City Council - Regular Meeting

We're getting...

ALL RIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO GET THIS SESSION, SPECIAL STUDY SESSION CALLED ORDER AT 5 P.M. JUNE 15, 2026. ROLL CALL, PLEASE.

Council Member Bracco, Council Member Klein, Council Member Fugazi, Council Member Hilton, Council Member Marks, Council Member Ramirez.

I'm here too. Thank you. Okay, we're going to get right to it in item 1.3. Just for the public to know where they are right now. They're in a study session, a 5 p.m. study session. This will last 30 to 45 minutes, maybe 50 minutes. and then we will get into the regular public meeting at 6 o'clock. That doesn't mean that you have to leave, but my instinct tells me that there might be a few folks here right now that think they're at the beginning of the regular city council meeting, but that will begin at 6 o'clock. So with that being said, take it away, city administrator.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. So in March and April, we together conducted a couple of study sessions to look at performance measures, organizational goals, and sort of where we wanted the organization to be with respect to my performance over the next 12 months. This was a result of contract language from when I was hired that lined that out for us to work through. At our last meeting, I had a couple of to-dos that I needed to put together and bring back to you. The request was to bring it back at a five o'clock study session, so here we are. Within those to-dos were a couple of things. One was to revamp the matrix for scoring to make the special initiatives equal to the performance measures, sort of the top and the bottom of the chart that we utilized, so that they were 50 points each, 10 points per item. So we've done that, and we've adjusted to make it a 100-point scale. So I think that that will hopefully meet that need. We also were asked to put together milestones associated with our top five priorities. So we went through the five priorities and I'll say these priorities come from the legislative agenda. Because we've identified these five does not mean that we're ignoring the other nine I guess on the list. The list we'll continue to work through and our goal is to accomplish all of them on schedule. But these top five we wanted to provide with more detailed milestones for you. So you have additional milestones in the attachment that identifies each legislative agenda item of the top five with a little bit of a description and an approach. And with that target completion date, revised completion date should we have it revised since it was originally set so that we're tracking that. And then additionally individual milestones that tracks us over the course of the project. So with that, I wanted to present that to you to get your feedback on how this is looking. The ultimate goal is to finish this up today and then be able to come back at a regular agenda meeting sometime in the future as a normal business item for ratification of an amendment to the city administrator's contract. So I'll stop there and turn it back to you, Mr. Mayor.

All right, folks, any questions or comments from that so far with the information that we have so far?

Depending on what happens with the sports park, is there anything else that might slot into that space if for some reason we decided to ditch the LAFCO thing?

That slot in terms of sort of filling in the gap in workload?

Well, yeah, exactly, in terms of a deliverable, so to speak.

Yeah, I think, as I mentioned, the rest of the list is going to continue, and it continues as a priority. Certainly, there's other priorities that come up over the course of the year that take things on. I'll use the mayor's ad hoc for homeless as an example of a priority that came up mid-cycle that we were able to add and adapt. So we're constantly doing that. It's a living list, and things come on and fall off. We'll always want to have a conversation with council about additional priorities, should we want to add them. I think having an item complete, whether it completes because it's done or because our priorities have changed, I think is okay over the course of the cycle. It allows us to balance in some of our normal workload with the council-identified priorities and make progress on both.

Council Member Ramirez.

So I have been really pleased with this process so far in terms of the process itself. I just want to clarify a couple of things. So we have this, and we agree on it tonight, whatever. What is the expectation moving forward with the use of this document as we go through it? So are we going to do quarterly check-ins, that type of thing? I would prefer to not have it then be set aside and then brought back in a year and then decide. Because I think, like you said, it's a moving, living document. And as such, you know, if we were to look at something, let's take Council Member Fugazzi's example with the LAFCO. Maybe that does need to be, let's just say, completely removed and replaced with the unhoused ad hoc committee with expectations there. I would rather see that happen as we progress along and things do change. or if we do it kind of intermittently, quarterly, or whatever, we look at this rather than wait until the end of the year and say, well, that came off, but hey, I did the ad hoc thing, right? So process, can you speak to that?

So certainly bringing updates on a regular basis, whatever seems to work for council would work for me. Quarterly may be a little too frequent, maybe three times a year, something like that. Fine. But, yes, I think regular updates would be fine for me. It provides a great way to provide communication. We can do it as a, you know, unless there's something unusual in the change, we could do it as a consent item on a council meeting so that it's there for everybody to see. And if we want to provide input, have a discussion, that provides us that opportunity.

Yeah, and I – Because I do know that certain things, a hiccup comes along and whatever, and it's not necessarily a reflection of what you are doing, but something outside of your control. Let's adjust it accordingly, that type of thing. That makes sense. Thank you.

I think, yeah, quarterly is too much to do something like that. I think that twice a year, and I do like the idea of the study session methodology that we already had to put this together. Did not feel rushed. It felt like a lot of thought went into it, a lot of discussion went into it. And it wasn't crammed into what are now becoming longer agendas for these meetings. And so I would definitely consider that. One other thing, too, to bring up on one of these topics is the gateway beautification part. It seems a little light on exactly what that means, and I want to make sure to clarify in my mind at least, that it's not making sure the weeds are clipped in the clover leaves and that it also has to do with things like making sure the truck stop area down in the south end of town continues to get better and stay better and and many of the other types of things that we see as activities, homeless collection at the underpasses and all of those kinds of things. So at least putting it on the record here, that's my intent. I don't know about the rest of the council, but for the gateway beautification.

I had that noted as well. I'd like it a little bit more specific because I agree. I don't want it just to be weed abatement.

Yeah, I thought through that as I was creating the list. I purposely took what was originally on the document and then didn't modify it for exactly the reason. We've had a couple shots at making adjustments and this would be sort of the next one and I wanted to be able to do that intentionally with the entire council versus me sort of interpreting input from random conversations.

I think the beauty of the way that we have worked together to set this up is I get to score you in the way that I think it should be. So that's definitely each of us gets to look at it. It would be fair, of course, but if it's left more open, it also gives us more opportunity to be more subjective in how we rate you.

Let me add a comment before you go. I'm going to almost repeat what you guys already said, but I'll just throw in, especially so in economic development. I think that I'm going to want, if possible, some areas where there could be more details, something that we can measure. And that doesn't mean, you know, how many new gas stations we got, but maybe some areas of town that we all have talked about in the past that we can have some specific information about. So go ahead, Council Member Ramirez.

I'm just going to say... based on my experience with executive evaluations or any evaluation of an employee, the more objective you can be, the more fair it is. And so I would rather see far more specific information. You know, I certainly don't want to, you know, if we take the beautification, I don't want to be, you know, 10 trees in a long month, you know, that type of thing. But... something more tangible that is, you know, a more measurable objective that we can say, yes, you did, or no, you didn't. Not, well, in my opinion, you did, and in someone else's opinion, you didn't. I would like it to be a little bit more specific.

Yeah, go ahead, Dion.

Yeah, I agree with Kelly. That's a mistake. Councils in the past have made is not being specific on what we want. You know, beautification, what's that mean? I think when we were talking about originally, we were talking about motorhomes and trash and weeds. But if we don't be specific, some council members are going to have a different view of what they think it should be than other council members. And I think that just causes... some issues down the road. So I think the more specific we can be, the more headaches we're going to save ourselves in the future.

You want to comment before I go to public comment?

Why don't you go to public comment?

Did you want to have a few questions? Then I'll go to you first right after public comment. Any public comment? I have no speakers. Council Member Klein.

No, I was just going to agree with Council Member Rocco and Council Member Pagazzi, just civics and, you know, just honing that in. So I'm good with this document as it is. It's a good starting point, especially what we've been through over the course of these last few years and everything. This really gives metrics we need.

Okay. Council Member Ramirez.

One area I would like to look at is the – police analysis, police department service level evaluation and strategic plan. Is there any way we can move that up, that timeline?

Yeah, that's a good one to talk about on the timeline. And what would be a timeline that would be more enticing to you? I think when I put this together, this is the original schedule. I had actually ran through a schedule that would complete it a year earlier. My feeling is that we need to do some more intense data collection and data processing to get ourselves right sized to begin with. My hope would be that that happens and that we're collecting data now, but I'm not 100% sure of that, so we're working with the new chief on making sure that we have the data that we need to be able to report out. The reason the data and the timeline is important if we don't have the right data is we need a runway in order to collect data to be able to react to it and to put that into the analysis. So that was the thought process there. Certainly if we're collecting data now in a way that is functional for us and we can report on it, then this timeline would change absolutely.

Okay, so as long as that's something that is on your mind and can be brought up sooner, I'm happy with that, thank you.

