational or multiple owners can make consensus on selling difficult to reach; • In urban village areas, of which several are transitioning from primarily commercial to mixed use or residential, there may be properties already occupied by businesses that are paying good rent, and the owner is thus reluctant to sell; and • The perception of a strong real estate market, major employers moving in, and/or impending improvements, such as new transit and amenities, may create an expectation of higher future land values that the seller is willing to wait for.

In these instances, developers must either choose to pay over the residual land value for the property or look for other options. Since this analysis in 2019, data from CoStar, an online real estate database, shows that price growth slowed in the multifamily sector in 2020 at the onset of the pandemic. Due to the uncertainty of the market, the volume of sales was down in 2020 and 2021. Additionally, analysis conducted in 2022 by Century Urban, a City consultant, found that the median land price per multifamily unit in San José was $50,000 and the maximum was $125,000 based on 17 comparable data points. Given the volume of sales during the pandemic, many property owners seemed to have wanted to wait for more market certainty before selling, however, sales started to trend upwards in early 2022. With this recent data, there is reason to believe that land prices in San José continue to reflect market and economic cycles rather than any City actions affecting land.

Construction Costs. Construction costs have continued to increase and represent a major nongovernmental constraint on the supply of housing at all income levels in the City of San José.

According to interviews with developers of both market -rate and affordable units in the C ity,

78 construction costs rose 10 -12 percent from 2021 to 2022, due to increases in both labor costs and materials, such as lumber. Labor costs were already a significant contributor to construction costs prior to the pandemic and have continued to increase. The ongoing challenges in global supply chain have further exacerbated material costs.

The City has been conducting regular analyses of the cost of multifamily residential development and has issued two reports to date working with a consultant. A third update was completed in November 2022 by the City’s consultant, Century Urban. This analysis uses a variety of prototypical developments in submarkets across the City with different building types, and resulting data on construction costs are summarized in Table 48. The table also shows the costs to build a typical single- family home; this data was also developed by Century Urban.

SOURCE: Century Urban, prepared for City of San José 2022 Report on the Cost of Development.

Table 55: Constructions Costs for Multi-Family

MULTIFAMILY CONSTRUCTION *

AVERAGE
UNIT

SIZE (SF)
TOTAL
HARD
COSTS

PER UNIT
TOTAL

SOFT COSTS

PER UNIT
TOTAL
PER
SF
TOTAL

COST PER
UNIT **
Type I / Rental – Downtown 900 $688,800 $171,900 $956 $860,800 Type I / For Sale – Downtown 950 $797,400 $191,700 $1,041 $989,100 Type III / Rental – Central 900 $662,100 $216,300 $932 $838,400 Type III / Rental – West 900 $662,100 $213,500 $928 $835,600 Type III / Rental – North 900 $662,100 $186,800 $899 $808,900 Type V / Rental – Central 900 $552,900 $199,900 $836 $752,700 Type V / Rental – South & East 900 $552,900 $179,300 $813 $732,100 Type V / For Sale – South & East 1,150 $737,900 $233,500 $845 $971,400 Type V / For Sale – Central, West & North 1,150 $737,900 $228,600 $840 $966,500

79 SOURCE: Century Urban, prepared for Bard + Driskell for County Collaborative Group, 2022.

San José is at a unique disadvantage compared to other nearby cities. Rents remain high in San José, but are still lower than rents in some nearby cities. However, the City is still subject to the same construction costs as those jurisdictions. For market-rate development, this has been a major setback to production of new units in recent years. New market rate development has also been limited to specific areas where rent levels are sufficient to support new development and has resulted in uneven development patterns across the City. Increased construction costs are also a constraint on the production of affordable housing by increasing the size of the subsidy that must be provided by the city, county, or state. The layering on of these additional funding sources adds time, which adds costs due to escalating construction costs. Additionally, these new funding sources may add on additional requirements to the project that can take time incorporate or add additional expense.

Resident Opposition. As in many other cities in California and the United States, proposals for housing development in San José are often opposed by residents who raise various objections. These objections can be on procedural grounds (e.g., insufficient public consultation 31 or violation of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) 32) or concerns about project impacts (e.g., less parking and increased traffic33, increased crime, reduced property value, 34 etc.). This opposition can result in longer review periods, additional political intervention, and delayed construction through appeals after City approval. This in turn increases project risks and costs in multiple ways: it jeopardizes financing (private or public) that in turn affects the time value of money, and it pushes private developers toward more expensive projects with more favorable rates of return.35 It also often results in reduction in project unit delivery (either preemptively or due to backlash), eroding the ability of the

31 Ramona Giwargis, San José Mercury News, August 12, 2016, “San José council Oks controversial homeless housing project,” https://www.mercurynews.com/2016/06/28/san-José-council-oks-controversial-homeless-housing-project/. 32 Grace Hase, San José Mercury News, July 28, 2022, “San José: Residents sue city over impact a Whole Foods store would have in El Paseo shopping center redevelopment,” https://archive.ph/BrpNK 33 Emily Deruy, San José Mercury News, August 21, 2019, “San José senior housing faces backlash from neighbors,” https://www.mercurynews.com/2019/08/21/senior-housing-development-faces-backlash-from-neighbors/. 34 Art Duran, Change.org, “No To Homekey Proposal in D2: Residence Inn on San Ignacio Avenue,” https://www.change.org/p/no -to-homekey- proposal-in-d2-residence-inn-on-san-ignacio-avenue
35 Jenny Schuetz, Brookings, January 17, 2020, “Who’s to blame for high housing costs? It’s more complicated than you think,” https://www.brookings.edu/research/whos-to-blame-for-high-housing-costs-its-more-complicated-than-you-think/.

Table 56 – Constructions Costs for Single-Family Homes

SINGLE-FAMILY CONSTRUCTION AVERAGE
UNIT

SIZE (SF)
TOTAL
HARD
COSTS

PER UNIT
TOTAL

SOFT COSTS

PER UNIT
TOTAL
PER
SF
TOTAL

COST PER
UNIT
Single-Family - Small 2,600 $1,092,000 $365,000 $560 $1,457,000 Single-Family - Large 5,000 $2,625,000 $775,000 $680 $3,400,000

80 City to deliver on its affordable housing production goals. Therefore, significant and sustained opposition by residents is a constraint on new housing.

City Policies
General Plan . In November 2011, following significant community engagement, the City Council adopted the Envision San José 2040 General Plan, the blueprint for the city’s growth and development through 2040. The General Plan centers on 12 Major Strategies that reflect the community’s desire to see San José grow as a prominent city in the region, state and country. For future land use, the plan focuses growth into existing infill areas along transit, thus limiting sprawl while creating new, vibrant urban villages that provide enough homes for all ages and income levels. The General Plan influences housing in the City primarily through land use designations and the Land Use Map, which control where new homes can be built and at what density. Of the plan’s 23 land use designations, 11 allow for residential development.

The development of urban villages is the fifth of 12 Major Strategies embodied within the Envision San José 2040 General Plan. The urban villages concept is a policy framework to direct most new job and housing growth to occur within walkable and bike-frie ndly urban villages that have good access to transit and other existing infrastructure and facilities. The urban village strategy fosters revitalization of underutilized properties, densities that support transit use, bicycling, and walking, and mixed residential and employment uses that are attractive to an innovative workforce. The urban village strategy is a critical path to achieve multiple interconnected goals (e.g., environmental sustainability, transit supportive communities, fiscally sound city, etc .) and these areas also provide for significant residential growth capacity planned in the Envision San José General Plan 2040. Urban village planning is critical for the City to achieve residential growth envisioned in the General Plan.

The urban village planning process however can be a constraint. Urban village planning requires significant staff resources and advanced planning. Since the adoption of the General Plan in 2011, staff has planned 14 urban villages areas— roughly 1.2 every year. At this rate the City cannot reasonably expect to plan the remaining urban village areas (46) within the time frame of the current General Plan unless several changes are implemented to streamline the process. While housing development may proceed in unplanned urban villages through General Policies IP -5.10 and IP-5.12, these policies do not provide opportunities for residential and mixed -use residential development outside of one-hundred percent affordable developments and “Signature” (or outstanding/ catalyst) projects. Essentially, unplanned urban villages are not primed yet to facilitate residential development.

The total staff and consultant cost to prepare an urban village plan ranges from $350,000 to $850,0000, and the time to prepare ranges from 18 months to 2.5 years. Pursuant to General Plan Policy IP-5.15, staff is encouraged to “actively pursue outside fun ding opportunities for the Village planning process.” However, given the limited Planning and fiscal staff positions in the Department, as well as the complexity of administering federal and state grants, it is inefficient for the Department to seek grant funds to wholly support urban village planning processes. In practice, planners are spending too much time administering grants than engaging in real, land use planning.

Zoning. High -density residential development is allowed in Mixed-Use Neighborhoods, Mixed- Use Commercial, Urban Residential, Transit Residential, Transit Employment Residential Overlay, Urban

81 Village, and Downtown zones. Rezoning can be time-consuming requiring amendments to the Zoning Ordinance and a lengthy approval process. About, 94 percent of San José residential land is zoned for single-family homes.

Infrastructure and Impact Fees. Impact fees are charged to housing developers to pay for city infrastructure that will support the project, pay for parks, or other city services that protect the welfare of City residents. However, research reports that increases of impact fees over time is one factor feeding the expensive residential development in the Bay Area, which ranks the most expensive nationally. Construction costs, permitting fees, and impact fees are passed on to the consumer, driving up the cost of housing at all income levels.

Environmental Review. Environmental review can be a long, expensive process. If a developer is applying to rezone an area or parcel, an amendment to the General Plan or Zoning Ordinance is required, which is considered a project under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). The City completed program-level EIRs for many of its priority planned development areas in order to expedite the process, which helps reduce the overall cost.

Displacement
Despite a thriving and growing economy and decades of population growth, the most recent data indicates that Silicon Valley has lost population in the past few years, especially during the pandemic, mid-2020 to mid -2021, when the region lost 44,800 residen ts.36 In community outreach for this Consolidated Plan and engagement around the Housing Element and in prior community engagement around the Citywide Residential Anti-Displacement Strategy, City staff heard from many community members who want to continue to l ive in San José but worry about being priced out of the market, and who report that family and neighbors have already been displaced. A more detailed analysis of displacement can be found in the City’s Assessment of Fair Housing, Appendix B to the Housing Element.

36 2025 Silicon Valley Index, https://jointventure.org/images/stories/pdf/index2025-jvsv.pdf

82 MA-45 Non-Housing Community Development Assets - 24 CFR 92.215 (f)

1. Introduction

The City of San José is committed to boosting its community and economic development through services, policies, and incentives that help new, as well as already established, companies grow and thrive. It is dedicated to supporting a competitive economy that assists in increa sing prosperity for residents and businesses through catalyzing job creation, private investment, revenue generation, and talent attraction. The City’s Economic Development department provides four core services:

1. Business Development

2. Regional Workforce Development

3. Real Estate Services

4. Cultural Affairs

The business development services help companies locate, expand, and thrive in San José . Regional workforce development provides services to business and job seekers in San José and Santa Clara County. Real estate services help to manage the City’s real estate assets to support City projects and generate revenue. The office of cultural affairs promotes and develops the arts in San José and manages outdoor and special events.

Although the 201 9-2023 ACS data shows the unemployment rate of San José at 4.7 percent, more recent data from the State Employment Development Department’s Labor Market Information, January 2025 to be closer to 2.5 percent, just slightly above the County as a whole (2.4 percent).

2. Business Activity

Table 57 - Business Activity
Business by Sector Number
of
Workers
Number
of Jobs
Share of
Workers
%
Share of
Jobs
%
Jobs less
workers
%
Agriculture, Mining, Oil & Gas Extraction 3,724 497 1 0 -1 Arts, Entertainment, Accommodations 53,553 44,821 11 11 0 Construction 25,339 26,119 5 7 1
Education and Health Care Services 75,754 63,941 16 16 0 Finance, Insurance, and Real Estate 19,494 18,220 4 5 0 Information 25,958 14,373 6 4 -2
Manufacturing 74,743 53,935 16 14 -2
Other Services 15,746 13,653 3 4 0
Professional, Scientific, Management
Services 68,814 48,778 15 13 -2
Public Administration 0 0 0 0 0
Retail Trade 42,528 40,854 9 10 1
Transportation and Warehousing 9,227 8,610 2 2 0
Wholesale Trade 18,307 17,087 4 4 0
Total 433,187 350,888 -- -- --

83 3. Labor Force

Table 58 - Labor Force
Total Population in the Civilian Labor Force 566,833
Civilian Employed Population 16 years and over 540,505
Unemployment Rate 4.65
Unemployment Rate for Ages 16-24 12.11
Unemployment Rate for Ages 25-65 3.34

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Table 59 – Occupations by Sector
Occupations by Sector Number of People
Management, business and financial 190,669
Farming, fisheries and forestry occupations 17,704
Service 55,479
Sales and office 96,354
Construction, extraction, maintenance and
repair 36,095
Production, transportation and material
moving 25,180

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

4. Travel Time

Table 60 - Travel Time
Travel Time Number Percentage
< 30 Minutes 244,631 51%
30-59 Minutes 180,648 37%
60 or More Minutes 56,807 12%
Total 482,086 100%

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

5. Education:

Educational Attainment by Employment Status (Population 16 Years and Older)

Table 61 - Educational Attainment by Employment Status
Educational Attainment In Labor Force
Civilian
Employed
Unemployed Not in Labor
Force
Less than high school graduate 51,620 2,605 22,420
High school graduate (includes
equivalency) 67,800 3,545 19,849
Some college or Associate's degree 108,244 4,410 24,680 Bachelor's degree or higher 230,190 8,800 35,810

84 Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Educational Attainment by Age

Table 62 - Educational Attainment by Age
Age
18–24
yrs.
25–34
yrs.
35–44
yrs.
45–65
yrs.
65+ yrs.

Less than 9th grade 1,210 5,675 10,700 26,615 21,220
9th to 12th grade, no diploma 7,015 6,745 8,730 18,185 9,269 High school graduate, GED, or
alternative 23,840 25,240 22,165 43,789 26,540
Some college, no degree 36,945 27,839 21,965 44,500 21,880 Associate's degree 4,355 10,720 9,820 22,620 9,785
Bachelor's degree 14,240 53,434 41,205 64,750 26,810
Graduate or professional degree 2,000 35,959 35,410 44,190 17,904

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

Educational Attainment – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months

Table 63 – Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months
Educational Attainment Median Earnings in the Past 12 Months Less than high school graduate 30,065
High school graduate (includes equivalency) 35,719
Some college or Associate's degree 47,565
Bachelor's degree 81,588
Graduate or professional degree 120,767

Data Source: 2016-2020 ACS

6. Based on the Business Activity table above, what are the major employment sectors within your jurisdiction?

The Business Activity table shows that the top employment sectors in San José are Education and Health Care Services, and Manufacturing, which each account for 16 percent of the share of workers, and 16 and 13 percent, respectively, of the share of jobs in the area. These two sectors are followed closely by Professional, Scientific, and Management Services, which accounts for 1 5 percent of the share of workers, and 13 percent of the share of jobs.

As of 2024, one of the largest employers in San José was Cisco Systems, with approximately 7 ,500 local employees.
37 Cisco is a technology conglomerate that develops, manufactures, and sells networking hardware, telecommunications equipment, and other high -tech services and products.

Other major employers in San José include Adobe Inc., eBay Inc., Netapp Inc., Prime Materials, SAP Center, and Super Micro Computer Inc.38

37 https://www.bizjournals.com/sanJosé/subscriber-only/2025/01/03/largest-silicon-valley-employers.html 38 https://www.labormarketinfo.edd.ca.gov/majorer/countymajorer.asp?CountyCode=000085

85 7. Describe the workforce and infrastructure needs of the business community:

With two of the largest employment sectors in San José in Education and Health Care Services, and Professional, Scientific, and Management Services, there will be an increasing need for a highly educated workforce. In order to meet the demand for qualified employees to fill these positions, it is important that the City continues to ensure that its schools provide consistent, high-quality education for the residents. The City currently has a couple of business assistance programs that give businesses an incentive to keep business in San José. It offers the Store Activation Grants program that provides financial assistance to small, ground -floor businesses with two types of grants to activate vacant commercial storefronts and/or businesses wanting to improve their exteriors . 39 The Foreign Trade
Zone allows companies to delay, reduce, or eliminate customs duties on imported goods.

8. Describe any major changes that may have an economic impact, such as planned local or regional public or private sector investments or initiatives that have affected or may affect job and business growth opportunities during the planning period. Describe any needs for workforce development, business support or infrastructure these changes may create.

The City of San José has several pending development projects that will have an economic impact on the area once completed, including housing units, commercial use property, schools, senior facilities, office space, and public park areas. The addition of this infrastructure t o San José will help increase property values, create jobs, generate housing for more employees, and offer opportunities for private investment.

Some examples of projects that have already been approved or are under construction are the Bascom Station (Dick’s Center) Project, Communications Hill, and Downtown West. 40 Downtown West
makes up approximately 80 acres of the Diridon Station Area Plan. Although the project has been delayed, if market conditions improve and it moves forward, it would have significant implications for the surrounding area. It calls for 6,500,000 to 7,300,000 gross square feet (GSF) of office space, 3,000 to 5,900 new housing units, 300,000 to 500,000 GSF of active uses (retail, cultural, arts, etc.), 100,000 GSF of event space, up to 300 hotel rooms, and up to 800 rooms of limited -term corporate accommodations. The plan also includes infrastructure, utilities, and public space.

Bascom Station will include the construction of a 200,000 square foot office building, 590 residential units, and an alternative parking arrangement (tandem parking). Communications Hill will be a dense, highly urbanized, pedestrian -oriented residential ne ighborhood with industrial park uses. The proposed project includes the development of approximately 2,200 residential units, up to 67,500 square feet of commercial/retail uses, 1.44 million square feet of industrial park uses, and other open space.

These projects above fall under the fifth of the twelve major strategies embodied within the Envision San José 2040 General Plan -- the development of urban villages. The villages are walkable, bicycle - friendly, transit-oriented mixed-use settings that provide both housing and jobs. 41 39 https://www.sjeconomy.com/how-we-help/programs-and-services 40 https://www.sanJoséca.gov/your-government/departments-offices/planning-building-code-enforcement/planning-division/major- development-projects
41 City of San José, “Urban Villages,” under Citywide Planning, https://www.sanJoséca.gov/your-government/departments/planning-building- code-enforcement/planning-division/citywide-planning/urban-villages.

86 9. How do the skills and education of the current workforce correspond to employment opportunities in the jurisdiction?

The data displayed in the “Educational Attainment by Age” table shows the education level of the workforce of San José by age. The percentages by education level for San José residents that are 18 years of age or older are as follows:

• Less than 9th grade: 8 percent
• 9th-12th grade, no diploma: 6 percent
• High school graduate, GED, or alternative: 18 percent • Some college, no degree: 19 percent
• Associate’s degree: 7 percent
• Bachelor’s degree: 25 percent
• Graduate or professional degree: 17 percent

San José is in the heart of Silicon Valley and is a large producer of technology. Due to the technical nature of the work, these companies often require higher education for their employees.

10. Describe any current workforce training initiatives, including those supported by Workforce Investment Boards, community colleges and other organizations. Describe how these efforts will support the jurisdiction's Consolidated Plan.

One of San José’s workforce training initiative is called Work2Future, which is the local administrative arm of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act (WIOA) that operates America's Job Center of California One-Stops. Located in San José and Gilroy, these centers serve the areas of San José , Campbell, Morgan Hill, Los Altos Hills, Gilroy, Los Gatos, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County.42 The US Department of Labor is the main funding stream for the centers, but other sources include State, local, other federal grants, and corporate support.

Work2Future’s mission is to assist businesses and individuals in meeting the workforce demands and opportunities of a global economy with the goal of strengthening the economic base in San José and Santa Clara County by increasing employment opportunities and job retention for all residents.

Each Work2Future one-stop center offers services and resources that:

• Help job seekers obtain the skills and training they need to find a job • Assist businesses in meeting their workforce and economic development needs • Enable youth to jump-start their career with skills training and job search assistance

One of the ways that Work2Future helps job seekers is by providing talent coaches, who help individuals navigate through the available services to develop an individualized. Businesses receive tools and resources to help them succeed by focusing on four ma in areas: employment services, business development, access to capital, and industry trends and information. The Youth Employment and Training program helps 18-24 year-olds secure employment through intensive case management, training services, educational programs, and supportive services. Work2Future also provides labor market information that gives the community insight into specific industries, occupations, and area employers.

42 Work to Future, http://www.work2future.biz/.

87 11. Does your jurisdiction participate in a Comprehensive Economic Development Strategy (CEDS)?

No.

12. If so, what economic development initiatives are you undertaking that may be coordinated with the Consolidated Plan? If not, describe other local/regional plans or initiatives that impact economic growth.

Not applicable.

13. Discussion

Please see above.

88 MA-50 Needs and Market Analysis Discussion

1. Are there areas where households with multiple housing problems are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")

As illustrated in the Needs Assessment, as households with higher incomes tend to have fewer housing problems, such as overpayment on housing costs. Households with housing problems are likely occurring in census tracts that are mostly occupied by low - to moderate-income households.

Concentration of low- to moderate-income (LMI) households is defined by HUD as census tracts where 51 percent or more of households in the tract earn low to moderate income. See Map 2 below for concentrations of LMI households.

Table 64 - Housing Problems by Income Category
% of Area Median
Income
Number of Households
Experiencing Housing Problems
Number of Households
Experiencing Severe Housing
Problems
0-30 41,580 34,070
30-50 28,330 18,680
50-80 29,310 12,330
80-100 12,800 4,435

Data Source: 2017-2021 CHAS

89 Map 2. Source: U. S. Census, American Fact Finder 2025

90 2. Are there any areas in the jurisdiction where racial or ethnic minorities or low-income families are concentrated? (include a definition of "concentration")

Please see Map 1 of minority concentrations in NA-30, Disproportionally Greater Need discussion. A minority concentration is defined as a non-White population of 51 percent or more.

