RULES COMMITTEE: 9/3/2025
Item: B.1
File ID: ROGC 25-266
TO: Honorable Mayor & FROM: Toni J. Taber, MMC
City Council City Clerk
SUBJECT: The Public Record DATE: September 3, 2025
August 21, 2025 – August 28, 2025.
ITEMS FILED FOR THE PUBLIC RECORD
Letters from Boards, Commissions, and Committees
Letters from the Public
1-8. Letters from eight members of the public of substantially the same language were received between August 25 – 27, 2025, re: Restore Virtual Comments at City Council meetings.
____________________________
Toni J. Taber, MMC
City Clerk
TJT/tt
Public Record: 1
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Joseph Lam
95135
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/26/25, 2:43 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 Public Record: 2
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. the challenge of finding solutions to preserve access for everyone while continuing to facilitate public comment by providing a virtual option.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Lisa E Hettler-Smith
95112
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/26/25, 2:46 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 Public Record: 3
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Why do the resident/taxpayer/voters (the residents who pay YOUR salary) have NO opportunity to express their
opinions and well researched comments at City Council meetings any longer? I request that you, as representing
your constituents, and NOT developers, realtors and union members, do the right thing and restore remote
access to all City Council meetings.
Patricia M. Blevins
95118-
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/26/25, 2:47 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 Public Record: 4
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. the challenge of finding solutions to preserve access for everyone while continuing to facilitate public comment by providing a virtual option.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Quite simply .. it is wrong to mandate that public comment can only be in person. This is a step to further alienate SJ Citizens and increase opposition.
Dorothy Cassidy
95136
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/26/25, 2:47 PM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 Public Record: 5
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. the challenge of finding solutions to preserve access for everyone while continuing to facilitate public comment by providing a virtual option.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Robin Hahn
95135
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/27/25, 11:43 AM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2 Public Record: 6
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources. the challenge of finding solutions to preserve access for everyone while continuing to facilitate public comment by providing a virtual option.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Please hear and respect the voices of the 5th district community Heidi Grern
95123
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/27/25, 11:42 AM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours-long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Janis Gemignani
95112
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/28/25, 8:19 AM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2
This message is from outside the City email system. Do not open links or attachments from untrusted sources.
We agree that the comments of a few bad actors are vile and have no place in a community meeting.
Rather than using racist and hateful speech as an excuse to cut off community participation and hamper people's First Amendment right to petition their government, however, the City should rise to the challenge of finding solutions to preserve access for everyone while continuing to facilitate public comment by providing a virtual option.
Ending the process of remote participation, is to deny a large segment of the community the opportunity to participate in our democratic process. Some examples include:
— Disabled residents who rely on technology to speak, or who otherwise have to arrange rides with Paratransit.
— Immunocompromised residents who take on unnecessary risks to their health by spending hours in a packed room.
— Working people without the ability to arrange their schedules around hours long council meetings. — Parents with small children who can't take time off to attend City meetings.
For example, budget season is the most critical time of year for civic engagement. The ban on remote comments means the people most in need of an equitable city budget will be sidelined throughout the process.
The possibility that the ban on remote comments might only last months is no comfort to those who wish to comment on current City Council, Committee and Commission matters in order to ensure that quality of life in San Jose is maximized. I ask that you immediately restore virtual public comment to ensure that you and the City once again benefit from the voices silenced by your recent decision.
Sue
95126
You may not use my contact information for any purpose other than to respond to my concern regarding the topic listed above, nor may you share my address with any other organization(s) or individual(s).
—
This mail was sent on behalf of a San Jose resident via District 5 United https://www.district5united.org
Community Working Together
8/28/25, 9:11 AM Mail - Rules and Open Government Committee Agendas - Outlook https://outlook.office365.com/mail/[email protected]/inbox/id/AAQkADhhYzk3NTk1LTBmZDAtNDc4Yi1hN2Q0LTZjNmZjNTk5MT… 2/2