Further comments? So we're just, we're looking for direction, it's not action, we're just looking for direction. Everybody's happy with what they said so far and the comments they heard from Matt? Yeah, with the additional comments? Any final comments?

So I will say that in terms of trying to be more specific, in each of these items, I tried to put the milestones in there very specifically, so if we use the beautification, which it's been a little bit of a moving target on that project, but if we use that as an example, I tried to define it a little bit through the use of the milestones. So within that, I talked about increasing staff attention on a regular basis to the gateway, so that would be something that you would see an impact from visually. Then I also talked about a project and outlined the schedule on a project and what that schedule of the project would look like as a way to get that structure in place to have increased beautification there. The item that did not get included here was sort of the code enforcement side of things. I think that what's going on from that perspective. And that was simply because it wasn't included in the original language and I didn't want to take too much freedom in terms of what your priorities are and redefining them.

I THINK IF YOU JUST LIST OFF SOME OF THOSE THINGS, IT WOULD BE A BETTER UNDERSTANDING OF THESE THINGS KIND OF FIT IN THE SCOPE OF THAT OTHER THAN JUST LANDSCAPE, RIGHT? I THINK THAT'S WHERE KIND OF THE HOLDUP IS, AND COUNCILMEMBER BROCKO BROUGHT UP, FOR INSTANCE, MOTOR HOMES OR ABANDONED CARS. I MEAN, IF YOU GO OVER RIGHT NOW, across from Jack in the Box and south into town, you're going to find about seven or eight completely dilapidated cars sitting on the side of the road in front of the mobile home park there. I want the landscape done too, but I think focus on having it look like you would want to bring somebody to that area to invest in that area. Council Member Ramirez?

That's what I was going to say. Landscaping is important, but But if you do the landscaping and then there's still all the other stuff, then it's... I appreciate your holistic approach. I just would like it a little bit more specific to benefit you.

It's perception, not just looks. It's the perception people have that we need to change.

And as Council Member Brock has said, in half of a year, there's going to be new people sitting up here. I think the specifics are going to be really important at that point. Go ahead.

I think we need to, when we look at our landscaping, try to do something that'll last, you know, with people walking through it and stuff. You know, on Leesley, at one time it looked good, but now it's terrible because people walk all over it. The sprinklers are all broken. The sign's hanging down. So if we could... Try to put things in. I mean, even if it's gravel, that looks better than just dirt. And do things, you know, it doesn't have to be a million dollars worth of landscaping. You know, maybe it's $25 worth of rocks put in there. And, like, we have that issue with somebody that climbs up underneath the... the bridge on Leavesley and throws trash all over everything. And there's ways to solve that, you know, rocks and things like that, rather than put a fence because they'll just cut a hole in the fence. So we need to push our people to think, use their imagination and come up with some solutions.

All right, so it sounds like we have some good direction for Matt. And I think we have a thumbs up from everybody. And we're going to move forward with that. All right. Thank you. So that concludes. That concludes. Feels weird. That concludes the 5 p.m. study session. And for better or for worse, we have 45 minutes until the 6 o'clock meeting begins. Feel free to roam about, and we'll get started sharply at 6 o'clock again. Meeting adjourned. All right. Well, welcome, everybody. We're calling this meeting to order 6 p.m. on June 15th, 2026. Roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco. Here. Council Member Klein.

Here.

Council Member Fugazi.

Here.

Council Member Hilton. Council Member Marks. Here. Council Member Ramirez. Here. Mayor Bozo.

Here. Um. Okay, please rise for the Pledge of Allegiance, which will be led by Councilmember Ramirez. And please remain standing for the invocation by Pastor Trevor Van Laar from Gilroy Presbyterian Church.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

father tonight we gather for more than routine approvals budget discussions and policy decisions we gather the community and its leadership to stand in the gap to intercede for the citizens of gilroy and ask for peace and justice to take root in this place we bring before you our concern regarding detention centers on the edge of our city we pray that justice would always be pursued with mercy and that dignity of every person will be upheld, and that no one would ever be unlawfully detained or treated as less than the image of God that they brand. We ask for wisdom over data centers that may be reshaping our city. May growth and progress be a blessing to this community, not a burden on it. We pray that development will serve our community, not consume it. On a grateful note, we celebrate our graduates. Go with them, Lord, in every new chapter ahead. May they carry with them the very best that Gilroy has given them, and may they offer that, and more, back to the world. Lastly, as Father's Day approaches, we pause to give thanks to the fathers among us, for those who show up day after day, who work hard, love well, and point their children towards what is good and true. We are grateful for every father who stayed, who sacrificed, who led with both strength and tenderness. Encourage them, Lord, sustain them. Remind them that their faithfulness matters more than they may ever fool them. And we hold gently before you those whose fatherhood was not that simple. For those who have lost their father, those whose relationship with their father carries pain, and fathers who carry their own weight of regret, may each one be with your grace. Your kingdom come, your will be done, here on these streets, amongst these people, as it is.

THANK YOU, PASTOR VAN LAAR. AND MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 2.6, ORDERS OF THE DAY. WE WILL BE MOVING ITEM 9.4, THAT'S CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS FOR AMENDING THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW PERMIT PROCESS. THAT'S A FAIR MEMO THAT WAS SUBMITTED TO COUNCIL BY COUNCIL MEMBER MARKS AND COUNCIL MEMBER RAMIREZ. So instead of that being heard tonight at probably 10.30 or 11, it will be heard tonight very soon. So for those of you who are here for 9.4, your topic will be coming up quite soon. Okay, next, moving on to item 2.7, employee introductions. Police Chief Brandon Sanchez to introduce Stephanie Tilly.

Good evening, Brandon Sanchez, Chief of Police. I want to welcome Stephanie Tilly. Stephanie is the oldest of three girls and was born and raised in Hollister on a cattle ranch. She has very fond memories of hanging out with her cousins, learning to drive a stick shift truck, and hunting with her dad. Stephanie graduated from San Benito High School in 2002, moved to San Luis Obispo in 2004, 2007, in which she received her AA from Cuesta College. She then transferred to San Jose State, where she received her bachelor's of art in communication. In the workforce, Stephanie has enjoyed working in Santa Clara in the sheet metal machining industry for the past 16 years. She started in the office in an accounting position for a few years. From there, she transferred to outside services, helping order material, hardware, and getting parts painted and plated, and keeping jobs on schedule. She took a break to start her family, and when it was time to return, she went into outside sales for the company. She disallowed her to interact with more customers and get their feedback. Stephanie has been married for 14 years and has two children. Her kids keep her busy with her extracurricular activities, but she wouldn't change it. She loves being their mom. In her spare time, Stephanie loves to play slow-pitch softball and hunt. She's also been playing softball since she was very young and played slow pitch when she turned 18. She's played women's and co-ed, coached for Hollister Heat softball, and served on their board for a few years. Please welcome Stephanie Tilly.

Hi, everyone. My name is Stephanie Tilly. And I just wanted to say thank you for letting me join the team. And I look forward to learning about more of what we do internally and start my training. And thank you for the warm welcome. And I'm happy to be here.

Thank you very much. Moving on to item number three, presentations to council. Today we have a brief presentation from Caltrains. So welcome to the podium right here over on the left. You guys can speak from that one please. Thank you for being here.

MEMBERS OF THE COUNCIL, MY NAME IS MICHELLE BOUCHARD. I'M HERE TO INTRODUCE MY COLLEAGUE, JASON BAKER, WHO WILL BE PRESENTING THIS ITEM TONIGHT. BUT I DID WANT TO MAKE A FEW OPENING REMARKS. CAL TRAIN HAS BEEN NAMED RECENTLY THE FASTEST GROWING TRANSIT agency in the United States by the American Public Transportation Association. And that is as a result of really transitioning into what we call a regional railroad. So we're no longer just serving commuters going one way to jobs. We really have diversified the types of trips we serve. The South County Connector down here has been a really great complement to the electrified service. And Jason will talk to you a little bit more about what we see in terms of riders who are getting on in your community and going to destinations on the peninsula. It's also one of the most unique segments of our corridor because we basically operate between San Jose and Gilroy on Union Pacific owned freight tracks and we are governed by a joint powers agreement that was signed in 1991 and that dictates the times of day and the amount of service that can be provided. Notwithstanding that we do have a few trains that operate between San Jose and Gilroy, we are seeing explosive growth on that segment as well. And so we did want to talk to you just about the service and how well we hope that your community is receiving the service. But we also wanted to talk about some work that we've been doing to really take a look at Caltrain's long-term financial outlook. We are in need of a significant external source of funding. over the course of the next 14 years to really be able to have the railroad survive and thrive. So it's sort of a difficult position to be in. We are really serving our customers better than we ever have, and that is proving itself out due to the ridership increase And we also find ourselves in this post-COVID era with a significant gap in funding. And so Jason's going to talk to you about some of these things. And then if we have any time left, we will be happy to answer any questions. Thank you.