3. What are the characteristics of the market in these areas/neighborhoods?

As previously stated in MA -05, San José is one of the country’s most expensive residential markets.

According to the 2016-2020 CHAS data, there are 124,010 units that are affordable to households earning between lower incomes, but there 14 2,010 households earning lower incomes, creating a need of at least 18,000 affordable units.

Table 65 - Units Needed by Income Category
Households
earning
Renter and Owner
Affordable Units
Households Units Needed
30% HAMFI 11,770 54,270 42,500
50% HAMFI 35,575 42,060 6,485
80% HAMFI 76,665 45,680 (30,985)

Data Source: 2016-2020 CHAS

4. Are there any community assets in these areas/neighborhoods?

Assets in these areas include the following:

1. Community and recreation centers

2. Senior centers

3. Hospitals

4. Fire stations

5. Public libraries

6. Medical facilities

7. Transit centers

8. Parks

5. Are there other strategic opportunities in any of these areas?

There are many commercial high opportunity areas in these neighborhoods including Urban Villages.

The Envision San José 2040 General Plan lists Urban Villages as one of 12 major strategies, designed for optimal pedestrian and transit oriented mixed use tha t also will provide both housing and jobs.

The urban village strategy carries out the following43:

43 Envision San José 2040 General Plan, City of San José.

91 •Engagement of village area residents in the urban village planning process •Mixed residential and employment activities that are attractive to an innovative workforce •Revitalization of underutilized properties that have access to existing infrastructure •Densities that support transit use, bicycling, and walking •High-quality urban design

92 MA-60 Broadband Needs of Housing occupied by Low - and Moderate-Income Households- 91.210(a))(4), 91.310(a)(2)

1. Describe the need for broadband wiring and connections for households, including low- and moderate-income households and neighborhoods.

Broadband access is essential for education, employment, healthcare, civic engagement, and everyday services. While basic broadband that meets the Federal Communications Commission (FCC)of at least 100/20 Mbps speed, is widely available across San José according to the FCC’s National Broadband Map, affordability and infrastructure challenges persist, especially in low- and moderate-income communities.

The broadband market in San José is largely dominated by established wireline carriers such as Comcast Xfinity for cable and AT&T for fiber and DSL, raising concerns about the lack of competitive pricing. Households in mobile homes and multifamily housing are most impacted by inadequate broadband infrastructure and limited options for service providers.

The U.S. Census’ 2018-2023 American Community Survey estimates that 39,200 San José households lack reliable home internet; or approximately 116,800 individuals. 39% are seniors; 23% lack a high school degree or equivalent; 42% have an annual income below $35,000; and 27% earn between $35,000 and $75,000.

More than 40% of respondents to the Consolidated Plan Community Survey said they did not feel that low- and moderate-income areas have adequate broadband access. Many survey respondents said that there are common/pressing broadband internet problems related to unreliable access and slow service. However, according to survey respondents, the primary problem with broadband internet access is that it is too costly.

Some municipal, public facilities, and social service facilities provide free indoor Wi-Fi internet service for the public and/or customers within San José, including San José Public Libraries, San José Convention Center, and San José International Airport. The City provides free outdoor Wi-Fi in the downtown core area, seven community centers, nine libraries, and eight parks. Additionally, Community Wi-Fi provided in partnership with East Side Union High School District (ESUHSD) is now fully constructed serving over 200,000 users in eight ESUHSD attendance areas. However, outdoor Wi-Fi initiatives face sustainability challenges due to high costs for maintenance, operations, and upgrades.

The City’s Digital Inclusion & Broadband Strategy is a comprehensive plan to expand digital access and affordability through sustained investment, innovative public-private partnerships, and strong community engagement. One of the key initiatives is the Digital Inclusion Grant Program, which supports the development of Tech Hubs within multi-service centers operated by local organizations in low-income areas. These hubs provide free internet, devices, culturally tailored digital navigation support, and skill-building classes to empower residents in education, employment, health, and civic engagement.

93 2. Describe the need for increased competition by having more than one broadband Internet service provider serve the jurisdiction.

The lack of high-speed internet access can result from both infrastructure unavailability and adoption constraints, such as affordability and a lack of digital skills. While the City has good coverage for basic internet speeds, there is a lack of competition among providers. According to the FCC’s National Broadband Map, currently, 99% of the City has access to basic speeds of 100/20 Mbps, but 68% of residents have only one or two service options. When it comes to ultra-high- speed internet (1000/500 Mbps), coverage is limited to 36% of the City and is only available through fiber connections. According to the Community Survey, many respondents said that broadband access could be improved by lowering rates, improving fiber optics, and breaking up large companies.

94 MA-65 Hazard Mitigation- 91.210(a)(5), 91.310(a)(3)

1. Describe the jurisdiction’s increased natural hazard risks associated with climate change.

San José faces several increased natural hazard risks, including extreme heat, wildfires, and flooding. Rising temperatures and more frequent heat waves threaten public health, particularly for vulnerable populations, as seen increasing hotter summers. On September 6, 2022 the hottest temperature ever recorded in San José, California was 109°F. Wildfires, fueled by hotter and drier conditions, have become more frequent, with the 2020 SCU Lightning Complex fires burning over 390,000 acres and blanketing the city in hazardous smoke. Flooding is another growing threat, as demonstrated by the 2017 Coyote Creek flood, which displaced over 14,000 residents. Severe storms, including atmospheric rivers like those in early 2023, have caused widespread flooding, downed trees, and power outages.

In response to these traumatic events, the City has developed Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) Support Annexes for the facilitating evacuation, especially for supporting populations lacking access and other functional needs. In 2019, The City of San José adopted an Emergency Operations respond to disasters and emergencies and integrates lessons learned during a variety of emergencies, including COVID-19, public safety power shutoffs, wildfires, atmospheric river events, and localized flooding. The plan continues to be updated every five years.

2. Describe the vulnerability to these risks of housing occupied by low- and moderate-income households based on an analysis of data, findings, and methods.

Land development on floodplains is more affordable than in areas with lower risk, making it the only viable option for many low- and moderate-income (LMI) families. However, this also exposes them to higher flood risks and costly flood insurance.

The Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) recognizes floods as the most frequent and costly natural disaster. FEMA has identified that San José has approximately 38,000 parcels at risk of flooding.
44 The city is preparing for potential flooding from Coyote Creek and other waterways, particularly following the severe flooding that occurred during the 2017 Coyote Creek flood. Coyote Creek runs along Highway 101 and through census tracts on the city’s east side, where much of the housing is occupied by LMI families. Similarly, the Guadalupe River poses a flood risk as it flows through northern and central San José, including areas near State Route 87 and Interstate 880, which also contain LMI housing.

To address these risks, the City of San José and the Santa Clara Valley Water District developed the Joint Emergency Action Plan for Severe Storm and Flood Response.

44 https://s3.us-west-1.amazonaws.com/valleywater.org.us-west-1/s3fs- public/2022%20Final%20Joint%20Action%20Plan%20Volume%201%20-%20Public%20Version.pdf

95 Strategic Plan
SP-05 Overview

1. Strategic Plan Overview

The Consolidated Plan allocates federal entitlement dollars according to low- and moderate-income (LMI) census tracts.

San José remains one of the most expensive cities in the nation to rent or buy a home and remains significantly out of reach for extremely low-, very low-, and low-income residents as well as some moderate-income and middle-income households. Additionally, the market remains quite challenging for residents in protected class categories.

Informed by data, stakeholder consultations, and community surveys, the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan identifies the following strategic priorities: affordable housing affordability, addressing homelessness, and revitalizing neighborhoods through public facility and infrastructure improvements, along with enhanced public services.

The following priorities are established for the Five-Year Consolidated Plan:

1. Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness – Expand housing access and self-sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

2. Increase Housing Affordability – Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing housing.

3. Strengthen Communities – Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

Given these three priorities, program activities that could be funded are further detailed in Table 60.

96 SP-10 Geographic Priorities – 91.215 (a)(1)

1. Geographic Area

Not applicable. The City has not established specific target areas to focus the investment of funds.

2.General Allocation Priorities

3.Describe the basis for allocating investments geographically within the jurisdiction (or within the EMSA for HOPWA)

One of the listed strategies in the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element, required under California Government Code sections 65580-65589, is to focus the City's investments on increasing equity in racially/ethnically concentrated neighborhoods with extremely low-incomes as defined by HUD. This strategy is in accordance with California Government Code section 8899.50, the state’s obligation to affirmatively further fair housing, by engaging community members and seeking a common data- informed approach across initiatives.

Staff will use this information and prioritize investing federal CDBG funds and other funds, to the extent legally permissible, in capital projects and to deliver services to areas with a high proportion of lower-income residents.

In 2024, the City's CDBG internal Notice of Funding Availability for infrastructure projects in other City departments continued to prioritize emphasizing areas in San José that are recognized as R/ECAP areas by HUD. Proposals will be included in the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan which will be brought forward in spring 2025. Projects include updating a neighborhood tot lot and replacing traffic signals with accessible traffic signals.

97 SP-25 Priority Needs - 91.215(a)(2)

1. Priority Needs

Table 66– Priority Needs Summary
Priority Need Priority
Level
Description Population Goal Basis for
Relative
Priority
Reduce
Unsheltered
Homelessness

High Provide mental
health services, at-
risk youth,
substance abuse
treatment, Domestic
violence support,
support services for
seniors (meals,
transportation),
Homeless
prevention, one-
time rent/utility
payments, legal
assistance,
Homeless services,
housing education

Homeless:

Chronic
Homelessness
Individuals
Families with
Children
Mentally Ill
Chronic
Substance
Abuse
Veterans
Persons with
HIV/Aids
Victims of
Domestic
Violence
Unaccompanied
Youth

Increase housing
opportunities and
self-sufficiency for
homeless populations
and assist in the
prevention of
homelessness of at-
risk individuals and
families.

Input from
community
and
stakeholder
outreach and
surveys

98 Increase Housing
Affordability
High Rehabilitation of
existing affordable
housing stock and
new construction,
improving
accessibility
(ADA), provide
tenant-based rental
assistance, and
security deposit
assistance

Extremely low,
very low, and
low-income
individuals and
families
Large
households,
small families,
seniors, and
disabled
household types
Emergency
shelter,
transitional and
supportive
housing for
homeless
individuals and
families
Develop and
preserve affordable
housing opportunities
and expand housing
access for residents
Input from
community
and
stakeholder
outreach
Input
gathered
through
surveys and
community
forums
supported by
data from
the Needs
Assessment
was
evaluated to
determine
the priority
needs
Strengthen
Communities
High Grassroots outreach
skills development
and neighborhood
leadership
development.

City wide Enhance community
well-being and
improved the
residents’ quality of
life
Input from
community
and
stakeholder
outreach
Input
gathered
through
surveys and
community
forums.

99 SP-30 Influence of Market Conditions – 91.215 (b)

1. Influence of Market Conditions
Table 67 – Influence of Market Conditions
Affordable
Housing Type
Market Characteristics that will Influence
the Use of Funds Available for Housing Type
Tenant Based
Rental Assistance
(TBRA)
According to the CHAS 2016-2020 data, approximately 54,264 households are extremely low-income yet there are only 11,770 rental units available to such households. San José's persistently high rents are driven by limited housing supply and strong demand. Rents have risen 20% between 2020 to 2024.

TBRA for Non-
Homeless Special
Needs
As of December 31, 2023, a total number of 7,224 individuals diagnosed with HIV had been reported to the County. Of these, 5,102 (71%) were diagnosed with AIDS. Persons with HIV/AIDS sometimes face misunderstanding about their illness that affect their access to housing. A survey was administered to 908 unsheltered and sheltered individuals experiencing homelessness in the weeks following the PIT county in January 2022, and 1% of respondents reported having HIV.

Approximately 94,971 people with physical limitations reside in the City of San José, according to the 2023 5-year ACS. However, there is a significant gap in housing appropriate for this population. Given the range of physical limitations, housing needs vary widely, including features such as wheelchair ramps, grab bars, and specialized bathroom designs. Community feedback indicates a shortage of appropriate housing and limited resources to locate and secure such accommodations.

100

Table 67 – Influence of Market Conditions
Affordable
Housing Type
Market Characteristics that will Influence
the Use of Funds Available for Housing Type
New Unit
Production
There are 54,264 households who are extremely low-income, but only 11,770 (21%) rental units affordable extremely low-income households. The problem is less severe for households earning very low-incomes; there are 42,060 very low-income households, and 35,575 (84%) units affordable to them.

According to the City of San José’s FY 2022-23 to 2027-28 Affordable Housing Investment Plan and Pipeline Report, the City has funded the development of approximately 21,000 affordable rental apartments since 1987. Over the next five years, over 2,000 new affordable homes are expected to complete construction. There are around 9,700 affordable homes in the pipeline that may begin construction within the next five years. According to The Gap, a 2025 report published by the National Low Income Housing Coalition, there are just 33 homes available for every 100 extremely low-income households in the San José-Sunnyvale-Santa Clara metro area.

In the City’s latest Annual Progress Report reported to the California Department of Housing and Community Development, housing units permitted reflect market forces that have favored the development of above-market housing. While development feasibility is particularly challenging in early 2025, production of affordable housing is typically far below market-rate housing. In that cycle, only 25% of the housing allocation in the extremely low- and very low-income combined category was permitted, 17% for low-income, 60% for moderate-income, and 117% for incomes above moderate.

Rehabilitation There is a need for rehabilitation of renter and owner households in the City of San José. Based on the provided definition of “conditions”, more than one-half of renters (63%), and more than one-third of owners (31%), are experiencing one or more of these conditions. The 2023 5-year American Community Survey (ACS) shows that approximately 250,115 units in San José were built before 1980. Data from the 2016-2020 Comprehensive Housing Affordability Strategy (CHAS) shows that 44% of total households are occupied by low-/moderate- income persons. This means 142,004 households may have an increased risk of lead-based paint, which is common in older housing with low rents.

101

Table 67 – Influence of Market Conditions
Affordable
Housing Type
Market Characteristics that will Influence
the Use of Funds Available for Housing Type
Acquisition,
including
preservation
Severe cost burden (cost burden greater than 50 percent of a household’s gross income) is experienced by 45,909 lower-income households representing 14 percent of total households.

Most of the local population that is vulnerable to displacement lives in rental housing that is older and naturally lower-cost. These types of properties are at risk of redevelopment. Some older properties also are appropriate for financial repositioning, rehabilitation, and increased rents that are unaffordable to existing tenants. Much of San José’s low-cost housing stock is naturally occurring rather than deed-restricted, as is the case in most of the country. In 2021, the most recent year of available data, roughly 68,000 San José households at or below 60% of AMI were living in units with affordable rents. 47,000, or 69 percent, of these units were naturally occurring, without any deed restrictions on the units (source: Public Use Microdata Survey & National Housing Preservation Database). Without protection for these households, they may experience increased rents and be vulnerable to physical and/or economic displacement.

102

SP-35 Anticipated Resources - 91.215(a)(4), 91.220(c)(1,2)

1. Introduction

The amount of federal entitlement funding saw a steady decrease in funding in the five-year period from fiscal years (FY) 2020-2025.

Table 68 – Allocations for 2020-2024
FY 20 FY 21 FY 22 FY 23 FY 24 Total
CDBG $8,947,319 $8,761,415 $8,454,606 $8,350,201 $7,883,242 $42,396,783 HOME $3,319,683 $3,221,675 $3,564,527 $3,380,549 $2,665,376 $16,151,810 ESG $778,209 $763,052 $747,341 $743,071 $733,895 $3,765,568 HOPWA $1,440,393 $1,553,405 $1,652,667 $1,797,713 $1,801,081 $8,245,259 TOTAL $14,485,604 $14,299,547 $14,419,141 $14,271,534 $13,083,594 $70,559,420

103

Table 69 – Anticipated Resources
Program Source
of
Funds
Uses
of
Funds
Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expecte
d
Amount
Availabl
e
Remain
der of
ConPlan
$
Narrative
Description Annual
Allocati
on: $
Progra
m
Income:
$
Prior
Year
Resourc
es: $
Total:
$
CDBG Public
Federal
Home
Repair
Progra
m

Commu
nity
Develo
pment
Improv
ement
Progra
m-
Constru
ction
and
Rehab
Projects

Public
Service

Adminis
trative
and
Plannin
g

Microe
nterpris
e
Progra
m
Childcar
e
$7,489,23
2 This program
funds various
nonprofit
agencies and
other city
departments
to implement
services that
benefit low-
and moderate-
income
persons,
resolve slum
and blight
concerns, or
address
community
development
needs.

104

HOME Public
Federal
General
Adminis
tration
(include
s
Housing
activitie
s, and
city
staff
HOME
adminis
tration
activitie
s)

Tenant-
Based
Rental
Assista
nce
(project
delivery
costs
and
adminis
trative
costs)

Home
Repair
Progra
m
$2,522,60
7 This program is
designed
exclusively to
preserve
affordable
housing for
low-income
households.

ESG Public
Federal
Adminis
tration

Emerge
ncy
Shelter,
Outreac
h, and
HMIS
$696,417 This program is
designed to
identify
sheltered and
unsheltered
homeless
persons, as
well as those
at risk of
homelessness,
and provide
the services
necessary to
help them
quickly regain
stability in
permanent
housing.

105

HOPWA Public
Federal
City
Adminis
tration
and
Plannin
g

Sponso
r
Adminis
tration

Tenant-
based
Rental
Assista
nce &
Support
ive
Service
s
$1,711,02
7 The program is
exclusively
dedicated to
the housing
needs of
people living
with HIV/AIDS.

2. Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied

Entitlement Funds

Leveraging HUD resources allows the City to bring in local, State, and other resources to combine with federal financial resources to maximize the reach and impact of the City’s HUD-funded programs. The following are either HUD or City -required matching requirements for the four federal housing and community development programs:

• In both the CDBG and HOPWA programs, the City requires subrecipients to contribute at least 20 percent of the program/activity/service cost from non -federal sources (that is, $1 of non - federal funds for every $5 of federal funds).
• In the HOME program, HUD requires entitlement cities to contribute at least 25 percent of the program/activity/service cost from non -federal sources (that is, $1 of non -federal funds for every $4 of federal funds).
• In the ESG program, there is a one-to-one match (that is, $1 of non-federal funds for every $1 of ESG funds).

State Housing and Community Development Sources

In addition to federal resources, the State of California has provided funding for affordable housing development, transit -oriented development, special needs housing, and infrastructure. However, over the last few years, resources have either been depleted or eliminated.

The following is a list of State funding sources that the City has either accessed in the past or seeks to access in the future:

106

• Low-Income Housing Tax Credit Program: administers both federal and State programs that encourage private investment in affordable rental housing. • Homekey: A statewide effort to sustain and expand housing for persons experiencing homelessness or at risk of homelessness.
• Transit-Oriented Development Fund: supports dense development and affordable housing near public transportation.
• Affordable Housing and Sustainable Communities (AHSC) Program: funding for transit - oriented affordable housing development and transportation-related infrastructure. • Veterans Housing and Homelessness Prevention (VHHP) Program: new construction of rental homes as well as supportive services for low-income and homeless veterans. • Mental Health Services Act (MHSA) funds: State funds administered at the county level to serve low-income mentally ill clients.
• Housing Related Parks Program: Competitive funding for Parks that support affordable housing projects.

County and Local Housing and Community Development Sources

There are a variety of Countywide and local resources that support housing and community development programs. Some of these programs offer assistance to local affordable housing developers and community organizations while others provide assistance directly to individuals.

These resources are discussed below:

• Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund: Repayments from the Housing Department's $675 million loan portfolio, originally funded by former redevelopment affordable housing funds, are reused to finance a variety of affordable housing programs for lower -income households.
• The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance, Chapter 5.08 of the San José Municipal Code, was adopted on January 12, 2010. The Inclusionary Housing Ordinance requires that, in market - rate developments of 20 or more units, 15 percent of the units be made affordable to income eligible buyers or renters. Although the Ordinance was operative on January 1, 2013, its implementation was delayed by court challenges.
• City of San José Housing Trust Fund (HTF): provides ongoing funding for housing and support programs that seek to address homelessness, in part by creating a vehicle eligible to compete for outside funding sources.
• Affordable Housing Impact Fee Program: in November 2014, the City established the Affordable Housing Impact Fee Program, to be levied on market -rate rental housing developments, excluding developments that qualify for pipeline status and other exemptions.

Implementation of the Affordable Housing Impact Fee (AHIF) Program is successfully underway.
• City of San José General Fund: The City’s General Fund is used to supplement services to homelessness and at risk of homelessness programs.
• City of San José Measure E: Measure E was placed on the ballot by City Council in 2019 and approved by voters on March 3, 2020. It enacted a Real Property Transfer Tax, which is imposed on property transfers of $2 million or more. Revenues generated by Measure E provide funding for general City services, including affordable housing for seniors, veterans, disabled, and low-income families; and helping families who are homeless move in to shelters or permanent housing.

107

• City of San José Housing Authority Litigation Award (HALA): The City established a new local funding stream in HALA, which will be used to provide safe and sanitary housing for low income households within the jurisdiction of the Housing Authority. • Veterans Affairs. OSH is making available services commitments for vulnerable populations. • Measure A – Affordable Housing Bond Fund: In November 2016, the voters of Santa Clara County passed Measure A, a $950 million affordable housing bond measure. Measure A funds the development of permanent affordable housing for the County’s most vulnerable populations, including homeless, veterans, disabled, seniors, foster youth and others. • Housing Authority: Acting on behalf of the City of San José Housing Authority, the City contracts with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) to administer and manage the Section 8 Voucher program and public housing programs within San José . The SCCHA receives federal funding to run the programs below:

o Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program: rental assistance to low-income households. o Family Self -Sufficiency Program: employment assistance program for Section 8 participants.
o Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH): housing assistance for homeless veterans. o The Family Unification Program: voucher assistance for families who have been separated due to a lack of adequate housing.
o Non-Elderly Disabled (NED) Vouchers: voucher program to allow non -elderly disabled people to transition out of care-giving institutions.
o Moderate Rehabilitation Program: project -based rental assistances for low -income families.