Let's see if I can get the technology going. Let's see. Maybe I'm just clicking it in the wrong way. All right, now hopefully the technology works. Thank you all. Again, I'm Jason Baker, Director of Government Affairs for Caltrain. I really appreciate you taking the time tonight. I'll go through this relatively quickly because I know you've got a full night but there's a fair amount we want to say about the situation we're in and just sort of as an overview. I know you all are familiar with the Caltrain corridor, but just as a brief overview for the members of the public, we've got 77 miles connecting San Francisco, San Mateo, and Santa Clara counties. That's 31 stations across 20 communities, and we've been in this business for over 160 years of continuous rail service. Earlier this, I think last year, we did a survey of the public and just asked, like an actual survey, scientific poll, and we had an 82% favorability rating with voters. So it's just not writers, but just random people. You call them, they're a voter. What do you think of Caltrain? 82% thought of Caltrain favorably. And that jumps to 91% with our regular writers. So people, if you write it, they really do love the system. Caltrain is a part of everyday life. We help millions of people get to where they need to go, reduce traffic on Highway 1, and we connect communities across the peninsula. We support access to jobs and opportunities. And as Michelle said, it's not just a commuter railroad anymore. We run half an hour service on the main line, seven days a week on the main line. So weekends, weekdays, your trains come in at least every half hour with new electrified service. Every day we provide regional benefits. We remove the equivalent of three freeway lanes of traffic at the peak times. We help build a stronger economy. Again, we touch 2.9 million people. 37% of the nine counties Bay Area's population live in the 20 cities served by Caltrain. And we do help to reduce the air. The new trains are cleaner, 100% electric energy, and that electric energy comes from our partners, San Jose Clean Energy and Peninsula Clean Energy, as clean energy from the source. We also help support local economies. There's evidence to show that there are higher property values near our stations, increased business activity and office demand, and that helps local tax bases. There's a lot here on this slide. I'll talk to just a few of them. A lot's going on along the corridor. We've got transit-oriented development. We're trying to put people near the line. We've got a big potential development at 4th and King in San Francisco. We have another substantial development we're working on around Deerdon at a building that we got entitled. And so we're really trying to bring riders to where the trains are. We also, and this is one I wanted to specifically highlight, because when I go out and about, and me and my team have been tabling in various places, including in Morgan Hill and Gilroy, that we have a dollar youth fair and a $2 all day for youth. So you're 18 and under, you can hop on a train, two bucks all day. And we do that both because we want to attract the writers of tomorrow today, and because we know kids and students often bring their parents along, and so they'll have full-paying fairs. One of the things we're trying to do to promote the railroad and also get riders interested in more things. And then finally on that slide you'll see at some of our crossings up north, we're using AI technology to make crossings safer. So at the Burlingame Crossing, about three cars a week would drive up the tracks, just following their GPS, turn left, I'll turn left, I'll keep going. With AI helping us learn about that behavior and then putting in sort of what I call dumb solutions, bollards and lights, we've cut that down to zero vehicles driving up those tracks. I wanted to touch a little bit on the South County Connector, because I know that that's the part of the train that serves you most. Although we know that people in Gilroy and Morgan Hill do ride the electric train, they might drive to Derredon to take it from that place as well. But we've really, in the last while, been having a concerted effort to do what we can to make sure that the South County connector is known in Gilroy and Morgan Hill and that we do what we can, see if we can tweak the service. So we've had marketing, print and digital ads, tabling, bus station ads. We also surveyed riders. I was on a train handing out surveys to riders on the South County Connector saying, look, we've got limitations, the kind of limitations Michelle talked about with our contract with UP. But within those limitations, can we tweak the times a little bit to see if we can make people's rider experience a little bit better? I've got a couple of slides in sort of the appendix after conclusion. I'm not going to go into the details. That's another night because there's a lot here already. But the answer is what we found is We really couldn't tweak within our limits and make the majority of the people more happy than they are now. But we did the work. We talked to the people and learned a lot along the way. We've also been working with VTA on ensuring our schedules and connections work as well as they can. So here's a little bit of a taste of our digital marketing campaign, 160,000 impressions in South County. Here's a look at what the VTA bus and shelter adds. And this is a partnership VTA let us put ads on their bus shelters that help remind folks that we are here and give people a QR code. And then here are those bus ads. And then we've also been doing partnerships with cities and city councils. We really appreciate your staff helping us get the word out about our survey and about the other work we've been doing. This is us. We've tabled the Ofrenda. We've tabled the Morgan Hill Open Streets event. I was there in May. And then we've been working on partnerships. Can we hand out, like, maybe a few free Caltrain tickets at a coffee shop nearby so that people try the product and then maybe use it. I did want to touch a little bit on the improved mainline service. We electrified and the new trains are faster, more frequent, they can start and stop faster, which means we can run them closer together. And like I said, every 30 minutes, every station, seven days a week, compared to what we used to have, which was once an hour. And that makes a big difference for people. We've got 20% more service, and importantly, 26% equity priority stations more service. Free Wi-Fi, outlets at every seat, bathrooms have changing tables, and it's quieter inside and out. And with the new trains, in part because they perform well, we have a 95% on-time performance. Michelle talked about this. I do want to talk about the bottom piece here, which is our ridership is more diverse than it used to be. 30% of our riders are low-income. 10% are youth, seniors, and people with disabilities. So 47% of our riders fit into one of those categories. Here's what folks often want to take a look at, which is our ridership trends. And this is an increase since electrification. You see August 2024, pre-electrification, and then the percentage increase. And what you can see is Gilroy had a 32.9, almost a 33% increase since electrification. What that tells us is, A, our efforts at marketing and getting the word out have helped some, but also, even when folks are riding the South County Connector, they see value in being connected to that new, faster, modern electric train service. So we're really proud of these numbers, and like Michelle said, these are nation leading in terms of ridership growth. This slide is really about us wanting to have partnerships with cities. We've done very well, I think, with Gilroy and Morgan Hill, especially because of that focus on the South County Connector Service and trying to get the word out. But we're trying to highlight downtown destinations and say, look, folks, here's where you can take the train, and here's what you can get when you get there. Really nice downtown places with a nice bowling alley. Nice place to watch the game. You can hop on a train and be there in no time. And then we're also working with GO Passes with city partners. And we've reworked that system. This is where a city or an institution can buy passes for their employees and be able to take the train based on the pass. And it used to be you had to be all in and be five days a week. But we know that's not how it works anymore. People are commuting two, three days a week. So we've reworked that system to make it work better for cities like you. All right. So here's the kind of meat of the program. So I'll go maybe a little less Jason speed for this part, because this is kind of, at least for our purposes, why we're all gathered here today for this presentation, the Caltrain fiscal outlook and ridership. So you can see our ridership trends pre-pandemic fiscal year 18 and 19. We were doing very well. And then we dropped down to about 2% of our ridership down to the pandemic. And that was more even than many transit agencies. So we've really had a really hard hill to climb coming out of there. But we've been doing it. And we can see our ridership in fiscal year 26 is expected to be 25% year over year. And math is not my strong suit. But what I do know is those year over years get harder every year because you jump up more and jump up more. And then those percentages get tough. And year over year, we're surprising ourselves of how well the trains are getting people to ride. Here is the fare box revenue, how much money we get basically selling tickets. Before the pandemic, we were nation leading. 72% of our operating costs were funded by selling tickets and parking revenue or the ridership revenue. That's not normally how transit works. Usually transit has a pretty decent sized subsidy and they make a lot less fare box and a lot of the other agencies around don't have anywhere near that. And that was nation leading. We went down and now we're at about 30% fare box recovery, which is still nation leading. We still have less subsidy than Essentially any any other agency like it in the country because people are writing and buying tickets So you'll ask like if we got it one of the nation leading fare box recovery and our ridership is growing up going up why do we have 75 million dollar annual operating deficit and and that's where we're at and Michelle Michelle led us into this a little bit. Year 27, we've got a balanced budget, in part because we got a loan from the state, and in part because our ridership was a little better, our fare box recovery was a little better, we saved some money on some energy costs. But the big piece of this is that commutes pattern shifted. People aren't commuting five days a week anymore, we aren't getting that fare box, and we were relying on that fare box. We had ridership drop, less revenue, We also had costs rising with inflation, and those costs grew faster than revenue across the transit agency. That's not just us. That's kind of how it worked. And then you do have a new train system that performs very well, brings riders on. You also have some additional costs. It costs more to insure them. It costs more to maintain 51 miles of 25,000 volts electrical infrastructure. So together, these factors led us to have about a $75 million on average operating deficit. Here's what that looks like in graph form. It starts a little smaller, gets a little better, and that's where we get that average of 75 million. We know that we can't just go talk about our deficit without saying, what are you doing yourselves to help fix it? And so we wanted to talk about that a little bit first. We've got cost containment strategies. We've got a strategic hiring freeze. So we aren't hiring new positions unless they would pay for themselves for some reason. So we've got a business development manager who's making us money, but other than that, we've got a freeze on positions. We are really proud that we held our operator contract to previous levels. A lot of our, you know, most of our budget goes to operating trains. And we held it to the previous level, which means after inflation, it actually went down. And that's an unusual thing to do, and we're proud we were able to do that. And then we also were able to get a sort of unique thing to us. And it took some, you know, some doing, including some smart people on my team, to get us to be able to get some money back for the energy that our trains were giving back to the grid. Because these trains... Just like a Tesla or Prius, they regenerate energy. And they were regenerating, and they are regenerating about 40% of the energy they were spending. About 20% of that was going right back to the grid. The other 20 was going to other trains and helping them run. That's good. But we weren't getting a dime for it. And now we're getting about a million dollars a year back in our pockets by getting some money for that energy. And that's just one of the things we're doing to try to sort of look at any options we can to contain costs. The other piece is we know that we can't rely on Fairbox revenue like we used to. That's just not the world we're in anymore. So how can we come up with non-Fairbox revenue strategies? Because even if we did get new funding, new external funding, it wouldn't last forever. And we know that we need to get to a place where we're more self-reliant and less reliant on the Fairbox. So that means everything from special events. We've run private cars, charter trains. what we can do with advertising and naming rights. I think you're seeing some trains get wrapped, and that's been a successful program. Two, we've got fiber optic cable running up our 51 miles, and we want to see if we can monetize that. And then kind of longer term, the transit-oriented development, commercial leasing, the kind of things that will help make us money in the long term to, again, try to shift that balance between being, you know, fare box reliant and being able to make our money. Our board is having this discussion right now, real time. You can see the yellow dot in June. The board just adopted a no external funding framework. They adopted the fiscal year budget, and again, that was balanced. But then they adopted a framework for what if we don't get external funds to fill that $75 million a year deficit? And what that really did is tell us to go back, look into the details, bring back detailed information about what that would mean and what cuts we might instill. You can see sort of two clear paths there. Fiscal year 26, service levels continue if we do get external funding. If we don't, we would have to plan and prepare for service cuts, and then in that fiscal year 28 is when those cuts would come into effect. So it would be in that sort of first pink time when we would really be coming to nuts and bolts about what the exact cuts are. But the board has already directed us to kind of go down that road and think about what the kind of scope and scale of those cuts would be. And this is what that is, and this is probably the most, you know, among the most important slides in the deck. On the left side, you see what our service is now. It's fast, it's frequent. We've got weekend service. We've got long hours from 5 a.m. to 1 a.m. And special event service to support special events and any games that might be going on these days. On the right side is potential service cuts. The board has not voted on any specific cuts to happen, but they did ask us to look into these. And this is kind of the scope and the scale that we would need to try to work on that $75 million deficit. And I will tell you now, even these cuts, which are significant, don't balance that $75 million. And I'll talk about that in a bit. But this doesn't even get us there. So cutting to hourly service, which is what we had before. No weekend service at all. Early shutdown, so we would shut down at 9 p.m. No special event service. And we would have to cut about a third of our stations, we think. But again, even that doesn't fill our deficit because you cut service to an hourly. We know what that looked like before. We get fewer riders, less revenue from riders, and that creates kind of a cycle where you've got to cut. You lose riders, you cut more, you lose riders. So it's really a tough spot we're in. Now, up to now, we've been only talking about Caltrain. There are other agencies, BART, Muni, AC Transit, also are experiencing significant cuts. Several of them are contemplating very similar cuts about closing stations, cutting service at 9 p.m. So you'd start having to plan, if I'm on this station, this system, and it stops at 9 p.m., and I'm trying to get to that station, and it stops at 9 p.m. you'd have to do a little more work. It really would be a very different system. And then at the end of the day, if we didn't get external funding long enough and we didn't find ways to fill that deficit, there is a scenario where we'd have to look at a shutdown or a pause of service. And that's a two to four year thing because it's not just a switch to flip to shut a train down and put it back up again. So we are calling this a critical inflection point. You see on the left the no external funding scenario. Ridership and revenue are growing. Things are going well. People like the trains. But we know we can't cut our way out of this. We know we can't raise our way out of this. There has to be some source of external funding. So we are at a crossroads. We thought it was incumbent on us to talk to you about it, to tell you about it as the conversation's happening, because you and your citizens are our customers, and this is an important time in the history of Caltrain. And I think I'll leave it at that and offer it through the mayor if you want to have time for questions or not.