The SCCHA plays a direct role in developing affordable housing units. Acting as a nonprofit housing developer, the Housing Authority applies for funds from the City and a variety of state, federal, and private sources for its various development projects. The City also partners with the Housing Authority through Project-based vouchers.

3. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan

The City is exploring opportunities to develop affordable housing on public and surplus lands, such as with the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), which owns land in transit -rich locations.

The City also continues to review opportunities to purchase surplus land from other public agencies to meet its housing and community development goals.

4. Discussion

See discussion above.

108

SP-40 Institutional Delivery Structure – 91.215(k)

1. Explain the institutional structure through which the jurisdiction will carry out its consolidated plan including private industry, non-profit organizations, and public institutions.

Table 70 – Institutional Delivery Structure
Responsible Entity Responsible Entity
Type
Role Geographic Area
Served
City of San José
Housing Department
Government Affordable housing—
rental assistance and
minor home repair

Homelessness
response-Transitional
and Supportive
housing

Community
development: public
facility improvements

Community
development: public
services

Community
development:
microenterprise
program
City wide
County of Santa
Clara – Office of
Supportive Housing
Continuum of Care Homelessness City of San José and
County of Santa Clara
Santa Clara County
Housing Authority
Public Housing
Authority
Section 8
administration
City of San José and
County of Santa Clara

2.Assess of Strengths and Gaps in the Institutional Delivery System

Strengths

The City of San José partners with the business community, other government agencies such as the County of Santa Clara, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, non -profit organizations that provide housing assistance and public services, faith-based organizations, the Continuum of Care, and collaborates interdepartmentally to carry out goals and strategies of the Consolidated Plan. When possible, the City also uses various means to grant City owned land for the purposes of providing affordable housing units.

109

In addition, the City has a variety of leveraging sources which include but are not limited to the following:

• Inclusionary Housing Ordinance (IHO)
• Affordable Housing Impact Fee
• The Housing Trust Fund-respond to impacts of homelessness and supports the Continuum of Care
• General Fund
• Santa Clara County Housing Authority

Further, the City has made efforts in the efficiency and improvement of the institutional delivery structure in several ways:

• Regular quarterly meetings between entitlement jurisdictions at the CDBG Coordinators Meeting and Regional Housing Working Group
• Developing joint jurisdiction RFPs and project review committees, to take advantages of cost and operational efficiency as a result of economy of scales. In 2016, the City released a joint NOFA with the County of Santa Clara for the development of low-income housing. • Coordination on project management for projects funded by multiple jurisdictions.

Gaps

Access to multiple services is challenging to many in need. Transportation is a need for individuals and families that must use a variety of services to sustain important necessities for not only their lives, but to obtain and retain housing. Persons in need often get referred to services that are in locations that require access to transportation.

As noted, there is a substantial lack of funding for affordable housing, and there is a significant need for facilities to house people experiencing homelessness . Funding for affordable housing and other needs is primarily sourced from government at the local, State, or federal levels or from philanthropy channeled through non-profit organizations specializing in the construction of affordable housing.

There is a continued need for housing education and enforcement for renters. Despite ongoing efforts, there is still potential for unequal access to housing. Working with housing providers to provide workshops to educate the public, including landlords, realtors, non -profit agencies, and others about fair housing laws and regulations, continues to be needed.

3.Availability of services targeted to homeless persons and persons with and mainstream services

110

Table 71 - Homeless Prevention Services Summary
Homelessness Prevention
Services
Available in the
Community
Targeted to
Homeless
Targeted to People
with HIV
Homelessness Prevention Services
Counseling/Advocacy X X X
Legal Assistance X X X
Mortgage Assistance X
Rental Assistance X X X
Utilities Assistance X X X
Street Outreach Services
Law Enforcement X X
Mobile Clinics X X
Other Street Outreach Services X X X
Supportive Services
Alcohol & Drug Abuse X X X
Child Care X X
Education X X X
Employment and Employment
Training
X X X
Healthcare X X X

HIV/AIDS X X X
Life Skills X X X
Mental Health Counseling X X X
Transportation X X X
Other
Other

4. Describe how the service delivery system including, but not limited to, the services listed above meet the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth)

As discussed above, numerous Santa Clara County agencies and various organizations in the County provide services to individuals and families experiencing homelessness , and those at risk of homelessness. Services provided by the County include but are not limited to housing, healthcare, food, benefits to recipients of Supplemental Security Income (SSI), school assistance services to school aged children (such as transportation and school supplies ), counseling, drug and alcohol rehabilitation, youth programs , financial assistance to veterans and their families for medical and housing, legal assistance for eviction and other housing related issues. Various non -profit organizations provide services including but not limited to shelter services, supportive housi ng, and transitional housing.

In addition to agencies and organizations in place to serve homeless populations, the Continuum of Care (CoC) of the County of Santa Clara is composed of a broad group of stakeholders committed to and preventing homelessness. The key CoC responsibilities a re ensuring community -wide implementation of planning efforts to reduce unsheltered homelessness, as well as ensuring programmatic and smooth effectiveness of the entire system of services available in the region.

111

5. Describe the strengths and gaps of the service delivery system for special needs population and persons experiencing homelessness, including, but not limited to, the services listed above

A lack of funding to construct much-needed affordable housing is a significant system gap. In addition, there is a lack of enough service providers to address the level of need, which also requires funding. business sector, and non-profit and philanthropy to leverage resources.

6. Provide a summary of the strategy for overcoming gaps in the institutional structure and service delivery system for carrying out a strategy to address priority needs

Encourage better coordination among service providers to better serve those in need.

The City benefits from a strong jurisdictional network of housing and community development partners, such as the Regional Housing Working Group, the CoC, and the San José Silicon Valley Workforce Investment Network. To improve intergovernmental and private sector cooperation, the City will continue to participate with other local jurisdictions and developers in sharing information and resources.

The City of San José ’s Housing Department has developed the Homelessness Response Framework, which uses a Coordinated Assessment System , which begins with an Outreach Team that is the first point of entry for the unsheltered homeless population to the system. At the outset of outreach, obtaining basic needs are facilitated. Individuals experiencing homelessness are then added to the Coordinated A ssessment System and matched with the appropriate housing program. Housing programs are coordinated with each other and include client referral to the following:

• Interim Housing, which provides temporary housing and site-based services, and is effective for certain homeless sub-populations.
• Permanent Supportive Housing, which provides long-term rental subsidies and intensive case management for households with disabilities and special needs. • Rapid Rehousing System, which p rovides time -limited subsidies and supportive services to households that can achieve economic self-sufficiency within the program term.

Other Actions to Overcome Gaps in the Institutional Structure and Delivery System

• Continue to support the maintenance of federal entitlement programs such as the CDBG Program, ESG, HOPWA, HOME, Section 8, Section 202, and Section 811 programs. • Grow new partnerships with re -entry programs, food programs, legal services, tenant protections, etc.
• Foster existing partnerships with the County of Santa Clara, local governments, the business sector, and non-profit and philanthropic partners to leverage available resources and bring in new funding streams.
• Increase funding and resources for supportive and affordable housing, specifically for extremely low-income households and streamline access-funding includes Measure E, HEAP, CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, ESG.

112

• Pilot/invest in alternatives to traditional rental assistance, e.g., shared housing, board and care.
• Provide housing subsidies with more flexible eligibility criteria and term of assistance. • Develop programs to address higher needs populations. • Provide more population -specific programs and services that meet their unique needs and programs for people that have difficulty accessing housing and services (e.g. undocumented; criminal history).
• Develop programs that meet the needs of those not prioritized for or not likely to receive a referral to Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) or Rapid Re-housing (RRH). • Increase the capacity and diversity of temporary housing options. • More oversight and monitoring of the Coordinated Assessment System. • Provide community education on available resources and services. • Adjust tax and land use policies to increase housing stock and better address affordability of housing.
• Modify development rules to permit affordable housing that is less costly and built more efficiently.
• Ensure access to adequate income (e.g. living wages) and education through public policy and collaboration with private sectors and partner with schools to provide educational and vocational opportunities and incentivize, support, remove constraints to hiring of people who are unhoused or in housing programs, including in the supportive housing system • Better coordination, data collection, and data sharing between safety net system and the criminal justice system and the homelessness system of care • Educate the broader community, including funders and community leaders, about realities of homelessness.
• Bring more services to unsheltered people through increased street outreach and mobile services and improve and expand communication about available services and programs to people who are unsheltered.

113

Table 72 – Goals summary
Sort
Order
Goal Name Start
Year
End
Year
Category Geographic
Area
Needs
Addressed
Funding Goal Outcome
Indicator
1 Reduce
Unsheltered
Homelessness
2025 2030 Homeles
sness
Non-
Homeles
s Special
Needs
N/A Homelessn
ess

CDBG:
$1,650,000
ESG:
$2,000,000

Homeless citywide
outreach,
programs

HMIS data systems
support

2 Increase
Housing
Affordability
2025 2030 Increase
Housing
Affordabi
lity
N/A Affordable
Housing
HOME:
$8,500,000
CDBG:
$4,000,000
HOPWA:
$8,500,000
Single family and
mobile home repair
programs

Enhanced and
targeted code
enforcement

Tenant based rental
assistance

3 Strengthen
Communities
2025 2030 Non-
Housing
Commun
ity
Develop
ment

Non-
Homeles
s Special
Needs
N/A Strengtheni
ng
Neighborh
oods
CDBG:
$27,000,00
0 CDBG:
$200,000
HOME:
$200,000
Grassroots outreach
skills development

Neighborhood
leadership
development

Senior Nutrition
Program

Education,
compliance, and legal
assistance with City’s
Apartment Rent
Ordinance, Tenant
Protection Ordinance,
and Source of Income
Discrimination
Ordinance

Housing education
and legal assistance

SP-45 Goals Summary – 91.215(a)(4)

1. Goal Summary Information

114

Table 73 – Goals Descriptions
1 Goal Name Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness
Goal
Description
• Homeless citywide and Downtown outreach
• HMIS data systems support
• Tenant-based rental assistance
• Emergency shelter or interim housing
2 Goal Name Increase Housing Affordability
Goal
Description
• Single family and mobile home repair programs
• Enhanced and targeted code enforcement
• Tenant-based rental assistance
3 Goal Name Strengthen Communities
Goal
Description
• Grassroots outreach skills development
• Neighborhood leadership development
• Microenterprise program-childcare
• Rehabilitation of public owned facilities
• Legal Service for low-mod income renters
• Education, Compliance, and legal assistance with the City’s Apartment Rent Ordinance, Tenant Protections Ordinance, Source of Income Discrimination Ordinance
• Housing education and legal assistance

1. Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.315(b)(2)

The City of San José’s allocation for HOME grants will assist members from all low-income categories in several ways: through rental assistance, production of new units, and/or acquisition of existing units over the 202 5-2030 Consolidated Planning period. Tenant -Based Rental Assistance will be provided to low-income residents in need.

115

SP-50 Public Housing Accessibility and Involvement – 91.215(c)

1. Need to Increase the Number of Accessible Units (if Required by a Section 504 Voluntary Compliance Agreement)

There are no public housing units in the City of San José. However, SCCHA’s housing portfolio includes 24 developments located in the City of San José . This includes the following affordable housing projects developed or acquired since 2020:
• Park Avenue Senior Apartments, a 100 -unit new construction senior property completed in 2020. 99 units are subsidized with PBVs, including 20 PBVs for special needs population. • Belarmino Place, a 116-unit new construction family property completed in 2024. 53 units are subsidized with PBVs, including 24 PBVs for the chronically homeless. • Alvarado Park, a 90 -unit new construction senior property scheduled to be completed in 2025. 41 units will be subsidized with PBVs, including 23 PBVs for the chronically homeless. • Hawthorn Senior Housing, a 103-unit new construction senior property scheduled to be completed in 2026. 47 units will be subsidized with PBVs, including 20 PBVs for homeless seniors.
• Girasol Senior Housing, a 60-unit senior property acquired in 2023. • Jardines Paloma Blanca, a 43-unit senior property acquired in 2023. • Rincon de los Esteros, a 246-unit family property acquired in 2024.

In addition, SCCHA allocates PBVs to projects under development by other affordable housing partners, many of which received funding through Santa Clara County’s 2016 Measure A bonds. Since 2020, SCCHA has added 872 PBVs to 28 projects located in San José, and 605 PBVs have been conditionally awarded to 16 projects currently under development.

2. Activities to Increase Residential Involvement

Though there are no public housing units in the City, the SCCHA uses innovative ways to improve the self-sufficiency of its Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher (HCV) holders to move them out of assisted housing programs, as well as ways to move households off the current HCV waiting list and into affordable housing. HUD designated the SCCHA as a “Moving to Work” (MTW) agency In January 2008.

The MTW agreement was extended from 2018 through 2028. The MTW program increases cost - effectiveness, promotes self -sufficiency of tenants, and expands housing options for low -income families and benefit homeless populations.

SCCHA continues to run the Family Self Sufficiency (FSS) program , which provides case management and advocacy to current program participants in order to help them attain self -sufficiency goals.

Families enroll and sign a five -year contract to participate in the program. After enrolling in the program, participants set goals such as finishing their education, obtaining job training, and/or employment.

During the contract term, participants who increase their earned income can receive cash bonuses.

When the family reports an increase in earned income, SCCHA calculates a monthly bonus amount that is deposited into an ‘escrow’ account which the family can receive upon program graduation.

116

SCCHA also operates a scholarship program which provides financial assistance to participants enrolled in higher education. The annual scholarships are awarded as unrestricted funds which can be used to offset the cost of tuition, fees, books, high -speed internet, transportation, groceries, or any other student -identified need. MTW funds are used to cover the scholarships, and SCCHA also supplements with non -MTW funds for awardees who are non -Section 8 residents of SCCHA properties.

3. Is the public housing agency designated as troubled under 24 CFR part 902?

The public housing agency is not designated as troubled.

4. Plan to remove the ‘troubled’ designation

Not applicable.

117

SP-55 Barriers to affordable housing – 91.215(h)

1. Barriers to Affordable Housing
While San José has experienced encouraging economic improvements, many San José residents continue to face a lack of affordable housing, and some lower-income households experience displacement from their communities due to market forces. There is a substantially greater demand for housing than the supply, which drives up costs in all of Silicon Valley, including San José. Average income increases have not kept pace with rising rents. Between 2020 and 2024, San Jose added roughly 21,700 jobs and just 5,111 housing units.45
Constraints to affordable housing in San José stem from a complex interplay of market forces and funding challenges. High land costs, driven by market dynamics rather than local regulations, pose a significant hurdle. These costs have been rising rapidly, making land acquisition for development increasingly expensive. Coupled with escalating construction costs due to rising labor and material expenses, the financial feasibility of both market-rate and affordable projects is severely impacted.

While market-rate development struggles to pencil out in some areas due to the gap between construction costs and achievable rents, affordable housing projects face a more difficult financing challenge. Competition for limited funding sources such as the Low-Income Housing Tax Credit, has greatly increased and the process of securing layered funding can be lengthy and complex, further adding to project costs and timelines.

2.Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The City of San José is committed to reducing constraints to affordable housing. The following are the most significant affordable housing preservation and production policies that San José has passed since the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan.

Multifamily Housing Incentive Program (2024): The San José City Council approved creating a temporary Multifamily Housing Incentive Program to encourage the development of high-density multifamily developments by waiving city fees and taxes for the first 1,500 units that also obtain a City building permit by December 31,2025.

Downtown High-Rise Exemption Renewal (2024): The San José City Council voted to extend the existing Downtown Residential High-Rise Program to promote development feasibility and incentivize dense housing construction in the downtown. Under the new program, developers that build the first 2,000 homes receive a 100% cut in construction taxes and a 50% reduction in park fees. The next 2,000 homes developed will receive a 50% cut in construction taxes and a 30% cut in park fees.

Affordable Housing Overlay Zones (2023): The San José City Council approved an affordable housing overlay in North San José that would streamline development of affordable housing on sites with a

45 https://dof.ca.gov/forecasting/demographics/estimates/e-5-population-and-housing-estimates-for-cities-counties-and-the-state-2020-2024/

118

General Plan designation for industrial, office, and research and development uses that to incentivize the greater integration of affordable housing into this large growth area.

Parking and Transportation Demand Management (TDM) Ordinance Update (2022): The San José City Council voted unanimously on December 6, 2022 to update its parking ordinance to no longer have minimum parking requirements for development proposals and to favor other modes of transportation. In a first significant shift in parking rules since 1965, the City Council agreed with the Planning staff's reasoning that zoning requirements for minimum parking is an obstacle to the expansion of housing and the reduction of carbon emissions.

Inclusionary Housing Ordinance Amendments (2021): In 2021, the San José City Council approved several amendments to the Ordinance, which was first adopted in 2010 and built off the City’s Inclusionary Housing Policy in former redevelopment project areas in effect since the 1970s. The goal of the 2021 Ordinance amendments was to increase the production of affordable housing through the Ordinance by:
• Lowering the minimum threshold for applicable projects • Streamlining compliance for all 100% affordable projects • Exempting City-funded 100% affordable projects
• Changing fee structures to account for weaker and stronger submarkets, and creating fee- based incentives to produce units
• Allowing a broader menu of compliance options, including a standalone 100% affordable development next to a market-rate development.
• Extending the affordability period to 99 years for non-tax-credit projects.

Commercial Linkage Fee (2020): The City Council approved a new program to create affordable housing revenues, with fees levied on larger commercial developments (100,000+ square feet) for affordable housing. The timing of this approval was particularly important as it occurred prior to the development of the planned Downtown West Mixed-Use development at the to-be rebuilt Diridon transit center.

Measure E (2020) for Affordable Housing and Homelessness: The City Council supported and voters approved a new real property transfer tax imposed on property transfers of $2 million or more.

Eligible uses are affordable housing production, preservation, and provision of homelessness services. Measure E revenues have ranged from approximately $40 to $60 million per year.

Citywide Residential Anti-Displacement Strategy (2020): The City Council adopted this multi-year Strategy to help prevent displacement of low-income residents, directing staff to focus on initial priorities that included funding for the preservation of lower-cost multifamily housing, tenant preferences to help fight displacement, and COVID-response stabilization activities.

Pre-Approved Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) (2019): The City implemented a process that has pre- approved plans for 45 different ADU types from almost two dozen companies. Since 2019 ADUs have made up 23% of housing production in the City with more than 1,500 units completed. These units often rent below market, allow families to support each other, and allow relatives to age in place.

119

SP-60 Homelessness Strategy – 91.215(d)

1. Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs
The City of San José employs a multi-pronged approach to connect with and assess the needs of individuals experiencing homelessness, particularly those who are unsheltered. This outreach is crucial for effectively addressing the complex challenges faced by this population.

One key strategy is the deployment of dedicated outreach teams. These teams proactively engage individuals at encampment sites, often in response to community concerns or prior to encampment abatements. Their primary goal is to establish contact, build trust, and offer immediate assistance.

Outreach teams act as a vital link to essential services, connecting individuals with resources like emergency shelter, basic necessities, case management, and even employment training opportunities.

San José's efforts are part of a larger, coordinated approach. The City collaborates with other agencies through the countywide Homelessness Prevention System. These efforts are aligned with the 2020-2025 Community Plan to End Homelessness, which provides a framework for addressing the root causes of homelessness, expanding preventative measures and housing programs, and improving the lives of unsheltered individuals.

Recognizing the diverse needs of the homeless population, San José also offers specialized services.

Supportive parking programs provide a safe haven for those living in their vehicles, along with connections to support services. The City also partners with or supports organizations that provide specialized assistance, such as showers and laundry facilities (Dignity on Wheels), healthcare (Valley Homeless Healthcare Program), support for LGBTQ+ youth (San José Youth Space, Bill Wilson Center), food resources (Second Harvest Food Bank), and eviction prevention assistance.

2. Addressing the emergency and transitional housing needs of homeless persons

Since the last submission of the 2020-2025 Consolidated Plan Cycle, the City has made significant strides in expanding supply in the shelter management system. At 2022 Point in Time Count, even though the homeless population increased by 8%, 25% of those counted were sheltered versus 16% from the 2019 Point in Time Count.

In 2020, the City opened its first interim housing community and has since opened five more totaling 499 beds. Most recently, the Rue Ferrari Emergency Interim Housing began construction of an additional 144 interim shelter beds and the opening of Pacific Motor Inn consisting of 72 beds for interim housing.

The City anticipates adding an additional 1,089 emergency and transitional housing units, expanding the development of emergency shelter and interim housing, supportive parking, and safe sleeping in 2025. Key priorities include:

120

• Finalizing construction of 86 new emergency shelter units currently underway at specialized sites, such as the Supportive Parking for Recreational Vehicles Program 1300 Berryessa Road site and 216 new interim housing beds at the Branham and Monterey emergency interim housing sites;
• Using emergency procurement powers to secure a site operator to develop up to 60 supportive outdoor sleeping spaces at the Taylor Street Navigation Hub site to provide safe, monitored accommodations for individuals experiencing unsheltered homelessness; and, • Preparing to break ground on up to 336 new emergency interim shelter beds at the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority’s Cherry Avenue and Cerone Bus Yard Emergency Interim Housing sites.

By prioritizing these efforts, the Housing Department will ensure that emergency shelter solutions remain central to the City's strategy for mitigating the impacts of homelessness, aligning with broader goals to achieve functional zero unsheltered homelessness.