I'll go Councilmember Ramirez, and then I'll go Councilmember Fugazi.

Thank you for your presentation. So I'm getting the impression you're alluding towards potential tax.

I will tell you that this is the exact same. There is a measure on the ballot, or we expect a measure to be on the ballot in November 2026. I will tell you this is exactly the same presentation we would give if there were not a measure, because it would be the same problem.

Thank you. So I appreciate a lot of the points that you brought up, electric line enhancements, the limitations in terms of sharing the tracks down here from San Jose down this way. But I represent this group. And so if they support this tax and they take on this tax, can you identify what specifically, specifically, will benefit them. I see a whole bunch of benefits, you know, in terms of BART and all the different, you know, interconnections and all that kind of stuff. And I see a lot of benefits for those north of us. But I want the people here in Gilway to understand that if they support this tax and they take on this tax, what specifically they will get. So can you help with that, please?

I can't. I would love to, but I'm a public employee on public time, and so I can't speak to the benefits or detracting pieces of a measure. I can tell you what this slide says. It's if we don't get external funding from some source, then we would have to prepare for some pretty significant cuts. If we do, then we expect we would be able to keep our service at least what it's at and maybe a little better.

Council Member Fugatti.

But there are people who will talk to you about that, but I can't do that because I'm on company time.

To your best guess, how many individuals ride Caltrain here in Gilroy? I saw 2,600 and change rides, right? Isn't that what I saw on your slide? I'm sure that's down and back, so that's 1,300 a month, right? 300 and some odd a day?

Sorry, a week? Yeah, that's about right.

And the

No, it's more than that. Some of this counts lightings and boardings.

How many unique people do you think in Gilroy ride the train? Let's put it that way. How many unique?

Yeah, I mean, I think from what I saw the data, it's about 126. Yeah. Is it close to that? We know the whole extension is about 900.

Yeah, I mean, you can see... 126 people in Gilroy ride Caltrain.

So... Those are one-way trips, so it's you double that.

Right, but that's people, though. I mean, they go down, they come back, right? I mean, I hope. And so, yeah. When you look at there and you say 50% is moderate or above or high income, I guess that's what you put on there. What is moderate? Is that the county's definition of moderate?

So 67% of county, we just did a survey. We did our tri-annual survey. And about two-thirds of South County Connector riders report household incomes below $150,000. And about more than a third, 37%, earn less than $100,000. And again, that's household income. That's not individual income.

In the statistic that you had up there, which said 50%, you said you have a very diverse ridership, and 50% of it was moderate to above. So what is considered moderate? Because I know when we're talking about county stuff, moderate is like $200,000 a year or something like that, I think, for the household.

Yeah, so it's 37% with our low income and 50% moderate. I'm trying to remember, that is county AMI. That's the same numbers you're talking about.

Right, so it's north of 200,000, I think, for moderate and even more than that for the other.

Right.

So have you considered with your fare box, a sliding scale fare box, to help pay for this so that it's distributed more evenly to people's income levels?

One of the ways we try to deal with that is to try to, we've got that go-pass program where companies buy passes for all their employees, and then some of those don't get used, and so we have a pass-forward program where the companies can get that.

I get that, but no idea to double the, let's say double the fare box for people who are moderate to high income in order to help cover the cost.

I don't think the board, you know, we have been for a long time.

Okay, thank you.

I have a question. Any other questions from council? I have a question. Could you go back to the page where it talked about your hours, when you're open, when you serve? I think it was blue. Yeah, yeah. And at that point, you were referring to what you guys do. Mainline. And then later, you referred to if you get funding, you'll continue with that. And if you don't, you'll go to red.

Right.

Right. So if you don't mind, so when I see this here, it says frequent service day seven days a week. As you know from other council members, we want to talk about Gilroy.

Absolutely.

That doesn't include Gilroy, correct?

No, it doesn't. But we do know that Gilroy folks do ride that service. But you're right, that's not.

But it also says every 15 minutes. That certainly does not include Gilroy.

No.

Okay. I just want to make sure that people knew that you're talking about your train services that are broadly applied.

Yep.

Okay. All right. Public comment, please? Stefan or Kim? Any public comment?

Oh, no. No speakers. Thank you. Sorry about that.

All right. Well, thank you very much. Thank you very much. Thanks for coming in. Appreciate it. All right. So next item is reports of council members. And I'm going to start with Council Member Bracco, please. Respect our time. No report. Council Member Fugazi. No report. Council Member Mark. No report. Council Member Ramirez. No report.

Just real quick, participated in another League of California Cities Housing Community Economic Development Policy meeting, participated in our first unhoused ad hoc meeting, which was great information and collaboration, and participated in my first focus agriculture session through Agriculture Santa Clara. I do want to address one other thing if you do not mind. Sure. I have to say, and I have to go on public record, I am appalled by the hateful emails and voicemails that have been sent to our staff. This is so difficult for me to keep my composure because I am mortified but by what I have read and heard. It is incredibly inappropriate to speak to staff, any staff, in this way. We are fortunate as a city to have the professionalism, the knowledge that this staff provides to this community on a daily basis. If you sent me an email demanding termination of staff or provided any disrespectful comment, you did not get a response from me. I deleted your email. You do not warrant a response. I understand that there are some things that are going on in this community that bring fear, fear of the unknown. I get it. And it is okay to disagree. That's what makes our democracy the beautiful thing that it is. But you have to remain respectful and kind in your comments. Ms. Goey, I'm going on record right now that we are fortunate to have you and your staff. Thank you for your service.

Council Member Klein. I don't have any reports, but I do. echo those sentiments of Council Member Ramirez with Sharon and what she does for us and the staff. We have a great staff, and they work their tails off. And there's a right way to do things. There's a wrong way to do things. And, you know, it's great to have a discussion, but keep it to the point, and don't make it personal like that. There's no room for it. And for someone like her to take what she's taken, we stand with her. We protect her because she does a great job. She works her tail off. And I'm just happy with working with her, and thank you for your sentiments.

Thank you very much. I am going to comment about, so we're at the end of the school year, and every year comes some of the most generous and giving people and organizations in this community is when they get highlighted. So this year, we've just gone through the cycle of where scholarships and things are given out to the students around our community. And just as a reminder, I believe Gilroy Assistant League, they just gave out their annual $45,000 or so. And most every single one of their givings went to Gilroy Unified School District. Gilroy Foundation has just finished their competitive grant recipients. PROGRAM FOR THE YEAR WHERE THEY GAVE OUT $548,000 TO SOUTH COUNTY ORGANIZATIONS AND PEOPLE IN NEED. AND AT THE SAME TIME, GILROY FOUNDATION, AS PART OF THEIR GILROY FOUNDATION SCHOLARSHIP CYCLE, THEY GAVE OUT $459,000 TO STUDENTS IN GILROY. AND INCREDIBLY, THERE'S IN PARTNERSHIP WITH SILICON VALLEY COMMUNITY FOUNDATION, There's now $20,000 scholarships that go to kids in Gilroy that are anonymous. And this year there was 15 of them. So it's pretty incredible, Gilroy Foundation and the generosity and the giving of this community, those people in front of us. So congratulations, Gilroy.

Can I add Rotary? Rotary also gives about 200,000 out every year.

Thank you. Thank you. And surely it's not just Rotary and Gilroy Assistant League and Gilroy Foundation. This community always continues to give. So thank you for doing that. I already made my first mistake of the evening. I skipped over public comment, which is quite important. Item number 3.2. So as a reminder, this part of public comment is by members of the public on items not on the agenda. but within the subject matter jurisdiction of city council. So I just want to remind everybody, thank you for coming in this evening and your interest in participating in the city council meeting. But I would also like to remember to ensure that this meeting proceeds efficiently and fairly and with decorum that we are going to ask people during public comment not to clap. I asked folks to do this a couple weeks ago and thank you very much for responding. It's not conducive to a great meeting when some folks are clapping against something that other people don't feel as strongly about. So please keep in mind we would like this meeting to move at a great pace. So we will not be having clapping. And I would also like folks to remember, once we start the public comment about this item, which is number 3.2, once we get through the first three, then we're not going to continue to add public speakers, or just it goes on and on and on, and then I choose the wrong minutes for them to speak. So with that being said, I'm going to move into public comment. Remember, this is for items that are not on the agenda. And for example, I get a sense that there are people here that want to talk about a data center this evening, which is quite fine. That is something that you will talk about in 9.4, right? And that'll be in 9.4. But don't worry, as I said earlier, we're moving 9.4 up from the very end of this evening to right after the consent calendar, which will not be long from now. So with that being said, I'm going to turn it over to Kim and Stefan for a public comment.

Thank you. I'll call three speakers at a time so you can be prepared and line up or be prepared to come up. Jan Guffey, Michelle Nelson, and Perla Garcia.

Kim, how many speakers do you have?

24, currently.

Okay, put them down for one minute, please. For one minute. And I want to remind folks, if you're speaking about an item that's somewhere else in the agenda, please... Wait until that item on the agenda comes up, please. Otherwise, take it away, Jan. You have one minute.

All right. Can I make one more note? Sure. One more note, really quick. The speaker timer, which you're used to seeing here on this screen, will now be shown up here, and you'll get a 10-second warning, and then your minute will chime as well.

Great. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you, Kim. Honorable Mayor and City Council members, my name is Jan Guffey. I'm a resident of Gilroy. Thank you for your courageous vote opposing the proposed ice facility on county land just outside city limits. Please do the next right thing and ban ice from staging their operations anywhere inside Gilroy. Thank you.

Michelle Nelson, Perla Garcia, and Georgine.

Before I start, this is about the environmental impact report for the data center.

Which item?

This is not about the process, which is 9.4.

I think we are going to be taking comments on the data center on 9.4. You're correct that 9.4 is devoted to process. However, we are furnishing that time to talk about data centers.

So I disagree completely. We'll hold your comment until then.

At 9.4, please, which will only be in a few minutes.

I had a separate comment for 9.4.

Well, Michelle, you've heard me ask the whole room.

Okay, just a complaint because I want to talk about the noise, not the process, the noise.

Thank you. 9.4, thank you very much. Next, please.

Sorry, the timer's up there now.

I'm sorry?

Good afternoon. My name is Perla Garcia, and I'm a resident of Gilroy. This is my first time coming to a city council meeting, and I find it important to be here for a couple of reasons. But one of the topics that I want to just, like the First Lady spoke about, is the detention center. I understand that this was privately done. We are hoping that as representatives of this city, you will fight for us and fight against the detention center. Gilroy has a population of 58.9% Latinos, and a lot of our Latino members here and citizens are farm workers. Having a detention center here is gonna affect all of us. It's gonna affect our farm workers. It's gonna affect our children. Racial profiling exists, as you know that. I don't know if you follow the news, but the Delaney Detention Center in New Jersey is all over the news right now for inhumane conditions. California is not going to be any different because ICE is doing whatever they want. So I'm really hoping that you will take our public comments and understand that our community is going to suffer if more detention centers come this way. And so I truly, truly hope that you will represent us in our interest and the interest of our farm workers. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Can you guys hold the applause, please? Can that bell be louder? I know that she did a great job speaking, but I don't think she even heard the bell. I just turned it up a little bit. Thank you.

My name is Georgene Scott-Kodiga with Americans for Transparency. On June 5th, this council was formally asked to issue a written determination under Sequel Guideline 15162 addressing changes to the data-centered water employment figures and certification. That determination has not been issued. It remains outstanding tonight. Here are the facts. Amazon's certified final EIR states this project will use 7,494,550 gallons of water per year, 23 acre feet. On May 29th, Amazon's VP published a column stating the project would use approximately four million gallons, roughly half. At the June 3rd open house, Amazon's own representatives acknowledged on video that the numbers had changed. The certified EIR states employment may grow to 50 full-time employees, while Amazon now says approximately 90. That's an 80% increase over the baseline used to determine the traffic and air quality analysis. These are not rounding errors. Since 15162 doesn't give this council discretion to ignore changes like this, It requires a documented determination of whether they trigger supplemental environmental review. I'm asking the council to acknowledge that this request remains outstanding and to direct staff to issue it.