In addition, the City has historically funded two tenant-based rental assistance (TBRA) programs:
one funded by HOME dollars, and another by HOPWA funds. The HOME TBRA Program is matched with local funds to increase capacity in the Rapid Rehousing System. During this five-year ConPlan cycle, the programs will provide housing subsidies and case management services to employed or employable homeless populations, including families with children and domestic violence survivors.

3. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

The City uses the Coordinated Assessment System to match homeless households to appropriate housing. Other primary goals include working with property owners and managers to educate them on the social benefits of renting to extremely low income and formerly homeless individuals and families. Another main strategy, due to its effectiveness, is increasing the number of units of permanent supportive housing, a housing type available to homeless people that includes a wraparound services component offering services such as case management to assist in keeping them housed. San José currently has 1,380 supportive housing units in the City.

The goal of the City’s Rapid Rehousing Program is to serve approximately 300 individuals at any given time to locate and secure appropriate rental housing, assist with time-limited subsidies based on the rent of the identified unit and help the participants increase their income so they graduate and pay the rent in full. The Rental Subsidy Administrators verify income eligibility, assist in housing search and placement, perform housing inspections, and coordinate monthly subsidy payments. The Supportive Services Administrators receive referrals from the CoC's coordinated assessment. Once enrolled, the role of the Supportive Services Administrator is to ensure that by the time the participant's subsidy terminates, they are stable, self-sufficient and do not return to homelessness.

The HOPWA TBRA Program targets low-income residents living with HIV/AIDS who are homeless or

121

at-risk of homelessness.

On a regional level, leaders from the City, the County, other government agencies such as the Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) and the Santa Clara Valley Water District, service providers, philanthropy, community institutions, and business organizations and those involved with homeless services delivery developed the Community Plan to End Homelessness 2020-25.

Input from this planning process helped to inform the City’s strategy to address homelessness. The Community Plan is developed to enhance the community's work towards ending and preventing homelessness among all homeless persons and families. Input at stakeholder meetings focused on topics including,
• Lived Experience focus groups
• Permanent supportive housing being built
• Prevention through early childhood education and diversion programs • Temporary solutions- Safe Parking, Street teams that are keeping people engaged and managing boredom that comes with homelessness
• Coordinated Assessment System
• Growing partnerships and outreach- jail re-entry programs, food, legal resources, tenant rights
The plan notes that many vulnerable populations are just a paycheck or medical emergency away from homelessness. A coordinated effort between local jurisdictions, service providers and other engaged groups over the last decade demonstrates that a Housing First model works in Santa Clara County –it is less expensive to permanently house someone than to continually care for them while they live on the street. The Community Plan for 2020-2025 has three main strategies:

1. Address the root causes of homelessness through system and policy change

2. Expand homelessness prevention and housing programs to meet the nee

3. Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and create healthier neighborhoods for all.

The Community Plan for 2020-2025 strongly support the need to prioritize funding for affordable housing development, homelessness strategies, homelessness prevention, and anti-displacement strategies.

4. Help low-income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low- income individuals and families who are likely to become homeless after being discharged from a publicly funded institution or system of care, or who are receiving assistance from public and private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education or youth needs

The City of San José participates in a countywide Homelessness Prevention System (HPS) supported by Destination: Home and Sacred Heart Community Service. HPS provides assistance to low-income

122

families or individuals who are at risk of losing their housing, including: temporary financial assistance, legal support, case management and other service. The goal of the Homelessness Prevention System is to expand the ability of families with children to become quickly connected to prevention services with multiple points of entry to keep them housed. The System identifies households at risk of experiencing homelessness and provides client-centered services, including short-term rental subsidies, financial assistance, and supportive services to help them regain stability. The regionally developed systemwide performance benchmark is that 85% of individuals enrolled in prevention services will remain stably housed while receiving assistance.

123

SP-65 Lead based paint Hazards – 91.215(i)

1. Actions to address LBP hazards and increase access to housing without LBP hazards The San José Housing Department coordinates the “Minor Repair Program” along with our partners Rebuilding Together and Habitat of Humanity. The program focuses on minor repairs to low-income households of San José. Unless determined through a professional lead paint testing process, lead- based paint (LBP) is presumed in housing built prior to 1978. Therefore, the San José Housing Department and its housing rehabilitation partners test all projects with the potential of the scope disrupting LBP surfaces. LBP testing is conducted in partnership with an environmental consultant service , “Benchmark Environmental,” who provide testing and monitoring services.

2. How are the actions listed above related to the extent of lead poisoning and hazards? There is a total of 250,115 units that were built before 1980 in San José. Since LBP was banned from consumer use in 1978. There are 44.7 percent of households in the city that are LMI, meaning that there are an estimated 91,548 units occupied by an LMI household that may have an LBP risk.

Lower-income families with children are particularly vulnerable to LBP hazards, partly because of a lack of disposable income to make repairs. Therefore, the city address LBP hazards when encountered with the coordination of the housing rehabilitation efforts of the Minor Repair Program.

3. How are the actions listed above integrated into housing policies and procedures? All units built prior to 1978 are tested for lead and hazards are mitigated when necessary. All services provided for LBP hazard reduction are following Federal regulations 1012 and 1013 of Title X. LBP hazard remediation has been and will remain a component of all scope of works related to the Minor Repair Program rehabilitation activities as a matter of policy and law compliance.

124

SP-70 Anti-Poverty Strategy – 91.215(j)

1. Jurisdiction Goals, Programs and Policies for reducing the number of Poverty-Level Families The City, in its continuing effort to reduce poverty, will prioritize funding to agencies that provide direct assistance to the homeless and those in danger of becoming homeless. Additionally, the City has made a commitment to improve the communication and service delivery capabilities of agencies and organizations that provided programs to assist the homeless, including a job training program.

The City-support homeless programs also work with individuals and families to increase their self- sufficiency by providing employment readiness assistance or help with applying for State or federal benefits.

A key component of the City’s other efforts to reduce the number of poverty-level families is work2Future, the local administrative arm of the Workforce Innovation and Opportunity Act of 2013. work2Future operates one-stop centers that serve the areas of San José, Campbell, Morgan Hill, Los Altos Hills, Gilroy, Los Gatos, Saratoga, Monte Sereno, and the unincorporated areas of the County. Strategically positioned within the Office of Economic Development, Work2Future addresses the workforce and economic development needs of the local area in collaboration with small and large businesses, educational institutions and community-based organizations.

For calendar year 2023, work2future secured employment for nearly 1,000 participants with 83% placed into high-wage, high-growth occupations.

Additionally, the San José Works program placed 375 high school youth in subsidized employment, with 100% placed in areas related to high-growth wage occupations. Furthermore, the San José Works program, during FY 2022-2023 secured unsubsidized employment for another 454 youth participants ages 16-29 and anticipates meeting or exceeding this number for the current fiscal year.

2.How are the Jurisdiction poverty reducing goals, programs, and policies coordinated with this affordable housing plan.

The City supports its poverty-reduction goals in coordination with the affordable housing plan by funding community-based programs through CDBG funds. Two key initiatives include the Vietnamese Voluntary Foundation’s (VIVO) Neighborhood Engagement Program and SOMOS Mayfair’s Eastside Neighborhood Development Program, both of which provide safety net services and economic development opportunities for low-income residents. These programs offer referrals and support to meet participants’ food, housing, financial, and health needs, while promoting economic self-sufficiency through workforce training, childcare provider training, and urban agriculture initiatives.

Through the Neighborhood Engagement Program, VIVO served 155 participants, delivering approximately 300 hours of case management services and offering classes on civic participation and economic empowerment. VIVO significantly exceeded its program goals, which targeted 100 participants and 160 hours of case management services. Similarly, SOMOS Mayfair’s Eastside Neighborhood Development Program served 188 participants. Of these, 82 individuals completed

125

leadership training to strengthen skills in collective decision-making and community governance, helping residents lead local projects and advocate for their communities. Additionally, 51 participants participated in food entrepreneurship training, introducing them to alternative business models and pathways to economic independence.

These efforts strengthen the City’s approach to reducing poverty by fostering community empowerment, increasing access to economic opportunities, and building the resilience of low- income residents.

126

SP-80 Monitoring – 91.230

1. Describe the standards and procedures that the jurisdiction will use to monitor activities carried out in furtherance of the plan and will use to ensure long-term compliance with requirements of the programs involved, including minority business outreach and the comprehensive planning requirements

Monitoring CDBG, HOME, HOPWA and ESG

The City continues to follow the grantee monitoring requirements outlined by HUD for the use of federal funds. The City has also standardized policies and procedures for use C ity-wide, which incorporate many of the HUD requirements. City staff continues to participate in the Grants Management Working Group that brings together all City departments that provide grants to the community. The Working Group shares best practices and discusses program performance of the grantees that each City department funds.

A major element of the monitoring process is the tracking of grantee performance. The Department of Housing uses the C itywide Webgrants database system. This database tracks programmatic and financial performance and allows potential applicants to apply for funds electronically. Staff completes pre- and post- risk assessments.

The intent of the monitoring process is to identify any potential red flags and, if necessary, provide the necessary technical assistance so that subrecipients can successfully implement their projects. If a significant problem is discovered, City staff meets with project staff to discuss and resolve any issues.

Examples of such problems include:

• Services are not documented
• Goals are not being met
• Project files are not in order
• Lack of fiscal controls and/or documentation
• Required reports are not being submitted in a timely manner • Expense reporting does not adhere to regulations or policies

For CDBG, HOME, ESG and HOPWA programs, service providers are required to submit monthly Reimbursement Requests and Reconciliation Reports to document expenses and ensure that both line item budgets and total project budgets are not over-expended. Monthly review of reimbursement requests enables the City to ensure that all costs incurred by subrecipients are eligible and documented as required by the applicable federal regulations. Additionally, service providers are required to submit quarterly performance reports and a cumulative annual report. Review of these reports allows staff to determine whether corrective measures are necessary and provide a basis for monitoring procedures.

In addition, the Housing Department staff reviews financial documentation of its subrecipients , who are required to establish and maintain a system of accounts that is in conformance with generally accepted principles of accounting for budgeted funds. This system of accounts is subject to review and approval by the City. In addition, subrecipients are requir ed to submit an annual agency audit.

Financial monitoring is based on the program budget that is incorporated in the grant agreement

127

between the City and the subrecipient. Subrecipients are required to submit to the City the name of a fiscal agent, if any, who is responsible for the financial and accounting activities of the project, including the receipt and disbursement of project funds. In addition to the review of quarterly progress reports and financial documents, the City conducts onsite visits with subrecipients at least every two years. Programmatic monitoring visits include a review of doc umentation of national objective and eligibility, client intake documentation, income eligibility, staffing levels, recordkeeping, and outcome measures tracking. Financial monitoring visits involve a review of invoices and all backup documentation including staff timesheets, receipts, and proof of payment documentation on file. If deficiencies are identified, the City determines whether corrective action, technical assistance, or both are needed.

128

Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

2025-2026
Annual Action Plan

Prepared by:

City of San Jose
Housing Department,
200 East Santa Clara Street,
San Jose, CA 95113

AAP-1
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Contents
AP-05 Executive Summary – 91.200 (c), 91.220(b) ................................................................................................................. 2 PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies – 91.200 (b) ................................................................................................................... 5 AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b) 91.215 (I) ................................................................................................................. 6 AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200 (c) .............................................................................................................................. 13 AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220 (c) (1,2) ....................................................................................................................... 17 AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives – 91.220(c)(3)& (e) ...................................................................................................... 23 Table 7 - AP-23 Annual Goals Summary ................................................................................................................................ 24 AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d) ................................................................................................................................................... 28 AP-38 Project Information Summary .................................................................................................................................... 30 AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220 (f) .......................................................................................................................... 42 AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220 (g) ................................................................................................................................. 43 AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220 (h) ........................................................................................................................................ 44 AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220 (i) ......................................................................................... 46 AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3) ...................................................................................................................................... 53 AP-75 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.220 (j) ................................................................................................................ 54 AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220 (k) .......................................................................................................................................... 59 AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220 (l) (1,2,4) ................................................................................................... 62

AAP-2
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-05 Executive Summary – 91.200 (c), 91.220(b)

1. Introduction
The Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-2026, Annual Action Plan (AAP) marks the first year of implementation under the new 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan. As an entitlement jurisdiction, the City of San José receives annual funding from the U.S. Department of Housing and Urban Development (HUD) to support the housing and community development initiatives. The AAP outlines the City’s specific strategies, projects, programs, and funding allocations to advance priorities established in the Consolidated Plan (Con Plan). The Consolidated Annual Performance and Evaluation Report (CAPER) then assesses progress made toward these goals at the end of the program year.

The City administers HUD funding through four key federal grant programs: Community Development Block Grant (CDBG), HOME Investment Partnerships (HOME), Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG), and Housing Opportunities for Persons with AIDS (HOPWA). In addition to these recurring funds, the City also received one- time HOME-ARP (American Rescue Plan) funding to support affordable housing and homelessness initiatives.

The San José Housing Department administers HUD funds by partnering with community-based organizations, City departments, and the County of Santa Clara to implement programs that address housing affordability and community development needs. By leveraging federal, state, and local funding, the City maximizes its impact by expanding affordable housing opportunities, reducing homelessness, increasing access to supportive services, lowering barriers to housing stability for vulnerable populations, and revitalizing neighborhoods through community development initiatives.

HUD funding provided under the CDBG, HOME, HOPWA, ESG, and HOME-ARP primarily address the needs of low- and moderate-income (LMI) households whose incomes do not exceed 80% or less of the Area Median Income (AMI). HUD categorizes income levels as follows: extremely low-income households earn 30% or less of AMI, very low-income households earn 50% or less of AMI, and low-income households earn 80% or less of AMI.

All federally funded programs in this AAP are designed to address critical housing and community needs while ensuring equitable access to resources for the City’s most vulnerable residents.

2. Summarize the objectives and outcomes identified in the Plan.

The Annual Action Plan supports the goals and needs identified in the five-year Consolidated Plan:
• Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness
Expand housing access and self-sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness.
• Increase Housing Affordability
Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing housing. • Strengthen Communities
Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

3. Evaluation of past performance.

The City is responsible for ensuring compliance with all rules and regulations associated with the CDBG, HOME, ESG, and HOPWA, entitlement programs. Evaluating past performance is critical to ensuring that the City and its subrecipients effectively implement activities that align with the strategies and goals identified in the five-year Con Plan and AAP.

AAP-3
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

To assess program performance, the City conducts quarterly performance evaluations of subrecipients providing public services and implements ongoing monitoring to track progress toward program goals. Subrecipients are required to submit quarterly progress reports detailing participant data, including demographic information, activity outputs, and program-specific outcome measures. The City also completes quarterly progress review reports for each funded program, assigning an overall performance rating. These evaluation reports enable the City to measure progress against annual targets and collaborate with subrecipients to adjust goals and improve program effectiveness, as needed.

Before program implementation, the City works with subrecipients to establish outcome measures that align with goals and strategies outlined in the AAP. For homelessness programs, performance outcomes are also aligned with the Continuum of Care (CoC) performance measures and align with the strategies in the Santa Clara County’s Community Plan to End Homelessness, and are developed in coordination with the City’s Homelessness Responses Division.

In addition to the quarterly review of progress reports, the City conducts an annual risk assessment for all subrecipients to determine the appropriate level of monitoring – low, moderate, or high risk. Monitoring site visits are determined and scheduled based on risk level, ensuring that all subrecipients receive monitoring at least once every two years to maintain compliance with City requirements and federal regulations. These monitoring efforts provide additional opportunities to evaluate progress toward program goals and ensure that federally-funded programs remain effective, accountable, and compliant.

The following highlights key accomplishments from the 2023-2024 CAPER, demonstrating progress toward the 2020-2025 Con Plan goals:

Spending Priority #1: Respond to Homelessness
684 individuals received individualized support on housing options. Of those, 198 individuals exited outreach services to permanent or temporary housing placements.

Spending Priority #2: Increase and Preserve Affordable Housing Opportunities 84 low-income households affected by HIV/AIDS remained stably housed and received supportive health services
Spending Priority #3: Strengthen and Stabilize Communities 438 low-income seniors received nutritious meals and in-person health check-ins. Additionally, 343 individuals participated in neighborhood engagement programs, gaining access to leadership training, education programs, or basic supportive services. A total of 1,088 individuals received phone-based legal assistance referrals to improve their housing stability. A total of 664 housing units were inspected to ensure compliance with housing and blight codes.

Spending Priority #4: Promoting Fair Housing Choices Through Services 184 individuals received fair housing services. Of these, 142 improved their housing stability through legal education, while 42 gained housing stability through legal representation. Among those receiving legal representation, at least one or more of the following outcomes were achieved: 11 prevented evictions, 26 obtained opportunities for other housing options, and 7 retained or preserved their housing placement.

4. Summary of Citizen (Community) Participation Process and consultation process

AAP-4
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

During the development of the 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan, City staff solicited public comment to help identify community needs, and non-profit agencies that could provide services to address those identified needs.

Public Hearing #1. This Public Hearing satisfied the Community Participation Plan requirement to hold at least one Public Hearing during the drafting phase of the Annual Action Plan. The hearing gives the public an opportunity to provide input. A public hearing was provided to hear the Funding Priorities on March 13, 2025 at the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) meeting. The first Public Hearing for the Draft FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan will be held on May 8, 2025, at the regularly sch eduled Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC)

Public Hearing #2. The second and final Public Hearing was held on June 3, 2025, during the City Council meeting.

This Hearing provided a final opportunity for public comment/input. The final version of the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan was presented. Any comments are included in the final version of the Action Plan and the Plan will be submitted to HUD.

Public Noticing. The noticing follows the Community Participation Plan requirements. The following information for the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan was publicly noticed in the Mercury News, El Observador, Vietnam Daily, Asian Journal and World Journal. Notice was also posted on the City website, and copies were accessible at City Hall:

1) Notice of Public Comment Period (May 01, 2025 – May 31, 2025) for the Draft FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan 2) Notice of Public Hearing #1 on May 8, 2025, for the Draft FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan 3) Notice of Public Hearing #2 on June 3, 2025, for the approval of the FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan

a) Summary of public comments

The Housing Department conducted three public hearings in accordance with the City's Citizen Participation Plan.

Two hearings were held before the Housing and Community Development Commission (HCDC) — one to receive public input on funding priorities, and a second to review the draft Fiscal Year (FY) 2025–2026 Annual Action Plan (AAP). The third public hearing was held before the City Council to receive public input and to approve the FY 2025–2026 AAP. A summary of public comments received during the hearings is provided in Appendix B. 30-Day Public Comment Period

b) Summary of comments or views not accepted and the reasons for not accepting them.

The City did not receive any public comments that were not accepted. The City attempted to incorporate all feedback received through outreach efforts into the Plan.

AAP-5
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

PR-05 Lead & Responsible Agencies – 91.200 (b)
Table 1 – Responsible Agencies
Agency
Role
Name Department/Agency
CDBG Administrator SAN JOSE Department
of Housing
HOPWA Administrator SAN JOSE Department
of Housing
HOME Administrator SAN JOSE Department
of Housing
ESG Administrator SAN JOSE Department
of Housing

The City of San Jose is the lead agency and administrator for the CDBG & HOME funds. The Consolidated Plan and Annual Action Plan Public Contact is:

Erik L. Soliván Cupid Alexander
Housing Director Deputy Director
[email protected] [email protected] 200 East Santa Clara Street, 12th Floor 200 East Santa Clara Street, 12th Floor San Jose, CA 95113 San Jose, CA 95113

AAP-6
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-10 Consultation – 91.100, 91.200(b) 91.215 (I)

1. Introduction
The FY 2025- 2026 Annual Action Plan was prepared by City staff with input from a variety of local, county, and regional stakeholders including public service providers (e.g., senior services, homeless services, minor repairs services, legal services, and fair housing, and services for people with aids), and County partners. Service partners administer projects and activities that align with the goals and objectives of the Con Plan.

The City is implementing programs and projects consistent with the 2025-2030 plans that were heavily coordinated and received significant outreach. These programs and projects are all in alignment with the goals and objectives identified in the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan.

2. Provide a concise summary of the jurisdiction's activities to enhance coordination between public and assisted housing providers and private and governmental health, mental health, and service agencies (91.215(l)).

The City of San Jose contracts with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority to administer the Housing Choice Voucher program because there are no public housing units in San Jose. However, community and stakeholder meetings discussed how to enhance coordination and develop new approaches between housing providers and legal advocates, private and governmental health agencies, mental health service providers, and other stakeholders that use the funding for eligible activities, projects, and programs.

Additionally, comprehensive outreach was conducted to enhance coordination and discuss new approaches to working with public and assisted housing providers, legal advocates, private and governmental health agencies, mental health service providers, and other stakeholders that utilize funding for eligible activities, projects, and programs.

To encourage broad and meaningful community participation, the City used various community outreach methods, including public meetings, a community survey, and stakeholder consultations. Community outreach and engagement was conducted from October 2024 through February 2025.  Community meetings were held in San José. These local meetings were designed to solicit public input from a broad range of constituents on the highest community development and housing needs.

Print newspaper display ads were posted in the El Observador (Spanish), the Vietnam Daily News (Vietnamese), the Philippine News (Tagalog), the World Journal (Chinese), and the San Jose Mercury News (English).

Action Plan Development
City leadership meets with the Santa Clara County Housing Authority and the County Office of Supportive Housing on a regular basis to discuss collective priorities around housing and homelessness and progress toward the strategic plans.

AAP-7
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

3. Describe coordination with the Continuum of Care and efforts to address the needs of homeless persons (particularly chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans, and unaccompanied youth) and persons at risk of homelessness.

The Santa Clara County Continuum of Care (CoC) is a multi-sector group of stakeholders dedicated to ending and preventing homelessness in the County of Santa Clara (County). The CoC is considered by HUD to be a Major City CoC, and is one of 48 CoCs that cover the 50 largest cities in the U.S. The CoC primary responsibilities are to coordinate large-scale implementation of efforts to prevent and end homelessness in the County. The Santa Clara CoC Board (CoC Board) governs the CoC, representing its members and serving as the driving force dedicated to supporting and advancing a systemic approach aimed at preventing and ending homelessness in the County).

The CoC Board is comprised of five ex-officio members from the County of Santa Clara, City of San José, City of Morgan Hill, Santa Clara Housing Authority, and Destination: Home, as well as seven at-large members chosen to represent individuals with lived experience and homeless service providers within the CoC. Destination: Home is a public-private partnership committed to collective impact strategies to end chronic homelessness and leads the development of community-wide strategy related to the CoC work.

The County Office of Supportive Housing serves as the Collaborative Applicant for the CoC and is responsible for implementing by-laws and protocols that govern the operations of the CoC. The Office of Supportive Housing is also responsible for ensuring that the CoC meets the requirements outlined under the Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing Act of 2009 (HEARTH).

The City of San José is committed to ending homelessness, aligning our goals with a county-wide community action plan developed by the CoC. The Community Plan to End Homelessness 2020-2025 outlines strategies that serves as our roadmap for ending homelessness:

Strategy 1 – Address the root cause of homelessness through system and policy changes Strategy 2 – Expand homelessness prevention and housing programs to meet the need Strategy 3 – Improve the quality of life for unsheltered individuals and create healthy neighborhoods for all The City of San José has established a robust supportive framework encompassing interim, permanent, and preventative solutions. The Policy and Planning team leads initiatives aimed at addressing the systemic issues that contribute to homelessness through policy reforms, while the Homeless Response Division collaborates with the Grants Management team to implement homeless prevention and diversion initiatives.

An essential function of ending homelessness is to ensure efficient coordination with CoC partners. This coordination utilizes a coordinated entry system that involves a community-wide intake process that matches individuals facing homelessness with the appropriate community resources. In Santa Clara County, this process begins at an access point where clients complete a standardized assessment using the VI-SPDAT tool. This assessment evaluates each household’s specific needs to determine the best housing intervention to address their situation. Eligible households are placed into a community queue to connect them with the best fit housing

AAP-8
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

program, such as transitional housing, rapid rehousing, permanent supportive housing, or other supportive services programs.

Currently, the City of San José funds programs including, rapid rehousing, homelessness prevention, supportive parking, emergency interim housing, and other supportive services programs aimed at those who are homeless or at-risk of homelessness. Those who qualify for these programs through the coordinated entry system may be enrolled in a City-funded program. Additionally, the City of San José funds capital improvement projects for agencies that assist chronically homeless individuals, families, veterans, and unaccompanied youth. Our aim is to elevate the living standards for those experiencing homelessness while simultaneously enhancing the community as a whole.

All homelessness programs utilize the CoC’s Quality Assurance Standards as a benchmark and model for program policies and procedures. All programs have measurable goals and regular progress reviews to assess the effectiveness of the programs. Aggregate data is provided to the CoC and is readily available through the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS).

4. Describe consultation with the Continuum(s) of Care that serves the jurisdiction's area in determining how to allocate ESG funds, develop performance standards for and evaluate outcomes of projects and activities assisted by ESG funds, and develop funding, policies and procedures for the operation and administration of HMIS.

The City of San José utilizes ESG funds to support programs aimed at ending homelessness, including assisting individuals in regaining permanent housing stability after experiencing a housing crisis or homelessness. In January 2023, the City released a Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA), which included Citywide Outreach and Engagement. HomeFirst, the subrecipient, was selected to administer and implement the ESG program, beginning July 2023, for two fiscal years. Additionally, ESG funds supports County of Santa Clara’s operation of HMIS.

As the County’s ESH recipient, the City continues to coordinate with public and private partners to ensure that the local CoC meets all Homeless Emergency Assistance and Rapid Transition to Housing (HEARTH) Act requirements. This coordination includes:

Coordination with the County: Assessing and analyzing service needs to avoid duplication of efforts in ESG- funded programs.

Evaluating Program Outcomes: Monitoring the outcomes of ESG-funded projects and reporting them to HUD.

Coordinated Entry System: Operating and participating in a system that provides comprehensive assessments of individuals’ and families’ needs for housing and services. This includes policies to address the needs of domestic violence survivors seeking shelter or services from non-victim service providers.

Standards for CoC Assistance: Establishing and adhering to standards for providing CoC assistance, including evaluating eligibility, prioritizing transitional housing, rapid re-housing, and permanent supportive housing assistance. This includes determining the percentage or amount of rent each program participant must pay while receiving rapid re-housing assistance.

AAP-9
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Planning and Evaluation: Planning for the allocation of ESG funds and reporting on the performance of ESG- funded programs.

The County’s Office of Supportive Housing (OSH) oversees the administration of HMIS, utilizing Clarity Human Services software. This system meets and exceeds HUD requirements for HMIS compliance, ensuring accurate data collection, reporting, and performance monitoring across a network of service providers.

All City-funded homelessness programs are required to participate in HMIS. To strengthen efforts to improve data quality, the City a five-member data team trained in HMIS operations. All City program managers regularly review HMIS data to verify that subrecipients are accurately entering and entering data. Additionally, the City’s data team conducts extensive data quality checks every first and third quarter to ensure consistency, accuracy, and compliance when reviewing quarterly report data against HMIS records.

5. Describe agencies, groups, organizations, and others who participated in the process and describe the jurisdiction’s consultation with housing, social service agencies and other entities.

Table 2 – Agencies, groups, organizations who participated Agency/group/
organization
Agency/group/
Organization type
What section of the Plan
was addressed by
Consultation?
How was the
Agency/Group/Organization
consulted and what are the
anticipated outcomes of the
consultation or areas for
improved coordination?
Bay Area
Community Health
Services – Health

Services – Persons with
Disabilities

Services – Persons with

HIV/AIDS

Services – Elderly Persons
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Non-homeless special
needs
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

California
Apartment
Association
Regional Organization Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,

Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

AAP-10
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

County of Santa
Clara-
Office of Supportive
Housing
Other government –
Regional

Continuum of Care
Needs Assessment,
Housing,
Non-homeless
special
needs, Strategic Plan
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

Destination Home Services – Homeless

Services – Housing

Services – Children
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Homelessness Needs
(Chronically
homeless, Families
with children,
Veterans,
Unaccompanied
youth),
Homelessness
strategy
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

Fair Housing
Consortium – Law
Foundation, Project
Sentinel, Senior
Adult Legal Services
and Asian Law
Alliance
Services – Fair Housing Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

Lived Experience
Advisory Board
Services – Homeless

Services – Persons with
Disabilities

Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan,
Homelessness Needs
(Chronically
homeless, Families
with children,
Veterans,
Unaccompanied
youth),
Homelessness
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

AAP-11
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

strategy
People Acting in
Community
Together (PACT)
Regional Organization Needs Assessment,
Housing Market Analysis
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan
Sacred Heart
Housing Action
Committee
Services – Homeless

Services – Persons with
Disabilities

Services – Elderly Persons

Regional organization
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Homelessness
Needs

Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

San Andreas
Regional Center
Services – Persons with
Disabilities

Regional organization
Needs Assessment,
Housing Market Analysis
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

SOMOS Mayfair Services – Children

Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Non-
homeless
special
needs
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

San José Digital
Divide Team
Government-Local Needs Assessment,
Broadband internet needs

Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

San José Office of
Emergency
Management and
Housing
Department
Maintenance
Government-Local Needs Assessment, Lead-
based
Paint Strategy

Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

San José Office of
Emergency
Management
Government-Local

Services- Homeless
Needs Assessment,
Strategic Plan, Homelessness
Needs
Representative(s) contributed narrative and
data to answer questions relevant to the
ConPlan.

6. Identify any Agency Types not consulted and provide rationale for not consulting

AAP-12
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

All agency types were consulted during the FY 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan. The FY 2025-2026 Annual Action Plan goals and objectives are consistent with the previous plans and the feedback received by the various service agencies serving the City and County.

7. Other local/regional/state/federal planning efforts considered when preparing the Plan Table 3 – Other local / regional / federal planning efforts Name of Plan Lead
Organization
How do the goals of your Strategic Plan overlap with the goals of each plan?
Continuum of
Care
Regional
Continuum
of Care
Council
The Continuum of Care works to alleviate the impact of homelessness in the community through the cooperation and collaboration of social service providers. This effort aligns with the Strategic Plan goal to support activities to respond to homelessness and its impacts on the community
City of San Jose
Housing
Element (2023-
2031)
City of San
Jose
The Housing Element is the State-required component of the City General Plan and provides a policy guide and implementation work plan to help the City meet its future regional housing needs. This effort aligns with the Strategic Plan goal to assist in the creation and preservation of affordable housing opportunities.

Community Plan
to End
Homelessness in
Santa Clara
County of
Santa Clara
The Community Plan to End Homelessness in the County is a five-year plan to guide governmental actors, nonprofits, and other community members as they make decisions about funding, programs, priorities, and needs. This effort aligns with the Strategic Plan goal to support activities to respond to homelessness and its impacts on the community.

City of San Jose
Envision 2040
General Plan
City of San
Jose
The Envision 2040 General Plan provides the City seeks to create a sustainable, equitable, and economically strong city that invests in infrastructure, jobs, and housing opportunities. These goals align with the Strategic Plan goals to invest in programs and infrastructure that strengthen neighborhoods and to increase and preserve affordable housing opportunities.

AAP-13
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-12 Participation – 91.105, 91.200 (c)

1. Summarize resident participation process and how it impacted goal setting.

To gather community input, the City conducted a resident participation process that included multiple outreach efforts. In addition to these efforts, two public hearings were held before City Council, one of which occurred during the drafting phase of the AAP, as well as public notices and the posting of the draft AAP on the City’s website. These activities were designed to encourage public engagement and ensure transparency in the planning process. The feedback received through these efforts informed the City’s priorities and contributed to the development of the goals outlined in the AAP. The table below provides a summary of the City’s outreach activities and the corresponding outcomes.

2. Resident Participation Outreach
Table 4 – Resident participation outreach
Mode
of
Outrea
ch
Target of
Outreach
Summary of
response/
attendance
Summary
of
Comments
received
Summar
y of
commen
ts not
accepted
and
reasons
URL
(If
applicable)
1 Public
Hearin
g
Non-
targeted/br
oad
community

Broad
outreach to
Santa Clara
County
stakeholder
s with
computer
and
internet
access
The City Housing
Department
conducted a Public
Hearing on the
funding priorities for
the Annual Action
Plan.

Announcements
were posted to the
City of San Jose
website, the Housing
Department website
to promote the
meeting on March
13, 2025 for HCDC
during the drafting
phase of the Plan.

See
Appendix B
All
commen
ts
accepted
n/a

AAP-14
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Table 4 – Resident participation outreach
Mode
of
Outrea
ch
Target of
Outreach
Summary of
response/
attendance
Summary
of
Comments
received
Summar
y of
commen
ts not
accepted
and
reasons
URL
(If
applicable)
2 Public
Hearin
g
Non-
targeted/br
oad
community
The City Housing
Department
conducted three
public hearings for
the Annual Action
Plan.
*Announcements
were posted to the
City of San Jose
website, the Housing
Department website
to promote the
meetings.

See
Appendix B
All
commen
ts
accepted
n/a

AAP-15
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

3 Newsp
aper
Ad
Non-
targeted/br
oad
community
The following
information for the
FY 2025-2026 Annual
Action Plan was
publicly noticed in
five local newspapers
of wide circulation
and translated for
foreign-language
newspapers. AAP was
posted on the city
website, and had
copies accessible at
City Hall:
1) Notice of Public
Hearing #1 on March
13, 2025 for Funding
Priorities;
2) Notice of Public
Hearing #2 on May 8,
2025 for the Draft FY
2025-2026 Annual
Action Plan;
3) Notice of Public
Comment Period
(May 01, 2025, to
May 31, 2025) for the
Draft FY 2025-2026
Annual Action Plan;
3) Notice of Public
Hearing #3 on June 3,
2025, for the FY
2025-2026 Annual
Action Plan.

No public
comments
received
for 30-day
comment
period.

Public
hearing
comments
are
attached.

Not
Applicabl
e
n/a
4 E-
blasts
Mass
emails to
new and
established
distribution
Over 2,600 entities,
organizations,
agencies, and persons
have been engaged
through e-blast
outreach efforts to
No Public
Comments
Received
Not
Applicabl
e

AAP-16
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Table 4 – Resident participation outreach
Mode
of
Outrea
ch
Target of
Outreach
Summary of
response/
attendance
Summary
of
Comments
received
Summar
y of
commen
ts not
accepted
and
reasons
URL
(If
applicable)
inform them of
opportunities to
obtain draft
documents, attend
public hearings, and
ways to give public
input. Staff contacts
were listed to answer
questions in English,
Spanish, Vietnamese
and Chinese.
5 Websit
e
Non-
targeted/br
oad
community

Broad
outreach to
Santa Clara
County
stakeholder
s with
computer
and
internet
access
Meeting
announcements were
posted to the City of
San Jose website and
its social media
accounts to promote
public hearings. The
website also carried a
short news blast that
automatically got
sent to media outlets.

Draft documents
were made available
on the website per
the City Community
Participation Plan.

No public
comments
Received
Not
Applicabl
e
www.sjhou
sing.org +
www.sanjo
seca.gov/h
ousingcon
plan

AAP-17
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-15 Expected Resources – 91.220 (c) (1,2)

1. Introduction
The City of San Jose FY 2025 -26 Action Plan covers the period from July 1, 2025, to June 30, 2026 (HUD Program Year 2025). The City’s FY 2025-2026 entitlement amount is $13,014,831. The City received $11,676,334 in HOME- ARP. The city will continue to leverage additional resources to successfully provide support and services to the populations in need.

CDBG HOME ESG HOPWA HOPWA
-PSH
FY 25/26 Actual Entitlement
Funds
$7,836,902 $2,615,70
8 $692,854 $1,869,366 $662,99
6 Estimated Prior Year
Balance
$4,358,740 $18,032,7
19 0 $442,158 0
Estimated FY25/26 Program
Income
$200,000 $300,000 $180,425 0 0 TOTAL $12,395,64
2 $20,948,4
27 $ 873,279 $2,311,524 $662,99
6 HOPWA Permanent Supportive Housing (PSH) operates on a three-year funding cycle. HUD awarded $1,325,991 in FY 2022–2023, which must be fully expended over a three-year period. The City began drawing down these funds in FY 2024–2025. FY 2025–2026 will mark the second year of implementation and the final year the City will utilize the HOPWA-PSH funds awarded in FY 2022–2023

Table 5 – Expected Resources Priority Table
Pr
og
.

So
urc
e
of
Fu
nds
Uses of
Funds
Expected Amount Available Year 1 Expect
ed
Amoun
t
Availab
le
Remai
nder of
ConPla
n
Narrative
Description
Annu
al
Alloca
tion
Progr
am
Inco
me
Prior
Year
Reso
urce
Total
:
$ $ $ $ $
CDB
G
Publi
c-
Feder
al
Public
Services;
Housing
Rehab;
Capital
Improvement
Projects CDIs
$7,836,9
02 $200,0
00 $4,358,
740
$12,04
7,972
[to be
finalized
after
Council
approval]

CDBG funds
may be used
for:
1) Public
Services;
2) Public
infrastructure

AAP-18
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

– Public
Facilities &
Public
Infrastructure
;
Capital
Improvement
Projects CDIs
–
Community-
based
Organization
Center
Improvement
s;
Enhanced
Code
Enforcement
Microenterpr
ise Program
Admin./Plann
ing.

and other
public facility
improvements;
3) Community-
based Center
Improvements;
4) Enhanced
Code
Enforcement;
5)
Microenterpris
e Program; and
6) Admin &
Planning
H
O
M
E
Pu
blic
-
Fe
der
al
Tenant
Based
Rental
Assistance
CHDO and
regular
HOME
rental
projects,
such as
property
acquisition,
new const.,
and/or
rehabilitati
on;.
$2,61
5,708
$300,
000
$18,0
32,71
9 $20,8
55,32
6 [to be
finalize
d after
Council
approv
al]

HOME funds
may be used
for:
1) Tenant
Based Rental
Assistance
(TBRA)
2) Rental
development
;
3) Home
Repair
Program
4) Fair
Housing

AAP-19
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Home
Repair
Program
Admin. and
Planning
(funds for
Fair
Housing
Activity) for
HOME
programs
and
activities.

Services;
and/or
5) Admin &
Planning.

ES
G
Pu
blic
-
Fe
der
al
Shelter
Outreach;
HMIS
Homeless
Prevention;

Financial
Assistance;

Overnight
shelter
Rapid re-
housing
(rental
assistance);

Rental
Assistance
Services;

Transitiona
l housing.
$692,
854
$0 $180,
425
$877,
625
$0 ESG is
designed to
identify
sheltered
and
unsheltered
homeless
persons, as
well as those
at risk of
homelessnes
s, and
provide the
services
necessary to
help them
quickly
regain
stability in
permanent
housing.
1) Homeless
Outreach
2) HMIS
3) Rapid
Rehousing

AAP-20
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

H
O
P
W
A
Pu
blic
-
Fe
der
al
Tenant-
based
Rental
Assistance;
Permanent
housing in
facilities;

Permanent
housing
placement;

Supportive
services;
Short-term
mortgage
and rent
assistance;
Admin. and
Planning
for HOPWA
programs
and
activities.
$1,80
1,081
0 $442,
158
$2,15
3,185
$0 HOPWA is
exclusively
dedicated to
the housing
needs and
supportive
services of
people living
with
HIV/AIDS.

AAP-21
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

2. Explain how federal funds will leverage those additional resources (private, state and local funds), including a description of how matching requirements will be satisfied.

Federal funds will leverage with local funds (i.e., General Funds, State, County and other federal funds) to increase project efficiencies and benefit from economies of scale. The HOME match requirement will be met through the waiving of property taxes on past HOME-funded multi-family affordable developments.

County and Local Housing & Community Development Sources:

County-wide & local resources support housing & community development programs. These programs offer assistance to local affordable housing developers and community organizations while others provide assistance directly to individuals. These resources include:
- Housing Trust Fund (HTF): HTF provides ongoing funding for housing and support programs that seek to address homelessness.
- Local Funds: Local funding, like Measure E and General Funds, in support of ESG and HOME matching funds requirement are utilized. Agencies have also provided matching funds through fund raising.
- Low- and Moderate-Income Housing Asset Fund: Repayments from this $675M loan portfolio, originally funded by former redevelopment affordable housing funds, are reused to finance a variety of affordable housing programs for lower-income households. The City receives approximately $18M each year in recycled funds repaid by existing loans in its Low-Moderate Income Housing Asset Fund.

3. If appropriate, describe publicly owned land or property located within the jurisdiction that may be used to address the needs identified in the plan.

The City continues to explore opportunities to acquire surplus land from other public agencies to meet its housing and community development goals.

The Housing Authority of Santa Clara County (SCCHA) administers the Section 8 Voucher program and public housing programs on behalf of the City of San Jose Housing Authority. The SCCHA receives federal funding to operate the following programs:
- Section 8 Housing Choice Voucher Program: Provides rental assistance to low-income households.
- Family Self-Sufficiency Program: Offers employment assistance to Section 8 participants. - Veterans Affairs Supportive Housing (VASH): Provides housing assistance for homeless veterans.
- Family Unification Program: Offers voucher assistance to families separated due to inadequate housing.
- Non-Elderly Disabled (NED) Vouchers: Assists non-elderly disabled individuals in

AAP-22
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

transitioning out of caregiving institutions.
- Moderate Rehabilitation Program: Provides project-based rental assistance for low- income families.

AAP-23
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-20 Annual Goals and Objectives – 91.220(c)(3)& (e)

Table 6 – Annual Goals /Goal Description
1 Goal Name Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness
Goal
Description
Address Homelessness and its community impacts by supporting activities aligned with Continuum of Care strategies to prevent and reduce homelessness. This includes constructing affordable housing for individuals who are homeless or at risk of homelessness, as well as providing essential support services to promote stability. 2 Goal Name Increase Housing Affordability
Goal
Description
Expand access to affordable housing by supporting the development and preservation of multifamily rental housing for low-income and special needs households, and by providing rehabilitation assistance to low -income homeowners through Minor Repair Program.

Assist households maintain housing stability through tenant -based rental assistance (TBRA). Promote fair housing choice through fair housing education, fair housing testing, a housing assistance hotline, and landlord-tenant mediation. 3 Goal Name Strengthen Communities
Goal
Description Strengthen and stabilize community conditions while creating opportunities to improve employment prospects and asset growth.

4. Public Services: Support activities that provide basic needs to lower income households and special needs populations. Services would be provided to low-income households, elderly individuals, homeless persons, people with disabilities, and victims of domestic violence.

5. Make improvements to public facilities which can include City-owned facilities and/or improvements to properties owned and operated by non -profits which serve low-income clientele.

6. Neutral-Tenant Landlord Dispute Services will enhance housing stability, prevent evictions, and promote fair housing practices through comprehensive education, personalized counseling, and effective mediation.

7. Legal Services will prevent evictions and housing instability for low -income tenants by educating them about their rights and providing targeted outreach through culturally competent and accessible services.

8. Provide microenterprise assistance to qualified child care providers. 5 Goal Name Planning & Administration
Goal
Description
Provide management, planning and implementation of the CDBG, HOME, ESG, HOPWA, and HOME-ARP programs as well as monitoring of public services and housing projects.