Thank you very much. Your time is up. Thank you very much.

Next three, please. Ellen Martin, followed by Santa and Rebecca Armendariz.

Good evening, Council. I've been in Gilroy since 1975. I recently retired from the Santa Clara Valley Water District. I was a water measurement technician. I measured all the data on all five of your wells every month, so I know what's going in and out. So my concern is just that you and your staff be sure to take due diligence on your water use on groundwater. So groundwater, you know, we don't want to have the overdraft, subsidence, which is what caused a lot of problems in other parts of the county. So Gilroy Foods was a big user of water, but they have their own wells out there. And so that didn't really affect your city water. So I would just say that when you're looking at industry and policy, Maybe think about, you know, not delving into too much groundwater to cause too much problems for all of your other people around. I personally now am out of city limits with 12 acres of organic apricots, and groundwater is super important to me. Thank you. Thank you.

Sana, Rebecca Armendariz, and Kelly Larson.

Good afternoon, honorable mayor, honorable council members. On behalf of the Ice Out of Gilroy Coalition, we are here tonight to ask that you prioritize the following. That the city file an amicus brief with our county and state attorney general lawsuit to stop the ice processing center from being built in Gilroy. And that it be part of the agenda for the special meeting on the 29th of June. Second, that you declare any city-owned property in Gilroy as ice-free zones. Our county and many cities across the country, including five in our own county, have successfully passed these policies. Gilroy needs to do the same to protect its community members and reassure them of our commitment to support them as best we can. And lastly, to create an emergency operations plan in case of increased ice enforcement, such as workplace raids and the kidnapping of our community members from their homes, schools, or work sites. It's no secret that our economy thrives because of our immigrant community members, but their value is far beyond the financial contributions, direct or indirect. They're human beings with families and friends who love our community as much as any of us do. They deserve to be here not just because of the work they do or the products that they buy, but because of who they are and how their presence strengthens the diverse cultural fabric of our community. Thank you.

Thank you, Rebecca.

Kelly Larson, followed by Clarita and Perla Flores.

Good afternoon, council members. I'm here to echo what you've heard from many of our community leaders and request that our county and state attorney general's lawsuit to stop the ice processing center from being built in Gilroy, and second, that you declare any city-owned property in Gilroy as ice-free zoned. Every time we all stand in this hall and recite the pledge that says liberty and justice for all, I want that to mean something. I want this community to know that our words are paired with action. And right now, our community is looking to you all to see that your words are paired with action. And we need those actions to unequivocally say that you will do everything in your power to defend this community, our neighbors, family, and friends, not just because they give us something and to be sure, our city would be nothing without our immigrants, but because we are all human and we are all deserving of life, dignity, and respect. And so I and the many beautiful people behind me are here to urge you to listen to your constituents and use the power we as voters have entrusted with you to use it responsibly and humanely, ice out and no data processing center.

Thank you, Senator.

Clarita, followed by Perla Flores and Sally Armendariz.

Hi, my name is Clarita. Thank you for the opportunity and for approving the resolution opposing the proposed ICE facility. I'm asking you to build on three actions. Join the amicus brief being filed by the county of Monterey. Agenda, sorry, I can't speak today. No staging some policy to your add the no staging policy to your decks council meeting Establish an emergency response plan to the city is in case we need to protect our community and These issues matter deeply to me Because I love my community

And today I work with you, the Youth Alliance. I coordinate the San Benito County Solidarity Network. And every day I witnessed the fear, uncertainty of our community. And I urge you to stand with our community and take action. Thank you.

Thank you, Carita.

Perla Flores, followed by Sally Armendariz and Julie Klein.

Good evening. My name is Perla Flores. I'm an immigrant from Mexico, the proud daughter of hardworking immigrant farm workers and also an immigration attorney. And I spent the last 25 years working with immigrant survivors of gender-based violence, particularly in South County. You've heard three concrete steps that you can do to further support our immigrant community. And I strongly support these... because I've seen firsthand the impact that fear has on immigrant and mixed-status families. Throughout my career, I've worked with thousands of immigrant survivors of domestic violence, sexual assault, human trafficking, and other crimes. When people are afraid to report violence, seek support, or cooperate with law enforcement, seek medical care, the entire community is less safe. Gilroy has always been shaped by immigrant and farmworker communities. There are neighbors, there are coworkers, business owners, and friends. They help power our local economy and enrich the fabric of our city. The question before us is not simply about immigration policy. It's about what kind of community we want to be. I believe Kiroy is strongest when all residents can live, work, learn, and seek help without fear. Thank you for your leadership, and we look forward to your support.

Thank you.

Sally Armendariz, Julie Klein, and then Aaron O'Brien.

Good afternoon, my name is Sally Hernandez and I'm a Galway native. I've always lived in Galway, all 84 years of my life. So do I care about Galway and who lives in Galway and how Galway is compromised? Yes, I do. But since I didn't see any of you yesterday at the protest against the building of the ICE jail in our town, I'm here to ask you that you Give and show our undocumented residents some type of reassurance that you care about them by creating that emergency plan for their protection. Join the lawsuit filed by the county and state and declare Gilroy an ice-free zone. Protect your community. That's why you were elected. And if you want to know what Gilroy is going to look like, if you let that detention jail, because that's what it's going to be, be built, I suggest all of you watch the movie, A Day Without a Mexican, and you'll see what Galway's gonna look like. Thank you. Thank you, Sally.

Julie Klein, Aaron O'Brien, and Ruby.

Honorable Mayor, honorable council members. I'm sorry if I get a bit emotional. I wrote to you earlier today about my beautiful daughter-in-law and I'm going to try and keep it together. I'm Julie Klein, a small business owner with Indivisible South County. Please. agendize a no staging policy prohibiting ICE from using city property for enforcement operations. You can't cry foul about it being called a Gilroy detention center and yet be a party to ICE actions by providing staging space within city limits. Please develop an emergency response plan. There are ICE bounty hunters rounding up our family and friends to fill for-profit detention centers. The price paid for each detainee is the same, regardless if they get the facts wrong. It's cruel. It's inhumane. Lastly, join the amicus brief and the lawsuit filed jointly by the county and California's AG. You can't control how the public refers to this facility, but you can control Gilroy's perceived response. Thank you, Julie. And how it is remembered.

Thank you very much.

Thank you.

Erin O'Brien, Ruby, and Yuli. Thank you.

Good evening. I'm going to start by asking people in chambers if they are opposed to the ICE facility and are asking you to take action to please stand. So I am here tonight because the proposed ICE detention facility just outside Gilroy City limits will have devastating impact on our families and neighbors. The people who are at most at risk are not strangers. They are our neighbors, our coworkers, our friends, our families, our loved ones. We have a responsibility to do everything we can in our power to keep them safe. You have a responsibility to do everything in your power to keep them safe. Silence is a choice. Inaction is a choice. And today I'm asking you to choose courage and leadership and solidarity with the people of Gilroy. And I'm asking you in a very urgent manner, you must agendize and pass the amicus brief because time is running out for that. It's incredibly important. Be brave.

Thank you.

Ruby, Yuli, and Diane.

Good afternoon, Mayor and City Council members. I acknowledge that my issue is very, very minor compared to the issue that everyone else is discussing today. I'm a member or resident of the Milius Apartments on 6th Street and Monterey, and the parking lot that all residents have been parking in for many years has now changed its hours, so we're no longer allowed to park there overnight. We park several blocks away on residential streets that are dark and not lit well. see this as a safety concern for my personal safety, my vehicle's well-being, and I am formally requesting the city at least consider a parking permit program for the residents of the Milius apartment complex. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

Yuli, Diane, and Gretchen.

Hi everyone, my name is Yulia Boundis and I'm a local educator. Yesterday, more than 500 people from our community and surrounding areas marched in protest of the potential construction of an ice concentration camp in Gilroy. Today, I stand alongside concerned community members regarding the potential harms and psychological distress that would be inflicted by the possible expanded ice presence in our area. It is our responsibility to establish safety and unity among all of its residents. By adopting the no staging zone policy and implementing emergency response plans, you have the opportunity to uphold these values and reinforce the trust that community members have placed in their local government. Without this policy, our immigrant neighbors would undoubtedly continue to face barriers to accessing essential services, including health care and education, due to increased fear and uncertainty. I urge you to consider lasting harm caused by family separation. Please reflect on your responsibility to protect the safety, stability, and dignity of all of its residents. I ask you to vote in support of the no staging policy and protect the individuals at greatest risk.

Thank you.

Diane, Gretchen, and Raymundo.

Good evening, City Council members, staff, community. My name is Diane Ortiz. I'm the CEO of Youth Alliance, serving Gilroy youth and families. Thank you to the City Council for passing a resolution opposing the harmful ice activity in our community. Your action sent an important message that Gilroy values the safety, dignity, and rights of all residents. While the resolution is meaningful, many families continue to live with fear. And when residents are afraid to go to work, take their children to school, seek medical care, or participate in civic life, the entire community suffers. Gilroy has an opportunity to demonstrate what local leadership looks like during this moment, and we respectfully urge the city of Gilroy to join the amicus brief being filed. To meet this deadline, we urgently request that you add this amicus decision to the city council board agenda at the upcoming special meeting on June 29th. By joining the brief, Gilroy can stand along neighboring jurisdictions in defense of our residents and community values. Adding Gilroy's voice would strengthen a regional message that local communities support constitutional rights, due process, and family unity. This is an opportunity to show that Gilroy is committed not only to words, but also to action. Thank you.

Thank you, Diana.

Gretchen Raymundo Angelique.

Good evening. My name is Gretchen Yoder shock. I am a resident of Gilroy and I want to express my appreciation for some of our city council members that have issued formal statements opposing the federal plan to build an immigration facility on whole school road and that our city. has a policy that the police department will not participate in federal immigration operations. As our community clearly is expressing, we are strongly opposed to the government's plan. I encourage you to file an amicus brief in support of our county and state lawsuit to stop this proposed facility. We have all experienced in this past year and a half how this federal government just barrels ahead with any and all of their ideas. We need to be prepared. I encourage you and urge you to pass a policy that will prevent any city-owned property being used by ICE. Thank you.

Thank you, Gretchen.

Raymundo, Angelique, and Tatiana. Tatiana.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Remundo Armendares. I'm the Executive Director at CARAS, Community Agency for Resources, Advocacy, and Services. And I am here tonight to request that all of you please continue to support the immigrant labor and Latino community of Kilroy. by a couple things. One, if you could please commit time and resources to creating an emergency response plan to support immigrant farm workers here in Gilroy. In case of ICE raids that may be escalated with the creation of this ice detention processing center to that the city contribute resources in time to Join and file an amicus brief in support of the county and state of California as well to support immigrant labor and residents and here in Gilroy, and finally, also to pass a policy that would bar the use of city-owned property from being used by ICE detention or ICE staff and facility members. Thank you.

Thank you, Raimundo.

Angelique, Tatiana, and Lauren.

Good evening. My name is Angie, and I'm 15 years old. And I live in Gueroit, but I'm here with Youth Alliance. First, I want to thank the City Council for passing their resolution opposing harmful ice activity in our community. It means a lot that our leaders are listening to our local families. As a 15-year-old, it's hard to see people in my community worried about being separated from our families. Everyone deserves to feel safe at school, in their neighborhood, and in the city they call home. I'm asking the city to continue taking action by joining Monterey County's mission brief, exploring a no-stage zone policy, and creating an emergency response plan so families know where to go for support and resources if they need help. Thank you for listening and continuing to support our community. I hope you'll keep taking steps to make sure all families in Garoy feel safe and protected. Thank you.

Thank you, Angie. Tatiana and Lauren.

Good evening, my name is Tatiana Villaseñor Carrillo. I am a community organizer with CARA South County here in Gilroy. Thank you for unanimously opposing the proposed ICE detention facility. I urge the city council to take the next step by joining the growing coalition supporting the lawsuit against this project and by advancing policies that ensure city property cannot be used for immigration enforcement staging. These actions matter because detention harms families, creates fear, threatens the economic well-being of our community. Gilroy was built by immigrants and farmworker families, and we have the responsibility to protect the people who make our city strong. I respectfully ask you to continue your leadership and take concrete action to keep Gilroy safe, welcoming, and united. I understand that people may disagree about immigration policy, but regardless of where we stand politically, we should be able to agree that families deserve dignity, children deserve safety, and no one should be subjugated to conditions that dehumanize them or separate them from their loved ones. Thank you.

Thank you very much.

And Lauren?

Lauren? Yeah, she's outside. She's coming. Okay.

Lauren Lauren Houseman.

Here she comes.

everyone, the council members to agenda a formal moratorium on all future data centers and battery storage facilities in the city of Gilroy. I have children and I'm a teacher and I love children and I love clean air and clean water and everyone needs that and we don't need any more data centers.

Thank you. You got your hands full there. Cute. I have no further speakers. All right. Thank you. Thank you, everybody, to the community. The signs are great. Thank you very much for the decorum in this part of the meeting. Very much appreciated. Okay. We are going to move on. to item number five and this is the appointment of our youth commission youth commission appointment so this is the background for some of you that are here and are sticking around of course you're not required to but two weeks ago we had young members of Gilroy come in and apply for the youth commission and they did short interviews and now we're going to go through the selection process so We will start with probably Council Member Bracco. Go right down the line, and he will announce who he voted for, and we'll keep a tally.

Yes, thank you, Mayor. We currently have five vacancies on the Youth Commission with terms ending June 30, 2028. We did interview 11 applicants on the June 1st meeting, and so I'm going to start with Council Member Bracco, and if you could give me your top five, and then we'll go down the line.

Okay. Estrad Balanos.

Is your mic on? Yeah. Can't hear you.

Did you get that, Kim? Okay. Cormac Stumpf. Sorry if I'm butchering your name. Jackson Liu. Jeremy Vu. Casey Walker.

Thank you. Council Member Fugazi.

Yeah, let's see if I can get this one of my glasses on. Cormac Stumpf, Jackson Liu, Jeremy Vu, Lizeth Gomez-Rodriguez, and Robert Garive.

Thank you, Council Member Marks.

Abigail Nguyen, Astrid Bolanos, Jeremy Vu, Casey Walker, and William Purdy.

Thank you, Mayor Bozo.

Abigail Nguyen, Jackson Liu, Casey Walker, Sarah Isaac, William Purdy.

Thank you, Council Member Ramirez.

Abigail Nguyen, Jackson Liu, Casey Walker, Robert Garive, William Purdy.

Thank you, Council Member Klein.

I'll give you the first name, Abigail. Jeremy Vu, Robert Garive, Sarah, and William.

Okay, just give me one minute. It looks like we have five applicants with four votes each. So that would fill the five vacancies. They are Abigail Nguyen, Jackson Liu, Jeremy Vu, Casey Walker, and William Purdy. Congratulations.

Congratulations for those who are here. I think there's a couple of them out here. All right, go ahead and stand up, you two that are here. I think there's two of you here that are present. All right, congratulations.

Thank you.

All right. Moving on to item number six is the consent calendar. ANY COMMENTS FROM COUNCIL MEMBERS ON CONSENT? ITEMS ON CONSENT? ANY QUESTIONS? DIDN'T SOUND LIKE IT. PUBLIC COMMENT? EXCUSE ME, GO AHEAD.

CLINE?

I JUST NEED TO POINT OUT ONE THING. THIS ITEM IN THE CONSENT IS I APOLOGIZE. Yes, 6.5. I have a conflict of interest with that, and so I need to recuse myself from that vote. 6.5. 6.5, yes.

We'll recuse from 6.5. Yes. Okay. Any public comment on the consent calendar, please?

No, I have no speakers.

Okay, then I will entertain a motion.

Motion to approve. I'll second.

I have a motion by Council Member Ramirez and a second by Council Member Marks to approve items 6.1 through 6.12 on the consent calendar with Council Member Klein abstaining from 6.5. Roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco. Yes. Council Member Klein.

Yes.

Council Member Fugazi.

Yes.

Council Member Marks. Yes. Council Member Ramirez. Yes. And Mayor Bozo.

Yes. Motion passes 6-0. OK. As I said earlier, in orders of the day, I decided to move item number 9.4 to the beginning of the meeting. I'LL READ THAT TO YOU MOMENTARILY. ITEM 9.4, CONSIDERATION OF OPTIONS FOR AMENDING THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW PERMIT PROCESS. FAIR MEMO BY MARKS AND RAMIREZ. STAFF REPORT, PLEASE.