AAP-24
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Table 7 - AP-23 Annual Goals Summary
Goal Category Needs
Addressed
Funding
Reduce
Unsheltered
Homelessness
Homeless Prevention, and
Outreach for homeless individuals
Homelessness CDBG: $330,000
ESG: $825,294
Start Year: 2025 End Year: 2026
Narrative: Address Homelessness and its community impacts by supporting outreach activities aligned with Continuum of Care strategies to prevent and reduce unsheltered homelessness. This includes supporting the administration of the HMIS system.

HomeFirst - Citywide Outreach: CDBG/$330,000 & ESG/$417,850 County of Santa Clara - HMIS Support: ESG/$227,119
LifeMoves – Rapid Rehousing*: ESG/$180,425

*Rapid Rehousing funds will supplement the program, which also receives support from non- federal funding sources. The program term is July 1, 2025, through December 31, 2025.

Goal Outcome Indicator Quantity Unit of Measure
Homeless Outreach 720 Persons Assisted
Rapid Rehousing 10
(CDBG funds
only; total
number of
clients served is
16)
Persons Assisted

Goal Category Needs Addressed Funding
Increase
Affordable
Housing
Affordable Housing
Non-Homeless Special Needs
Non-Housing Community
Development
Affordable
Housing

CDBG:
$1,473,703
HOME:
$2,738,390
HOPWA:
$2,101,855
HOPWA-PSH:
$643,107
Start Year: 2025 End Year: 2026
Narrative: Assist in the rehabilitation of low-income owner-occupied homes, provide TBRA rental subsidies, support the construction of new rental units, and enhance code enforcement inspections.

AAP-25
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Promote fair housing choices and reduce barriers to housing through fair housing education and testing, a housing assistance hotline, landlord-tenant mediation, and legal assistance to ensure compliance with the City Apartment Rent Ordinance, Tenant Protection Ordinance, and Housing Equality Payment Ordinance.

Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley - Minor Repair: HOME/$1,500,000 Habitat for Humanity - Minor Repair: HOME/$660,000
City of San Jose, Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement Department - Enhanced Code Enforcement: CDBG/$1,273,703
Bay Area Community Health – TBRA : HOPWA/$1,801,855 & HOPWA-PSH/$643,107 (100 households)
San Benito - TBRA: HOPWA/$442,158 (10 households: 3 households receive TBRA & Supportive Services; 7 households receive supportive services only)

Law Foundation - Fair Housing: CDBG/$200,000 & HOME/$200,000 *Fair Housing services will be funded from $165,132 in CDBG Administrative funds and $34,868 in Public Services funds.

Community Housing Development Organization (CHDO) HOME/$378,390 Goal Outcome Indicator Quantity Unit of Measure
Rental Units Rehabilitated: 0 Household Housing
Unit
Homeowner Housing Rehabilitated 150 Household Housing
Unit
Tenant-Based Rental Assistance 103 Household Housing
Unit
Enhancement Code Enforcement 660 Household Housing
Unit
Public Service Activities Other Than
Low/Mod Income Benefit
145 Persons Assisted

Goal Category Needs Addressed Funding
Strengthen
Communities
Non-Housing Community
Development
Public Services
Community
Development
Investments
CDBG:
$9,218,225

Start Year: 2025 End Year: 2026
Narrative: Strengthen and stabilize community conditions while creating opportunities to improve employment prospects and asset growth. Activities include supporting initiatives that provide basic needs to low-income individuals, households, special needs populations, the elderly, people with disabilities, and victims of domestic violence, as well as upgrading City-owned facilities and properties owned and operated by non-profits serving low-

AAP-26
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

income clients and providing legal services and neutral tenant-landlord counseling services.

Providing microenterprise training to qualified childcare business owners.

Critical improvement projects enhance the safety, accessibility, and livability of neighborhoods. Projects such as infrastructure upgrades, public facility renovations, and neighborhood revitalization efforts help prevent blight, increase access to essential services, and create spaces that foster community engagement.

SOMOS – Neighborhood Engagement $145,000
VIVO – Neighborhood Engagement $45,000
POSSO – Senior Nutrition - $355,385
Bay Area Legal (BALA) – Legal Services $150,000
Legal Link – Legal Services $10,000
Project Sentinel – Legal Services $150,000
Upwards – Microenterprise Child Care - $1,048,394
DOT - Sidewalk Repair Program - $150,000
DOT-Accessible Pedestrian Signal - $434,463
PW – Brahms Ave and Tully Road Street Light Improvement - $260,000 Mid-Peninsula Housing – Arbor Park Fire Sprinkler Heads - $290,590 Mid-Peninsula Housing – Italian Gardens Roof and Safety Lights - $1,491,582 Reserve for Public Infrastructure/Rehabilitation– $4,688,811

Goal Outcome Indicator Quantity Unit of Measure
Public Services (non-Legal Services) 630 Persons Assisted Public Services (Legal Services) 975 Persons Assisted
Microenterprise Program - Upwards 175 Persons Assisted

Goal Category Needs Addressed Needs Addressed Funding
Administration
& Planning
Other Administration &
Planning
CDBG: $1,537,846
ESG: $52,231
HOME: $82,260
HOPWA: $51,330
HOPWA-PSH:
$19,889
Start Year: 2025 End Year: 2026
Narrative: Grantee and HOPWA’s Project Sponsor provide management, implementation and planning of the CDBG, ESG, HOME and HOPWA programs as well as monitoring of public services and housing projects.

AAP-27
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Estimate the number of extremely low-income, low-income, and moderate-income families to whom the jurisdiction will provide affordable housing as defined by HOME 91.215(b).

210 households for Homeowner housing rehabilitation (CDBG), 75 Extremely low-income households
90 Very Low-income household
45 Low-income households

100 households for TBRA (HOPWA),
70 Extremely low-income households
30 Low-income households

AAP-28
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-35 Projects – 91.220(d)

2. Introduction

The activities that the City will undertake in FY 2025 -2026 using CDBG and HOME funds include:

Public Services, Homeowner Rehabilitation, Tenant Based Rental Assistance, Program Administration & Planning, and Affordable Housing Improvements for low and moderate-income residents. The activities meet one or more prio rity needs identified in the 5 -year Consolidated Action Plan.

In addition to the projects and activities funded with HUD funds as noted in table “AP-38 – Project Information Summary”, the City also funds other Public Service Activities with local funds that include:

The Consolidated Plan goals below represent high priority needs for the City of San Jose (City) and serve as the basis for the strategic actions the city will use to meet these needs. The activities that the City will undertake in FY 2024-2025 using CDBG, ESG, HOME and HOPWA funds include: Public Services, Homeowner Rehabilitation, Tenant Based Rental Assistance, Affordable Housing Improvements, Public Facilities Improvements, and Program Administration & Planning, for low and moderate-income residents. The activities meet one or more priority needs identified in the 5-year Consolidated Action Plan The goals, listed in no particular order, are:

1. Create additional affordable housing and provide more housing options for low-income renters.

2. Improve non-profit community services to provide and services for vulnerable populations, in particular individuals with disabilities, seniors, and the unhoused.

3. Improve access to housing through the provision of services (such as assistance with tenant/landlord issues and understanding laws and ordinances for renters).

4. Enhance resident quality of life by improving neighborhood conditions and expanding economic opportunities.

In addition to the projects and activities funded with HUD funds as noted in table “AP-38 – Project Information Summary”, the City also funds other Public Service Activities with local funds that include:

3. Projects List
Table 8 – Project Information
# Project Name
1 CDBG - Public Services
2 CDBG - Citywide Outreach for Unsheltered Populations
3 CDBG - Legal Services

AAP-29
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Table 8 – Project Information
# Project Name
4 CDBG - Enhanced Code Enforcement
5 CDBG - Minor Home Repair Program
6 CDBG - Public Facilities, and Public Infrastructure/Street Improvements 7 CDBG - Community-Based Organization Center Rehabilitations 8 CDBG - Rehabilitation, Infrastructure for Public Facility and Street Improvements 9 CDBG – Microenterprise Program-Childcare
10 HOME – Minor Home Repair/Rehab Program
11 HOPWA – Bay Area Community Health
12 HOPWA - San Benito County
13 ESG - City of San Jose Citywide Outreach for Unsheltered Populations 14 CDBG/HOME Fair Housing
15 CDBG - CSJ Administration/Legal & NEPA Review
16 HOME - CSJ Administration & Monitoring
17 HOPWA - CSJ Administration & Monitoring

4. Describe the reasons for allocation priorities and any obstacles to addressing underserved needs:

Allocation of federal funds is based on needs and priorities identified in the 2025-2030 ConPlan.

The City prioritizes allocations to projects that serve the lowest income households, from 0-80% of Area Median Income.

The Annual Action Plan was developed based on the goals and strategies of the 5-year Consolidated Plan.

The following priorities were identified during the outreach process for the Consolidated Plan:

1. Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness – Expand housing access and self- sufficiency resources for individuals and families experiencing or at risk of homelessness.

2. Increase Housing Affordability – Develop new affordable housing opportunities and preserve existing affordable
housing.

3. Strengthen Communities – Enhance community well-being and improve residents’ quality of life.

AAP-30
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-38 Project Information Summary

Table 9 – Project Information Summary
1 Project
Name
CDBG - Public Services (Neighborhood Engagement)
Goals
Supported
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Enhance community well-being and improve residents’
quality of life.

Funding CDBG: $545,385
Description CDBG will fund community-based organizations to provide public services to low-income persons and/or households.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
POSSO/360 persons
SOMOS Mayfair/170 persons
VIVO/100 persons
Location
Description
Citywide, East San Jose
Planned
Activities 1-Senior Access & Senior Nutrition – POSSO: This Project provides door- to-door transportation services for seniors and prepares hot meals with delivery to home-bound seniors (Budget: $355,385/Matrix Code: 05A- Senior Services/LMC/PB: Yes).

2-Neighborhood Engagement – VIVO: The Project aims to enhance the economic well-being of the community by imparting skills and knowledge and offering direct support services. Its goal is to address community needs through various activities, including educational classes, civic engagement workshops, and individualized case management (Budget:
$45,000/Matrix Code: 05Z-Other public services/LMC/PB: No).

3-Neighborhood Engagement– SOMOS: This project will engage in community and power-building activities by offering leadership training and basic needs support through partnerships with local community organizations (Budget: $145,000/Matrix Code: 05Z-Other public services/LMC/PB: No).

AAP-31
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

2 Project
Name
CDBG - Citywide Outreach for Unsheltered Populations
Goals
Supported
Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness
Needs
Addressed
Homelessness
Funding CDBG: $330,000
Description Citywide Outreach for Unsheltered Populations Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
720 unduplicated homeless individuals will be served
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities
Citywide Outreach – HomeFirst: The City will provide CDBG funds to HomeFirst to support a Citywide Homeless Outreach, Engagement, and Shelter program. The program will focus on utilizing an integrated approach to provide a comprehensive response to addressing chronic homelessness in the City. Activities may include street outreach, emergency shelter operations, rapid re-housing and financial/case management (Budget: $330,000/Matrix Code: 03T/LMC/PB: Yes).

3 Project
Name
CDBG – Public Services (Legal Services)
Goals
Supported
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Enhance community well-being and improve residents’
quality of life.

Funding CDBG: $310,000
Description CDBG will fund community-based organizations to provide legal services to low-income persons and/or households.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
Neutral Tenant-Landlord Dispute Resolution
Project Sentinel/800 persons served
Legal Link/75 persons served

Legal Services:

Bay Area Legal/100 persons served

AAP-32
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

proposed
activities
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities
CDBG will fund legal services activity for Low-Income Tenants aims to increase housing stability by providing landlord/tenant counseling, education, referrals, legal assistance to tenants facing unlawful evictions and assistance for various other landlord/tenant issues. (Budget:
$310,000/Matrix Code: 05C-Legal Services/LMC/PB: No).

1-Neutral Tenant-Landlord Dispute Resolution –
Project Sentinel: This Project will enhance housing stability, prevent evictions, and promote fair housing practices through comprehensive education, personalized counseling, and effective mediation. (Budget:
$150,000/Matrix Code: 05C-Legal Services/LMC/PB: No).

Legal Link: This project focuses on building community capacity by providing trainings and the development of a training manual to equip community partners with tools to deliver housing education to the community. (Budget: $10,000/Matrix Code: 05C-Legal Services/LMC/PB:

No).

2-Legal Services – Bay Area Legal Aid: The Project will prevent evictions and housing instability for low-income tenants by educating them about their rights and providing targeted outreach through culturally competent and accessible services, including legal assistance, advice, and representation to low-income tenants facing housing-related legal issues such as eviction, disputes with landlords, and other rental housing rights. (Budget: $150,000/Matrix Code: 05C-Legal Services/LMC/PB: No). 4 Project
Name
CDBG - Enhanced Code Enforcement
Goals
Supported
Create and Preserve Affordable Housing
Needs
Addressed
Increase Housing Affordability
Strengthen Communities
Funding CDBG: $1,273,703
Description Placed-based code enforcement for low-income neighborhoods.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
660 housing units (Households Assisted)

AAP-33
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
Location
Description
Project Hope, Santee, Mayfair, Five Wounds/Brookwood Terrace, and additional hotspots identified through the Mayor Gang Prevention Task Force.

Planned
Activities
Enhanced Code Enforcement activities will be conducted in low-income, residential neighborhoods by the Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement (PBCE) Department that meet the City definition of Deteriorated/Deteriorating Areas. Code Enforcement will focus primarily on the inspections of multifamily units. (Budget: $1,273,703/Matrix Code:
15/LMA).
5 Project
Name
CDBG – Public Facilities, and Public Infrastructure/Street Improvements Goals
Supported
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Strengthen Communities
Funding CDBG: $7,315,446
Description CDBG funds will be used to renovate public neighborhood and recreation facilities, enhancing community stability and improving the quality of life for residents in low-income areas. These improvements will benefit neighborhoods where at least 51% of the residents are low-income. The following projects will be allocated for the FY 2025-2026 program year:

1-Sidewalk Repair Project:

Department of Transportation (DOT) is looking to repair City owned sidewalks identified in Low-Mod communities. Useable and safe sidewalks are essential to ensuring community safety. The locations have been identified and contractors are standing by. Once the work is assigned, the work will be completed within 45 days, with some minor delay possibly extending the work to 90 days total. DOT has the systems in place and is partnering with property owners to get sidewalks repairs/replaced completed in FY2025-2026. (Budget: $150,000/ Matrix Code: 03K/LMA)

2-Accessible Pedestrian Signal Project:

DOT will continue its multi-year initiative to install Accessible Pedestrian Signals (APS) at signalized intersections to improve accessibility and safety, particularly for visually impaired and other vulnerable pedestrians.

APS devices provide audible and vibrotactile cues that indicate when the traffic signal is in the "WALK" or "DON’T WALK" phase, offering clear,

AAP-34
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

multimodal feedback to help pedestrians safely navigate intersections. (Budget: $434,463/ Matrix Code: 03K/LMA).

3-Brahms Ave and Tully Road Street Light Improvement Project:

The Public Works Department will enhance street lighting in these areas will significantly improve pedestrian visibility, reduce traffic-related accidents, and promote a greater sense of safety for community members. At the intersection of Rigoletto Drive and Brahms Avenue, the project will upgrade one existing streetlight, install one new streetlight with a pole and foundation, and trench approximately 150 linear feet for underground conduit. On Tully Road near the Coyote Creek bridge, four existing streetlights will be upgraded, two new streetlights with poles and foundations will be installed, and approximately 250 linear feet of underground conduit will be added. (Budget: $260,000/ Matrix Code:
03K/LMA).

4-MidPen Housing—Italian Gardens Roofing and Lighting Improvements (MidPen Housing) Project: MidPen Housing will replace the roofs of the twelve residential buildings and two community facilities that are at the end of their useful life and require full replacement to preserve the property’s long-term habitability, at the Italian Gardens location.

Additionally, MidPen will upgrade outdated common area lighting, particularly in hallways and parking lots, where existing lighting levels are insufficient. New energy-efficient LED fixtures will improve visibility, enhance resident security, and reduce utility costs, allowing savings to be redirected to other critical property needs. (Budget: $290,590/Matrix Code: 03E/LMA)

5- MidPen Housing—Arbor Park Fire Sprinkler Heads Replacements (Mid- Pen Housing) Project: MidPen Housing will replace the Arbor Park property's fire sprinkler heads in all residential units and common areas.

After 23 years in service, the sprinkler system components have reached the end of their functional lifespan and require updating to maintain fire safety standards and protect resident well-being. (Budget:
$1,491,582/Matrix Code: 03E/LMA)

6-Reserve for Public Infrastructure Project: Budget: $4,688,811/ Matrix Code: 03K/LMA.

AAP-35
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
LMI qualified families
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities Improvements of public facilities to improve public safety. 7 Project
Name
CDBG - Economic Development/Microenterprise Assistance
Goals
Supported
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Strengthen Communities
Funding CDBG: $1,048,394
Description Upwards (Weecare)-BOOST Program: The goal of the BOOST Program is to provide comprehensive business and technical support to participating microenterprise childcare providers, contributing to the establishment and maintenance of a robust and sustainable local childcare ecosystem.

This enhances the overall sustainability of LMI providers through operational stabilization and revenue maximization, which, in turn, improves the quality of life of the families they serve. (Budget:
$1,048,394/Matrix Code: 18B/LMA)
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
LMI qualified individuals
Location
Description Citywide
Planned
Activities
Provide technical support to participating microenterprise childcare providers.
8 Project
Name
HOME – Minor Home Repair Program

AAP-36
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Goals
Supported
Create and Preserve Affordable Housing
Needs
Addressed
Increase Housing Affordability
Strengthen Communities
Funding HOME: $2,160,000
Description This program aims to repair housing units to address the immediate health and safety needs of extremely LMI homeowners in San Jose. The primary focus will be on emergency and critical repairs, alongside general accessibility and mobility improvements within the home. Additionally, the program provides funding for limited rehabilitation efforts to address more substantial safety concerns, ensuring a safe, affordable, and decent living environment for the occupants.

1-Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley (Budget: $1,500,000/ Matrix Code:
14A/LMH)

2-Habitat for Humanity (Budget: $660,000/Matrix Code: 14A/LMH)

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
125 low and moderate-income households
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities
Homeowner housing rehabilitation.
9 Project
Name
HOPWA – Tenant Based Rental Assistance
Goals
Supported
Increase Housing Affordability
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Affordable Housing
Strengthen Communities
Funding HOPWA: $2,496,292
HOPWA-PSH: $662,996
Description The HOPWA program will provide rent subsidies, permanent housing placement assistance, and supportive services to help low-income residents living with HIV/AIDS secure and maintain housing. Housing placement assistance includes working with a placement specialist and

AAP-37
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

receiving security deposit assistance. Supportive services include medical and housing case management and self-sufficiency services. In addition, the project allocates 7% for the project sponsor to administer the HOPWA project.
- Tenant-based Rental Assistance;
- Support Services; and
- Permanent Housing Placement.

1- Bay Area Community Health (Budget: $1,801,855/HOPWA; $643,107/HOPWA-PSH)
2-San Benito County: HOPWA entitlement grant to San Benito County will provide housing placement assistance, rental subsidies, and nutritional and dental assistance to low-income clients living with HIV/AIDS. In addition, the project allocates 7% for the project sponsor to administer the HOPWA project. (Budget: $442,158/HOPWA)

3-Grantee Administration: $51,330/HOPWA; $19,889/HOPWA-PSH Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
100 households served (Bay Area Community Health)
10 households served (San Benito County)
Location
Description Santa Clara County
San Benito County
Planned
Activities - TBRA
- Supportive Services
- Permanent Housing Placement
- Project Sponsor Administration
10 Project
Name
Fair Housing
Goals
Supported
Increase Housing Affordability
Strengthen Communities
Needs
Addressed
Increase Housing Affordability
Funding CDBG: $34,868
CDBG Admin: $165,132
HOME: $200,000
Total: $400,000

AAP-38
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Description Law Foundation of Silicon Valley-Fair Housing: The City will continue to program some of its CDBG Administrative funds, as well as some public service funds, and HOME Administrative Funds to support a consortium of five agencies to provide Fair Housing activities. Activities may include providing outreach and education on fair housing issues; conducting fair housing testing; enforcing fair housing laws through litigation; and providing technical assistance to the Housing Department on how to monitor City-financed developments for fair housing compliance. (Budget:
$34,868/CDBG; $165,132/CDBG Admin; $200,000/HOME)
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
LMI Households
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities
Fair Housing Services
11 Project
Name
ESG
Goals
Supported
Reduce Unsheltered Homelessness
Needs
Addressed
Homelessness
Funding $825,394
Description The City will utilize ESG funds to support a Homeless Outreach and Engagement program for homeless and at-risk individuals and families and will also support HMIS. The Homeless Outreach and Engagement Program will focus on utilizing an integrated approach to provide a comprehensive response to addressing chronic homelessness. The program aim is to provide case management services, deposit/rental assistance, and other eligible services as needed to keep individuals and families from experiencing homelessness. The City will contract with HomeFirst to provide the Outreach and Engagement services. This program is combined with the CDBG Homeless Outreach, Engagement, and Shelter program. ESG funds will be used to support the administration of the ESG program. The ESG program will provide the following activities:
1-Shelter Outreach ($417,850);
2-HMIS ($227,119);

AAP-39
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

3-Rapid Rehousing ($180,425); and
Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
Shelter Outreach: 190 homeless;
HMIS: N/A;
Rapid Rehousing: TBD;
Grantee Admin: N/A
Location
Description
Citywide
Planned
Activities
Citywide Outreach for Unsheltered Populations
12 Project
Name
CDBG - CSJ Administration/Legal & NEPA Review
Target Area Citywide
Goals
Supported
N/A
Needs
Addressed
N/A
Funding CDBG Admin: $1,537,846
Description A portion of the CDBG grant allocation will be used for reasonable planning and administrative costs associated with the administration of CDBG funds and other related federal requirements. Administration funds will support oversight activities of the Housing Department for monitoring, legal services from the City Attorney Office, and environmental reviews from the Planning Department.

1. CDBG Admin. & Monitoring (Budget $1,259,956 Matrix code:
21A);

2. CAO/Legal Consultation (Budget: $76,925/Matrix Code: 21A);

3. PCBE/NEPA Review (Budget: $76,925/Matrix Code: 20 Planning); and

4. Fair Housing: (Budget: $200,000/Matrix Code: 21 D Fair Housing).

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
N/A

AAP-40
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

proposed
activities
Location
Description
200 E. Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA 95113
Planned
Activities
CDBG Planning and Administration
13 Project
Name
HOME - CSJ Administration & Monitoring
Goals
Supported
N/A
Needs
Addressed
N/A
Funding HOME: $82,260
Description The city will allocate $82,260 to administrative costs associated with managing the HOME grant.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
N/A
Location
Description
200 E. Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA 95113
Planned
Activities
HOME Planning and Administration
17 Project
Name
HOPWA & HOPWA-PSH - CSJ Administration & Monitoring
Target Area N/A
Goals
Supported
N/A
Needs
Addressed
N/A
Funding HOPWA: $51,330
HOPWA-PSH: $19,889
Total: $71,219
Description The city will allocate $71,219 (approximately 3% of the entitlement grant) to administrative costs associated with managing HOPWA-funded projects and activities.

Target Date 6/30/2026
Estimate the
number and
N/A

AAP-41
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

type of
families that
will benefit
from the
proposed
activities
Location
Description
200 E. Santa Clara Street San Jose, CA 95113
Planned
Activities
HOPWA Planning and Administration

AAP-42
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-50 Geographic Distribution – 91.220 (f)

2. Description of the geographic areas of the entitlement (including areas of low-income and minority concentration) where assistance will be directed.

Investments will be allocated citywide.

3. Rationale for the priorities for allocating investments geographically The City does not plan to prioritize investments based on geography. However, HOME CHDO set-aside funds may be utilized in a neighboring jurisdiction if a suitable CHDO development cannot be identified within the City limits.

The Consolidated Plan allocates federal entitlement dollars to low- and moderate-income (LMI) census tracts without designating specific target areas. Given current budget constraints, San Jose recognizes the importance of coordinated investments in its neighborhoods. In the 2010- 2015 Consolidated Plan, San Jose introduced its first neighborhood plan using a place-based strategy, focusing leveraged investments in the Santee/McKinley, Mayfair, and Five Wounds/Brookwood Terrace neighborhoods to foster clean, safe, and engaged communities.

In the 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan, the City further emphasized economic revitalization in neighborhoods, continuing to target investments strategically to advance these goals. The City will maintain its commitment to prioritizing investments in the original Place-based neighborhoods and has expanded this focus to include four additional targeted neighborhoods.

AAP-43
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-55 Affordable Housing – 91.220 (g)

1. Introduction
For the purpose of this section, the term “affordable housing” is defined in the HOME regulations at 24 CFR 92.252 for rental housing and 24 CFR 92.254 for homeownership. It is important to note that the City of San Jose intends to use “uncapped” 80% only income limits since San Jose is an entitlement city that is exempt from using the capped limits per HUD guidance effective June 1, 2021.

The City of San Jose has identified the production and maintenance of affordable housing as the primary objective for the expenditure of federal funds in the Consolidated Plan. While CDBG and HOME funds are limited, the City will continue to allocate funding to affordable housing projects, including owner-occupied rehabilitation. The City has non-federal funding sources that it will use toward the development of affordable housing during Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

Table 10 – AP-55A – One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported (by Population Type)
Homeless – Housing assistance for units reserved for homeless individuals and households.

Non-Homeless – Housing assistance for all units NOT reserved for homeless individuals and households. 250
Special-Needs – Housing assistance for units reserved for households that are not homeless but require specialized housing or supportive services. 90 Total 340

Table 11 - AP-55B – One Year Goals for the Number of Households to be Supported (by Population Type)
Rental Assistance – Housing assistance for programs such as tenant -based rental assistance (TBRA) and one time-time payments to prevent homelessness. 98 (HOPWA)
700
(HOME-
ARP)
The Production of New Units – New units, including the conversion of non - residential properties. 0
Rehab of Existing Units – Rehabilitation of existing units, including reconstruction. If unit will be acquired and rehabilitated, report the unit only once. 200 Acquisition of Existing Units – Housing assistance for programs such as down payment assistance. If the unit will be acquired and rehabilitated, report the unit only once.
0 Total 998

200 households for minor repair programs (CDBG)
90 Extremely Low-Income Households

AAP-44
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

60 Very Low-Income Households
50 Low-Income Households

90 households for TBRA for households with HIV/AIDS (HOPWA) 30 Extremely Low-Income Households
30 Very Low-Income Households
30 Low-Income Households

700 households for TBRA and supportive services (HOME-ARP)* 0 Extremely Low-Income Households
0 Very Low-Income Households
210 Low-Income Households

*Not more than 30% of the total number of rental units assisted with HOME -ARP funds may be occupied by low -income households as defined in 24 CFR 92.2. HOME -ARP funds must primarily benefit individuals and families meeting one of the four qualifying populations.

AP-60 Public Housing – 91.220 (h)

1. Introduction
The Santa Clara County Housing Authority (SCCHA) provides rental assistance to approximately 19,000 households through the federal Housing Choice Vouchers (Section 8) program. The Section 8 interest list includes around 37,000 individuals, with an estimated wait time of five years. In addition to administering rental assistance, SCCHA develops, owns, and manages more than 2,700 affordable rental housing units across the County. SCCHA’s programs primarily serve extremely low-income and very low-income households, with over 80 percent of clients being extremely low-income families, seniors, veterans, individuals with disabilities, and formerly homeless individuals.

The agency is an active developer of affordable housing and has either constructed, rehabilitated, or assisted with the creation of housing developments that service a variety of households, including special needs households
Note: Subsidized housing is housing owned and managed by private or nonprofit owners that receive subsidies in exchange for renting to LMI tenants, while public housing is housing owned and managed by the housing authority. Public Housing is defined by HUD as “housing assisted under the provisions of the U.S. Housing Act of 1937 or under a state or local program having the same general purposes as the federal program. Distinguished from privately financed housing, regardless of whether federal subsidies or mortgage insurance are features of such housing development.” The Santa Clara County Housing Authority had 555 units of public housing in Santa Clara County including approximately 150 in the City of San Jose. Funding for the public housing program was not adequately meeting the needs for providing much-needed

AAP-45
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

renovations and capital improvements to the projects and so, with HUD approval, the Housing Authority disposed of all but four of its public housing units. The units are now owned by a Housing Authority affiliate and maintain their affordability through LIHTC and Project-Based Vouchers.

2. Actions planned during the next year to address the needs to public housing

Not applicable. The are no public housing units administered by the City.

3. Actions to encourage public housing residents to become more involved in management and participate in homeownership
While most of its public housing units have been converted to affordable housing, SCCHA remains committed to resident engagement and incorporating resident input into its policy- making process. SCCHA encourages participation through public meetings and community feedback opportunities. Additionally, SCCHA’s Board of Commissioners includes two tenant representatives, known as Resident Commissioners, who are current participants in SCCHA's housing programs, such as the Housing Choice Voucher (Section 8) program.

SCCHA has been a Moving To Work agency since 2008, which allows it greater flexibility to meet its goals. As of FY 2025, the agency has had 65 activities approved by HUD. The vast majority of its successful initiatives have been aimed at reducing administrative inefficiencies, which in turn opens up more resources for programs aimed at LMI families.

4. If the PHA is designated as troubled, describe the manner in which financial assistance will be provided or other assistance.

Not applicable.

AAP-46
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-65 Homeless and Other Special Needs Activities – 91.220 (i)

1. Introduction
The 2023 Point-In-Time Count reported approximately 10,394 individuals experiencing homelessness in Santa Clara County, representing a 5% increase from 2023. Of this total, 6,340 individuals—about 61%—were located in the City of San José, marking a 4% increase from the previous year. Among San José’s homeless population, approximately 73% were unsheltered, while an estimated 1,700 individuals were in emergency shelters, safe parking sites, or transitional housing. Over 40% of those counted were identified as chronically homeless.

2. Community Plan to End Homelessness
The five-year Community Plan to End Homelessness, endorsed by the San José City Council in August 2020, serves as a countywide roadmap to guide public, private, and nonprofit stakeholders in making decisions about funding, priorities, and service delivery. The plan is structured around three key strategies:

1. Address root causes of homelessness through systems and policy change

2. Expand homelessness prevention and housing programs to meet the need

3. Improve quality of life for unsheltered individuals and create healthy neighborhoods for all
The City of San José is committed to aligning its funding and grantmaking efforts with these strategies. Through its Housing Department, the City seeks to establish and amend agreements with service providers to deliver crisis response services, housing placements, and shelter opportunities. These programs primarily support strategies two and three of the Community Plan.

3. Homeless System Coordination
Homeless response planning and coordination is led by the Santa Clara County Continuum of Care (CoC), governed by the CoC Board of Directors. The CoC is a collaborative body that includes local jurisdictions, community-based organizations, the Santa Clara County Housing Authority, public agencies, health providers, advocates, individuals with lived experience, faith- based groups, and research and policy organizations.

The CoC oversees the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS), which tracks performance metrics and outcomes for all County-funded homeless service programs, ensuring accountability and data-driven decision-making across the system.

4. Describe the jurisdictions one-year goals and actions for reducing and ending homelessness including:

The Point-In-Time County is a countywide collaborative effort to help assess regional homeless needs. The City participates with the County and other jurisdictions to conduct a biennial

AAP-47
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

countywide homeless count. The data from the count is used to plan, fund, and implement actions to reduce homelessness.

The City administers housing and shelter programs, supportive services, and outreach efforts aimed at reducing homelessness. These efforts include both permanent and interim (temporary) housing opportunities for individuals and families experiencing homelessness. Supportive services may include rental subsidies, case management, and individualized plans to help participants secure and maintain permanent housing.

All proposed agreements focus on service delivery and program operations. They do not include the development or construction of housing or shelter facilities.

The table provides an overview of the housing and shelter opportunities programs proposed to begin or continue in Fiscal Year 2025-2026.

AAP-48
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Table 12 – Programs aimed to reduce homelessness
Service Organization Program New or
Amendment
Funding
Source(s)
Award
Homelessness
Prevention
County of
Santa Clara
Homelessness
Prevention
System
Amendment TBD TBD
HomeFirst Targeted
Outreach and
Engagement
Program

Amendment TBD TBD
PATH Targeted
Outreach and
Engagement
Program

Amendment TBD

TBD
HomeFirst Citywide
Outreach
Amendment CDBG and
ESG
$747,850
Bill Wilson
Center
Youth
Financial
Assistance
Amendment TBD TBD
Unity Care Youth
Financial
Assistance
Amendment TBD TBD
Rapid
Rehousing
HomeFirst Rapid
Rehousing
Amendment TBD TBD
LifeMoves Rapid
Rehousing
Amendment TBD TBD
Bill Wilson
Center
Rapid
Rehousing
Amendment TBD TBD
Supportive
Services
County of
Santa Clara
Care
Coordination
Project
Amendment Measure E $2,000,000
(FY 24-26)
County of
Santa Clara
UPLIFT Amendment

HTF $250,000
(FY 24-26)
County of
Santa Clara
HMIS Support Amendment

ESG $226,336
County of
Santa Clara
Centralized
Shelter
Hotline
Amendment

TBD TBD
LifeMoves Supportive
Parking for
RVs
Amendment TBD TBD
GoodWill SJ Bridge Amendment TBD TBD

AAP-49
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Bill Wilson
Center
Safety Net
Shelter
Amendment TBD TBD
HomeFirst Valley Water
Outreach
Amendment TBD TBD
Pulse for
Good
Engagement
Evaluation
Survey
New TBD TBD
Interim
Shelter
HomeFirst BHC Amendment TBD TBD
HomeFirst EIH Amendment TBD TBD
PATH Evans Lane Amendment TBD TBD
A0729 The Arena Amendment TBD TBD
Abode Plaza Amendment TBD TBD
LifeMoves Guadalupe Amendment TBD TBD
Motel

LifeMoves Motel
Voucher
Program
Amendment TBD TBD
LifeMoves Temporary
Housing
Access
Program
Amendment TBD TBD
PMI
Partners
Pacific Motor
Inn

New TBD TBD
TBRA County of
Santa Clara
TBRA New $10,924,884

HOME-ARP

$10,924,884

TOTAL $31,445,700

5. Reaching out to homeless persons (especially unsheltered persons) and assessing their individual needs.

Homeless outreach and engagement teams are the first responders to the unsheltered homeless population. The overall goals of outreach are to: build trust between outreach workers and the homeless; meet the basic needs of clients; refer and place individuals into a variety of shelter and housing opportunities; and conduct housing assessments. The assessments are used to populate the Homeless Management Information System (HMIS) so that unsheltered individuals have access to housing programs. The regionally developed systemwide performance benchmark is that 40% of individuals enrolled in street outreach programs will be successfully housed (includes permanent, temporary, foster care, long-term care, etc.).

The Housing Department currently operates several different homeless outreach and engagement programs that meet both general and specific demands of the community. These

AAP-50
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

programs are currently being analyzed for a strategic and holistic redesign. In 2025, the City’s Homeless Responses Division implemented their own outreach team, currently staffed with 12 community coordinators.

6. Addressing the emergency shelter and transitional housing needs of homeless persons.

The Housing Department currently operates five interim shelter facilities. Other facilities in the construction pipeline or near completion. This includes the Guadalupe Emergency Interim Housing program). These interim shelter programs are currently being analyzed for a strategic and holistic redesign. The Housing Department plans to release an RFP for interim shelter operations in the summer of 2023 with subsequent new contracts beginning in January 2024

46. Table 13 – Summary of interim shelter programs
Program Council
District
# of
Units
# of
Beds Target Population
Monterey/Bernal Emergency
Interim Housing
2 78 78 Individuals
Rue Ferrari Emergency Interim
Housing
2 82 124 Individuals/Couples
Guadalupe Emergency Interim
Housing 3 96 96 Individuals
Evans Lane Emergency Interim
Housing
6 48 121 Families
Mabury Bridge Housing
Community 3 40 40 Individuals
Felipe Bridge Housing Community 7 40 40 Individuals
Plaza 3 43 43 Individuals
Total 427 542

7. Helping homeless persons (especially chronically homeless individuals and families, families with children, veterans and their families, and unaccompanied youth) make the transition to permanent housing and independent living, including shortening the period of time that individuals and families experience homelessness, facilitating access for homeless individuals and families to affordable housing units, and preventing individuals and families who were recently homeless from becoming homeless again.

AAP-51
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

Through the Housing Department’s Targeted Outreach and Encampment Program, proactive street-based outreach services are provided to those experiencing unsheltered homelessness at San Jose's targeted encampments. Outreach staff engage clients at the encampment, deliver resources, enroll clients into the County's Coordinated Entry System, work with the County's System of Care to get clients document-ready for Permanent Supportive Housing and Rapid Re- housing, provide intensive Case Management, and provide referrals and warm handoffs to the City's interim shelter programs. The Housing Department’s temporary and interim shelter portfolio offers low barrier non-congregate shelter, where participants receive services to address unique housing barriers to facilitate exits to permanent housing destinations. A full suite of supportive services and intensive case management is designed to help participants work toward self-sufficiency and make the transition to permanent housing and independent living.

The Housing Department’s Emergency Interim Housing program has historically surpassed the regionally developed systemwide performance benchmark of 36% exits to permanent housing from interim shelter. Since inception, Emergency Interim Housing programs have exited approximately 50% of participants into permanent housing destinations within 1 year of enrollment.

The HomeFirst Targeted Outreach and Encampment Program will continue to provide enhanced services and coordinated resources to individuals and households experiencing homelessness in targeted areas across San Jose. The PATH Targeted Outreach and Encampment Program will continue to provide enhanced services and coordinated resources to individuals and households experiencing homelessness in targeted areas across San Jose.

The Housing Department will continue to fund two Youth Financial Assistance programs with the Bill Wilson Center and Unity Cares. This program is for Transitional Aged Youth who are at- risk of or currently experiencing homelessness. Participants receive monthly cash stipends as well as wraparound case management, supportive services, and resource connections. The program aims to permanently house youth through intentional, client-centered service delivery, housing navigation, education, and employment support. Unhoused youth are connected to welcoming and supportive resources much earlier in their experience of housing instability, allowing participants to avoid entering the local homelessness response system and minimizing projected need for traditional interventions such as interim shelter. Youth remain in the program for a set duration of 18 months, regardless of diversion from or exit from homelessness, to ensure long-term self-sufficiency and stability.

The Bill Wilson Center Youth Financial Assistance Program will continue to assist transitional aged youth who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless through December 31, 2025. The Unity Cares Youth Financial Assistance Program will continue to assist transitional aged youth who are homeless or at risk of becoming homeless through December 31, 2025. The Youth Financial Assistance program will then be extended for a term and amount to be determined at a later date.

8. Helping low -income individuals and families avoid becoming homeless, especially extremely low-income individuals and families and those who are: being discharged from

AAP-52
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

publicly funded institutions and systems of care (such as health care facilities, mental health facilities, foster care and other youth facilities, and corrections programs and institutions); or, receiving assistance from public or private agencies that address housing, health, social services, employment, education, or youth needs.

The Housing Department contracts with HomeFirst, LifeMoves, and Bill Wilson Center to deliver Rapid Rehousing programs that provide time-limited rental assistance and supportive services to individuals, families, and youth experiencing homelessness. The primary goal of Rapid Rehousing is to help participants quickly exit homelessness, secure permanent housing, and stabilize through supports such as access to healthcare and pathways to living-wage employment.

Participants are housed in existing apartments and homes located in San José and surrounding areas. Core service components include: 1) housing search and placement, 2) a decreasing, time-limited rent subsidy, 3) short-term financial assistance, and 4) individualized case management. Each household receives support for up to 24 months from the date of housing placement, with the duration tailored to their specific needs and progress. Regionally, Rapid Rehousing programs aim to ensure that at least 83% of participants exit to permanent housing.

The City will continue funding three Rapid Rehousing programs that provide rental subsidies and supportive services to help individuals and families remain stably housed. The HomeFirst program will receive a one-year contribution of $1,250,000; LifeMoves will receive $1,200,000; and Bill Wilson Center will receive $1,000,000. Each award will support personnel and operational costs from July 1, 2024, through June 30, 2025. In addition, all three programs will be extended for an additional six months, through December 31, 2025. Beginning January 1, 2026, the City plans to align its Rapid Rehousing efforts with the County of Santa Clara.

The County of Santa Clara Office of Supportive Housing TBRA program will offer rental assistance and supportive services to San Jose residents in need. Rental assistance and supportive services will stably house San Jose residents while offering them a range of supportive services that address housing barriers. A central focus of the TBRA Program’s intended outcomes includes households achieving the income needed to pay for their rent expenses through employment opportunities, asset-building support, and strengthened financial literacy skills. The se outcomes further advance the Housing Department’s prevention strategies to reduce homelessness, housing instability, and displacement in the City. The TBRA Program’s goal is to assist approximately 700 unduplicated households. The five-year $10,924,884 award will support personnel and operation costs from February 1, 2025 through June 30, 2030.

AAP-53
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-70 HOPWA Goals - 91.220 (l)(3)

Table 14 - One-year goals for the number of households to be provided housing through the use of HOPWA for:

Short-term rent, mortgage, and utility assistance to prevent homelessness of the individual or family 0
Tenant-based rental assistance 100
Units provided in permanent housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 0
Units provided in transitional short-term housing facilities developed, leased, or operated with HOPWA funds 0
Total 100

AAP-54
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-75 Barriers to Affordable Housing – 91.220 (j)

1. Introduction
The incorporated & unincorporated. jurisdictions within the County face barriers to affordable housing that are common throughout the Bay. Governmental barriers may include the following, as identified in the State-mandated 2014-2023 Housing Element update:
• Restrictive General Plan land-use policies that limit the feasibility and add to the cost of housing development.
• Zoning regulations, including but not limited to design standards such as parking requirements, height limits, minimum lot sizes, setbacks, widths, & densities, & building and landscape coverage.
• California Building Standards Code, which apply to any application for a structural building permit.
• Development review procedures/processing time can increase the carrying costs of property under consideration for residential development. • Fees, taxes, & other exactions add to the cost of housing development. These include fees for land use approval and environmental clearance, construction fess, impact/capacity fees that mitigate the costs that new development imposes on community infrastructure, & development taxes to finance capital projects. • Reduction/depletion/elimination of affordable housing programs at the State & federal levels.
• Lack of regional/interagency coordination to respond to the regional impacts of the lack of affordable housing. This includes cities that are not producing their fair share of housing, requiring other cities to provide homes for the jobs created in under-housed cities.

In addition to potential governmental constraints to affordable housing, it is equally important to recognize and be aware of the non-governmental barriers to affordable housing. These may include but are not limited to the following:
• Land cost and availability.
• Speculation, which further drives up the cost & makes it more difficult for nonprofits and government agencies to compete with private developers for land.
• Increase in cost of construction.
• Cost and availability of financing.
• Structure of the financial system that does not create capital to help meets public purpose needs.
• Environmental hazards and limitations, such as seismic hazards, water supply,

AAP-55
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

etc.

Market forces/failures that lead to:
• Displacement—efforts to maximize investment returns by replacing lower-value land uses with higher-value ones cause increasing redevelopment pressures. This natural, profit-seeking behavior on the part of individual property owners can result in the steady elimination of existing affordable housing and, as a consequence, displacement of lower-income households.
• Product Uniformity—specialized housing types are designed to match the unique needs of persons comprising a relatively small share of the overall market. As a result, these housing types carry higher investment risks making them more difficult to finance. Product uniformity is the outcome, at least until demographic trends or changing preferences alter supply/demand & the associated risk profile.
• Overcrowding—the inability of lower-income households to afford to house can result in overcrowding as multiple or extended families are forced to live together. This overcrowding increase health & safety concerns and stresses the condition of the housing stock & infrastructure. As well, overcrowding stifles household formation and thus market demand that would otherwise trigger increasing supply.
• Labor/Housing Imbalances—the labor and housing markets operate somewhat differently, and as a result, communities can become imbalanced & inequitable.

While both markets seek to maximize profits, the (private) housing market does so by pricing homes according to what the market will bear.

2. Actions it planned to remove or ameliorate the negative effects of public policies that serve as barriers to affordable housing such as land use controls, tax policies affecting land, zoning ordinances, building codes, fees and charges, growth limitations, and policies affecting the return on residential investment.

Strategy to Remove or Ameliorate the Barriers to Affordable Housing The City is addressing the barriers that hinder affordable housing and residential investment with the key programs and policies below. These programs and policies are aimed at maximizing

AAP-56
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

the ability to promote and encourage affordable housing development in San Jose, and to mitigate barriers to affordable housing:

Implement the amended Inclusionary Housing Ordinance that adds flexibility in the ways that new rental and ownership housing developments can comply and monitor its effectiveness in producing affordable homes.

Actively seek opportunities to access existing and new local, state, and federal funding resources for housing affordable to low- and moderate-income households.

Monitor and support state and federal legislation and ballot measures to create additional sources of funding for affordable housing creation, rehabilitation, and preservation, including 0- 30% AMI units.

Monitor and advocate legislation at the state and federal level for housing, community development, and homeless response funding and tools.

Allocate resources for the most vulnerable households by:
• Partnering with Santa Clara County and the Housing Authority to build new supportive housing with rental vouchers and wrap around services for the homeless.
• Partnering with service providers to better target and provide needed services to 0-30% AMI households
• Integrating 0-30% AMI units with various types and income levels within developments
• Seeking to appropriately leverage all funds to receive the greatest number of 30% AMI units
• Spending 45% of City subsidy on ELI units, per City Council direction • Maximizing other, outside, funding resources to deepen affordability.

The City identified multiple barriers to affordable housing, including income and wages that are not consistent with the rising cost of housing, a competitive rental and home market, and diminishing public funds. The City has identified multiple constraints or barriers to the affordable housing and residential investment in its draft 2023-2031 Housing Element Update, including:

• Land use controls that limit the density of housing production; • Parking requirements increase the cost of housing.

Generally, the City faces the same affordable housing barriers as the rest of the Bay Area, including:

• High cost of development constrains the development of affordable housing units in favor

AAP-57
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

of higher end units;
• Lack of developable land prevents housing development and increases the price of land; and
• Local opposition prevents affordable housing from being built in high-resource areas; and • Insufficient subsidies and vouchers for deeply affordable units.

Additionally, the Assessment of Fair Housing identified the following contributing factors to fair housing issues, including affordable housing, through analysis of data and community engagement feedback:

• Displacement of residents due to economic pressures
• Land use and zoning laws
• Source of income discrimination
• Community opposition
• Availability of affordable units in a range of sizes
• Availability, type, frequency, and reliability of public transportation • Lack of access to opportunity due to high housing costs • Lack of affordable, accessible housing in a range of unit sizes • Lack of affordable housing for individuals who need supportive services • Lack of assistance for housing accessibility modifications • Lack of resources for fair housing agencies and organizations • Location and type of affordable housing
• Loss of affordable housing
• Private discrimination

The Housing Element includes the following actions to remove or ameliorate barriers: Work with nonprofits to acquire and rehabilitate distressed multi -family housing and convert it to low income housing, update the City zoning ordinance to comply with stat e laws on reasonable accommodations, emergency shelters, transitional and supportive housing and density bonuses, accommodation of the Regional Housing Needs Assessment for the 2015 Housing Element to maintain an inventory of housing sites appropriate for a range of income levels and for supportive housing for persons with physical and developmental disabilities, analysis of impact fees, promote construction of accessary units and low income housing types such as Single Room Occupancy units, continue to req uire developers of 10 or more homeowner units to provide Below Market Rate units, consider establishing an affordable housing mitigation fee for large office and industrial developments, consider a local source of affordable housing funds.

AAP-58
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

3. Discussion:

The Analysis of Impediments to Fair Housing Choice (AI) describes a the fair housing needs and provides strategies to address those needs.

The most recent Assessment of Fair Housing is found here:
https://www.sanjoseca.gov/home/showpublisheddocument/88089/637941041956670000 assessing the housing, demographic, and economic factors and how those elements affect Fair Housing beyond 2023-2024:

AAP-59
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-85 Other Actions – 91.220 (k)

1. Introduction
This section discusses the efforts in addressing the underserved needs, expanding, and preserving affordable housing, reducing lead-based paint hazards, and developing an institutional structure for delivering housing and community development activities.

2. Actions planned to address obstacles to meeting underserved needs Please see activities in AP-20 and AP-38 to address the housing and community development needs in the City. Also, please see AP-75 regarding potential actions to address barriers to meet the affordable housing needs.

3. Actions planned to foster and maintain affordable housing The City funds Rebuilding Together Silicon Valley to administer the Minor Home Repair Program .

The program addresses building/housing code deficiencies, abatement of hazardous conditions, repair/rehabilitation of deteriorated conditions, and accessibility for persons with disabilities, all to improve the habitability, use and occupancy of owner -occupied housing. Financial assistance is provided in the form of grants.

Please see AP-15 for actual and potential housing resources available, and AP-20 and AP-35 for activities that will be funded to address the housing and community development needs in the City. Also, see AP-75 regarding potential actions to address barriers to meet affordable housing needs.

The City has a Below Market Purchase Program (BMP). This program requires developers to set aside 15% of newly constructed units for housing affordable to moderate income homebuyers.

The Program created an additional source of revenue to augment future housing and community objectives – the City Affordable Housing Fund (CAHF). After five years, a BMP housing unit can convert from a restricted sales price to a market price. If a BMP unit is sold after the initial 5-year period, the City recaptures the value of the affordable purchase price discount. Proceeds are deposited in the CAHF. Use of CAHF funds is not subject to federal or state restrictions. The CAHF funds will be used for activities that benefit low and moderate -income persons and address one or mor e of the housing and community goals set forth in the ConPlan and the City Housing Element.

4. Actions planned to reduce lead-based paint hazards.

The Department of Housing continues to provide Lead Based Paint (LBP) testing and assessment services on all dwelling units built prior to 1978, and that receive rehabilitation assistance. Along with the trained and lead-certified Housing Department staff, the City maintains a contract with

AAP-60
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

a private environmental consultant to provide LBP testing and assessment services. The City also requires that:

Properties that use CDBG or HOME rehabilitation funds conduct testing for LBP and LBP hazard reduction.

Contractors are trained and certified in an effort to decrease the risk of potential use of LBP in new units. All services provided for LBP hazard reduction are in compliance with Federal regulations 1012 and 1013 of Title X.

5. Actions planned to reduce the number of poverty-level families The City, in its continuing effort to reduce poverty, will prioritize funding to agencies that provide direct assistance to the homeless and those in danger of becoming homeless.

Additionally, the City has made a commitment to improve the communication and service delivery capabilities of agencies and organizations that provided programs to assist the homeless. This includes a job training program for homeless individuals. The City-supported homeless programs also work with individuals and families to increase their self-sufficiency by providing employment readiness assistance or help with applying for state or federal benefits.

The City also utilizes CDBG funding to support the Home-Grown Talent project in East San Jose, which provides safety net services and economic development opportunities for low-income residents. The services include referrals and support to meet food, housing, financial, immigration and health needs of participants, as well as viable economic opportunities that tap into the local assets of the community. Economic opportunities include childcare owner/provider training, artist training, and urban agriculture training.

6. Actions planned to develop institutional structure.

The City is striving to improve intergovernmental and private sector cooperation to synergize efforts and resources and develop new revenues for community service needs and the production of affordable housing. Collaborative Efforts Include:
• Regular quarterly meetings between entitlement jurisdictions at the CDBG Coordinators Meeting and Regional Housing Working Group • Developing joint jurisdiction RFPs and project review committees, to take advantages of cost and operational efficiency as a result of economy of scales. • Coordination on project management for projects funded by multiple jurisdictions.

7. Actions planned to enhance coordination between public and private housing and social service agencies

AAP-61
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

The City benefits from a strong jurisdictional network of housing and community development partners, such as the Regional Housing Working Group, the CoC, and the San Jose Silicon Valley Workforce Investment Network. To improve intergovernmental and private sector cooperation, the City will continue to participate with other local jurisdictions and developers in sharing information and resources.

The City will continue its efforts to encourage consortium -building among housing developers, public service providers, and governmental and non-governmental entities. The City has achieved proven results in using federal funds to leverage private funds. The C ity participates in the quarterly meetings of the Supportive Housing Roundtable, which includes government agencies, housing developers, service providers, legal services, and private funders.

AAP-62
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

AP-90 Program Specific Requirements – 91.220 (l) (1,2,4)

1. Introduction
The following provides additional information about the CDBG program income and program requirements for entitlement funds.

Community Development Block Grant Program (CDBG)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(1)
Projects planned with all CDBG funds expected to be available during the year are identified in the Projects Table. The following identifies program income that is available for use that is included in projects to be carried out.

1. The total amount of program income that will have been received before the start of the next program year and that has not yet been reprogrammed 200,000

2. The amount of proceeds from section 108 loan guarantees that will be used during the year to address the priority needs and specific objectives identified in the grantee strategic plan. 0

3. The amount of surplus funds from urban renewal settlements 0

4. The amount of any grant funds returned to the line of credit for which the planned use has not been included in a prior statement or plan 0

5. The amount of income from float-funded activities 0
Total Program Income: $200,000

Other CDBG Requirements

1. The amount of urgent need activities 0

2. The estimated percentage of CDBG funds that will be used for activities that benefit persons of low and moderate income. Overall Benefit - A consecutive period of one, two or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70% of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low and moderate income. Specify the years covered that include this Annual Action Plan. 80.00%

AAP-63
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

HOME Investment Partnership Program (HOME)
Reference 24 CFR 91.220(l)(2)

1. A description of other forms of investment being used beyond those identified in Section 92.205 is as follows:

Not Applicable
Emergency Solutions Grant (ESG)
Reference 91.220(l)(4)

1. Include written standards for providing ESG assistance (may include as attachment) The City written standards are an attached document in Appendix C.

2. If the Continuum of Care has established centralized or coordinated assessment system that meets HUD requirements, describe that centralized or coordinated assessment system.

In the past year, the Continuum of Care has continued to conduct coordinated assessments utilizing the VI-SPDAT screening process to identify vulnerability of homeless people screened.

The City was actively involved in the planning, development, and implementation of the screening process. The City requires all homeless service providers funded with ESG and CDBG funds to utilize the coordinated assessment system.

3. Identify the process for making sub-awards and describe how the ESG allocation available to private nonprofit organizations (including community and faith-based organizations).

Approximately every 3 years, the City develops an RFP based on the needs identified in the Consolidated Plan and the Annual Action Plan and the needs identified by the Continuum of Care. The City selects and awards funds to subrecipients based on the following factors:
• Project eligibility under the ESG program
• Goals and outcomes
• Project relevance in meeting the need identified
• Organizational capacity and experience
• Budget and fee structure
The City utilizes Emergency Solutions Grant Program (ESG) funds to support programs aimed at ending homelessness.

AAP-64
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

4. If the jurisdiction is unable to meet the homeless participation requirement in 24 CFR 576.405(a), the jurisdiction must specify its plan for reaching out to and consulting with homeless or formerly homeless individuals in considering policies and funding decisions regarding facilities and services funded under ESG.

The Action Plan is distributed to the CoC applicant for review. The Board of the CoC applicant is the Destination: Home Board, which includes representation from the homeless community nominated and elected by the Collaborative nonprofit agencies. Services funded with ESG have aligned with CoC and Destination: Home strategic plans. The City solicits comments through the public comment process noted in the Action Plan.

5. Describe performance standards for evaluating ESG.

The CoC has developed performance standards for community-wide use and the City and its ESG recipients participate in the collection of performance data for the CoC and utilize the same standards to evaluate the performance of each individual ESG grantee. The grant agreements with all three agencies incorporated the CoC performance standards.

These performance standards include:
• Street Outreach - Change in placements to permanent housing destinations, temporary destinations (ES or TH), and some institutional destinations (e.g., foster care, long-term care facility).
• Homeless Prevention – Number of persons prevented from experiencing homelessness.

Additional CDBG Information
Overall Benefit – A consecutive period of one, two, or three years may be used to determine that a minimum overall benefit of 70 percent of CDBG funds is used to benefit persons of low- and moderate- income.

Additional HOME Information
Eligible applicants/beneficiaries for programs funded with HOME dollars vary based on program type.

TBRA: Applicants must be a part of the targeted population defined in the Annual Action Plan:

Homeless. “Homelessness” is defined using the HUD definition. Each household/individual must have an income of less than or equal to 60% AMI. Income is determined using the Part 5 income determination.

AAP-65
2025-2026 Annual Action Plan (Draft)

TBRA applicants are taken from HMIS and paired with appropriate case management. Case management is funded from the general fund.

Additional HOPWA Information
HOPWA project sponsors are chosen through a competitive Request for Proposals process.

Proposals are rated on factors such as program design, organizational capacity and experience, performance measurement, and budget.
1 Attachment C – Summary of Public Comments
Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting on Funding Priorities, March 13, 2025
Commissioner Comments  Staff Response
Does the City have a list of
where the accessibility traffic
lights will be placed?
Yes. The Department of Transportation provided an
extensive list for the FY 2024–2025 Annual Action
Plan. This is the second year of the project. We can
forward the list upon request.

Can you describe the enhanced
code enforcement area?
The Planning, Building, and Code Enforcement
(PBCE) Department will use CDBG resources for
enhanced code enforcement in four neighborhoods:

Santee, Five Wounds/Brookwood Terrace,
Cadillac/Winchester (Project Hope), and Roundtable
(Project Hope II).

Disclosure regarding potential
conflict of interest with nonprofit
organizations.

Comment noted.

Can you define eviction
diversion?
Eviction diversion efforts include regular participation in court proceedings and the use of a $2 million State
earmark to assist tenants with unpaid rent.

Have we considered expanding
technical assistance to other
small businesses?
CDBG regulations are restrictive and do not allow
funding for general job training or business assistance outside of specific eligible activities.

Why does the City provide rental
assistance in San Benito
County?
The City of San José receives a HOPWA allocation
and, through an agreement with HUD, provides
assistance to San Benito County. Santa Cruz County
does not receive HOPWA funds.

When are proposals due for the
programs?
The next Notice of Funding Availability (NOFA) will be
released in December 2025. Current agreements will
be extended for one additional year.

Do housing nonprofits contribute
to their construction or
rehabilitation projects?
Yes. For example, MidPen Housing will contribute
resources to the proposed projects.

Do we expect to receive
continued HUD funding?
There is currently no indication of either elimination or guarantee of ongoing HUD funding. Staff will provide
updates to the Commission as information becomes
available.

Are we auditing our funded
agencies?
Yes. The Housing Department conducts annual
monitoring of all agreements and programs, covering
both programmatic and financial compliance.

Will there be any HOME-funded
affordable housing
developments?
No. In FY 2025–2026, HOME funds will focus on
supporting the Home Repair Program and Fair
Housing activities.
2 How does the City use the
County’s Homeless
Management Information
System (HMIS)?
HMIS serves as the primary repository for information
on unhoused individuals. The City leverages the
County’s investment.

Can you explain what HOPWA
is?
HOPWA stands for Housing Opportunities for People
With AIDS/HIV. The program provides rental
assistance and supportive services to eligible
individuals.

Is there an option for rent-to-own
homeownership programs?
A rent-to-own program was available in the 1970s.

Currently, through support for the Community Land
Trust, the long-term goal is to transition rental
properties into limited equity cooperatives.

Housing and Community Development Commission Meeting on Draft 2025-2030 Consolidated Plan and Draft Fiscal Year 2025-2025 Annual Action Plan, May 8, 2025
Commissioner Comments Response
Only 405 respondents
participated. In a city of about
a million people, why was
engagement so low? Any
insights?
We recognize the response rate remains lower than
ideal. To address this, the Housing Department
expanded its partnerships and outreach strategies,
including collaborating with new organizations to
broaden our reach. We are also working to make
engagement more accessible and inclusive, aiming
to increase future participation significantly.

Why were there funds left
over that rolled into the
current year?
For HOME funds, compliance requirements are
complex, and some developers were unwilling to
assume those responsibilities. We have now
partnered with the County to administer Tenant-
Based Rental Assistance and Home Repair
Programs, which will significantly reduce the
balance.

For CDBG, unspent funds are primarily related to
public infrastructure projects led by Public Works,
PRNS, and DOT that are still in the pipeline but are
expected to be completed in the next fiscal year.

At a previous meeting, there
were only a few attendees.

Could the City increase
participation by making
meetings more approachable
and offering remote public
comment via Zoom?
Comment noted. We are exploring nontraditional
engagement strategies to make participation less
formal and more inviting.

What does it mean to "take
public comment as required"?
Federal regulations under Title 24 require that public
comments must be substantive to the matter at
3 hand. Comments unrelated to the Consolidated Plan
or its programs (e.g., general city complaints) are
acknowledged but not considered in plan revisions.

How many people responded
to the email blast sent to over
3,600 recipients?

While we track how many emails were opened (less
than 30%), we cannot track direct survey responses
from the email. Traditional email outreach typically
sees low engagement, so we have expanded our
presence on LinkedIn, BlueSky, and other social
media platforms to increase visibility and interaction.

Most outreach appears to
have been conducted in
2022. Was engagement
sustained through 2024–
2025?

Yes. Outreach was conducted throughout 2022 and
2024, with increased activity in late 2024 and early
2025, aligning with the Consolidated Plan
development timeline.

How was engagement
conducted with the unhoused
population?

We conducted outreach sessions with the Lived
Experience Advisory Board, engaging both their
Executive Committee and the full Board. Additional
outreach methods are being considered to deepen
engagement with unhoused residents.

Have you considered
partnering with libraries to
increase engagement?
Thank you for the suggestion. We are exploring
partnerships with libraries and other community-
based spaces to increase participation and make
information more accessible.

Why wasn't there stronger
outreach through Council
District offices or direct
engagement with
neighborhoods?

We acknowledge the need for more localized
outreach. Some Council Offices did include
announcements in their newsletters, and we are
working to broaden and formalize these partnerships
for future efforts.

The document suggests the
City does not have a working
definition of homelessness.

Can you clarify?
The City does utilize working definitions of
homelessness, aligned with federal and state
standards, particularly for data collection and
program administration. We will follow up regarding
the specific reference in the Consolidated Plan to
ensure clarification.

What is the relationship
between the City and the
County’s Continuum of
Care?
The CoC operates separately under HUD guidelines
to address homelessness across Santa Clara
County. The City participates through the Executive
Planning Committee, but CoC planning and funding
4 decisions are distinct from the City’s Consolidated
Plan administration. CoC meetings are open to the
public.

How
does HomeFirst’s outreach
differ from the City's internal
outreach?
HomeFirst is a contracted partner with expertise in
Housing First principles and trauma-informed care.

While the City historically relied on contracted
partners, we are now building internal capacity
through targeted outreach programs while continuing
to collaborate with external partners like HomeFirst.

Can you provide more
information on the County
partnership to spend down
HOME funds?
We are reallocating HOME funds toward Tenant-
Based Rental Assistance and Home Repair
Programs through the County, reducing compliance
barriers. For CDBG, we are prioritizing infrastructure
projects with Public Works, PRNS, and DOT to
ensure timely expenditure of funds.

How was the County’s
Community Plan to End
Homelessness incorporated
into the Consolidated Plan?
The Community Plan informs City strategies by
identifying aligned goals and funding priorities.

However, the plans are separate, with different
funding streams and compliance requirements. We
ensure coordination but maintain distinct program
management.

Most survey respondents
were over 45. Are there
efforts to engage younger
populations, like SJSU
students?
Yes. Recognizing generational gaps in participation,
we are expanding outreach to youth, including
building stronger ties with San José State University
and student organizations to increase engagement.

Could the City increase
engagement by attending
local events and interviewing
residents for social media
content?
This is a good suggestion. We are working with the
City’s Communications team to leverage more
creative outreach approaches, including attending
community events and enhancing real-time
engagement through social media.

Concerns were raised
regarding the allocation of
$700,000 to tenant legal
support, suggesting a need
for renter education on
responsibilities rather than
just legal services (i.e.
mediations, conciliations, etc).

Comment noted. We acknowledge the importance of
balancing tenant protections with promoting tenant
and landlord education; we can emphasize this in
future legal services programs.

Was there intentional
outreach to historically
underserved communities
such as African American and
Indigenous populations?

Yes. We made focused efforts to engage historically
marginalized groups, but skepticism and historical
mistrust of government remain barriers. We are
committed to continuing and deepening our
engagement with these communities.
5 Has the City evaluated which
outreach partners were most
and least effective?
This is a valuable suggestion. Staff will follow up
internally to assess feedback from outreach partners
to strengthen future engagement strategies.

I encourage the City to
reinstate programs like
Project Blossom to help
develop better housing
providers and Rent Ready to
better prepare tenants.

Rather than intervening only
after issues occur, we should
invest in strengthening both
sides of the rental
relationship. Expanding rental
assistance to prevent
displacement is also critical.

While I recognize that
problems exist, if issues are
not being adequately reported
or addressed, agencies may
continue receiving funding
without achieving meaningful
outcomes.

Comment noted.