MICHAEL. GOOD EVENING. THANK YOU, MICHAEL VASSATI, PLANNING MANAGER, CITY OF GILDEROY. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL, MEMBERS OF THE COMMUNITY. TONIGHT IS THE FAIR MEMO REGARDING THE ARCHITECTURAL AND SITE REVIEW PERMIT PROCESS. Staff is ready to present the outline, provide some options for council to consider, and provide a recommended path moving forward. Oh, it's not showing. MY APOLOGIES, COUNCIL AND COMMUNITY. THIS IS THE PRESENTATION. THIS ITEM IS RETURNING TO COUNCIL AFTER DISCUSSION EARLIER THIS YEAR. IN JANUARY THE FAIR MEMO BROUGHT UP QUESTIONS ABOUT THE CURRENT ANS REVIEW PERMIT PROCESS AND IN MARCH COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO COME BACK WITH OPTIONS TO CONSIDER. The current AS review permit process applies to new construction in several zoning districts. As shown on the slide, some large projects have been approved administratively under the current code without an initial public hearing or planning commission approval. These include Performance Food Group, the McCarthy Industrial Buildings Project, and the Gilroy Data Center. Next slide. Apologies for the technical difficulties. Under the current code, the community development director or designee has decision making authority for standard ANS review permits. For most major AS projects, we create a web page to show the project's current status in the entitlement phase. There is no public notice or hearing unless a project already requires it or if someone appeals the decision. If there is an appeal, the planning commission and possibly the city council can review the case. If the appeal is withdrawn, there will be no public hearing. This slide summarizes where approval authority currently sits. Standard ANS review permits are handled by staff, but certain permit types must go to the planning commission and city council for consideration. Staff has identified three options for the council to consider to increase public involvement. Option one would expand public outreach. Option two would set a CEQA-based threshold for planning commission review. Option three allows council to propose an alternative approach. Staff's going to provide a recommendation to combine option one and option two for your review. Option one would increase public outreach. It aims to increase community awareness earlier, specifically once an ANS application is deemed complete. We would keep the current web page posting process intact and add the additional following steps. We'd require the applicant to send mailed notices and host a public meeting to discuss the project. And the applicant would need to provide the documentation to the project planner once that community meeting is over. In our staff report, we identified pros and cons for this approach. OPTION ONE PRIMARILY RAISES AWARENESS AND ENCOURAGES COMMUNITY INVOLVEMENT WHILE KEEPING THE CURRENT APPROVAL PROCESS UNCHANGED. HOWEVER, IT COULD LEAD TO HIGHER COSTS, REQUIRE GREATER STAFF OVERSIGHT AND TAKE LONGER TO PROCESS. FURTHERMORE, EVEN WITH SET STANDARDS, THE QUALITIES OF THE COMMUNITY MEETING MAY BE COMPROMISED. OPTION TWO WOULD SET A NEW THRESHOLD ON WHETHER A PROJECT REQUIRES A PUBLIC HEARING. This approach reserves public hearings for projects with the greatest environmental impacts. All other development proposals would go through a more predictable administrative design review. Administrative review is usually more efficient and less costly. Projects with major unavoidable impacts would still get a higher level of public review and decision making. If adopted, this change would mean more staff time and higher processing costs for fewer projects that need to go to planning commission. This includes time spent on scheduling hearings, managing agendas, and providing extra support. Again with this option, as identified in the staff report, there are pros and cons. Option two reserves public hearings for projects with the greatest environmental impact, including community involvement. However, for projects that meet the CEQA threshold, this could mean longer timelines, higher costs, and more uncertainty for the development. With that, staff recommends pursuing a zoning code amendment to adopt option one and two, which would enhance the public outreach and planning commission review for projects that require an EIR with significant and unavoidable impacts. This approach balances and supports transparency, public participation, and administrative efficiency. This concludes staff summary of the proposed project, and I'd be happy to answer any questions. Thank you for your time.

I'm going to go to Councilmember Ramirez, then I'm going to go to Councilmember Marks, and then I'm going to go to Bracco, because I saw your hands go up. But I also, first I want to get some comments from Andy, just to give context to the community and to us up here about this item.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. Just briefly, this item is agendized to relate to options for amending the architectural and site review permit process, and that's what Mr. Fossati has presented a staff report on. The city will be considering the possibility of changing its system in some respect with respect to architectural and site approval considerations. This is not the time for a referendum on the Amazon project, which of course was approved a year ago. Although we recognize, however, that Amazon was the impetus for much of the concern here about the actual process and has brought that really to our attention. So the council will not be considering specifically the Amazon project or whether its documentation is accurate or not. That's not the issue tonight. However, those of you who wish to talk about Amazon, as the mayor mentioned earlier, this is the time to do it because it is here on the agenda. Although, as I said, the council deliberations will deal with questions about what to ask the staff to bring back in terms of possible changes to the city's process for treating architecture inside of Google Projects. Great.

Okay, I'm gonna go to a councilman mark.

Excuse me Ramirez marks then Bracco to start it off So I just want to clarify this this is for discussion or comments or questions right now for staff. I have no question It's I have just comments.

Sure councilmember marks.

Okay. I do have a question and I'm asking this so it's clarified for everyone who's listening and Because when I first read this in option two about significant and unavoidable impacts. I can't read my own handwriting here. I was thinking it was too subjective. And then when they explained it to me. and what it meant, all of a sudden it made a lot of sense. So I'm sure there's people out there that are confused as I was when I first read that. So could we have someone explain what these significant and unavoidable impacts actually means?

Sure, if you allow me. Sure. I'll give you a couple moments. Give me a couple moments. Every project that's within the city, the state of California, requires to go through what they call CEQA, the California Environmental Quality Act. That has multiple elements associated with it that a project needs to be reviewed against. If there's a determination that the project significantly impacts one of those elements, it's considered significant and unavoidable. Let me give you an example. The state recognizes and some cities recognize scenic views via scenic public routes. So if there's a public route that has a certain view, it can be designated as a scenic view. If someone proposes a development project that impacts that view because the building is too high, if it has a certain look, that would be considered a significant unavoidable impact because the state of California, as well as the local city, had determined that was a scenic vista. So that's where it's objective. Hopefully that's an example that you can handle.

Okay, and I do have one more. I noticed that in the recommendation, it goes to Planning Commission, and say Planning Commission says yes to the project, But the council doesn't like it. I'm a little surprised that the council doesn't weigh in on this also. So I don't know. Well, I guess when we get to discussion, I guess the council could discuss that, that we could ask the question if that could be amended. Because I think when we did the fair memo, Council Member Ramirez and I had planning commission and council involvement.

So through the mayor, the process for reviewing land development items is that it would be reviewed through the Planning Commission first, that's why you hire them. So they come on board to do that review. Doesn't necessarily mean that that's the end of the process, so either side can appeal that decision, and that appeal would come to the City Council. So there is a process to get to the City Council for your insight. THE GOAL IS THAT THE PLANNING COMMISSION HAS CLEAR DIRECTION FROM THEIR KNOWLEDGE OF YOU AND FROM THEIR WORK PLAN OF WHAT YOU ANTICIPATE, WHAT YOU EXPECT, AND WHAT THE CODE SAYS, AND THAT WOULD DRIVE THEIR PARTICULAR REVIEW AND DIRECTION.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU.

COUNCILMEMBER BROCKO.

HOW LONG HAVE WE BEEN DOING THIS PROCESS THE WAY IT'S BEING DONE NOW?

I DID A LITTLE RESEARCH AND I CAN'T FIND A TIME WHERE WE HAVE NOT BEEN DOING THIS PROCESS. AT THE BEGINNING OF THE SLIDE, I DEMONSTRATED SOME PROJECTS THAT HAD RECEIVED THE SAME PROCESS, ADMINISTRATIVE REVIEW VIA AN EIR. AND THE LATEST ONE WAS THE PERFORMANCE FOOD GROUPS. THAT WAS APPROVED IN 2016. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER FUGATI.

First question, because Mr. Morley brought it up, he said either side could appeal. What are those sides? Obviously there is, if it was denied, the applicant could appeal to, but what would be the other side?

So if it was denied, the applicant could appeal. If it was approved, then anybody and any member of the public could appeal it at that point.

Okay. Thanks for that clarification. Now, as far as examples, since we have just done the Amazon one, would this have kicked in, gone to the Planning Commission and given the opportunity for the public to be that appeal should they have approved it? If we had this in place, would that have covered and kicked in accordingly for that project?

Yes.

Thank you.

Could you give some examples of other projects? Sorry, I'm catching you off guard here. Some other projects where that would also kick in.

Sure. Both that and the best I can use, the performance foods, they both have the same impact. The Amazon project had a significant and unavoidable impact on vehicle miles traveled. They were speculating a certain amount of cars going into that area. And the project required more vehicle miles traveled to propose that. That's exactly the same. IMPACT THAT THE PERFORMANCE FOODS GROUP HAD DONE ALSO. I THINK THE OTHER DIFFERENCE FOR THIS ONE IS THE AMAZON PROJECT, IF I RECALL, HAD IT FARMLAND THAT NEEDED TO BE MITIGATED. THIS ONE WE CAN MITIGATE IT BECAUSE I BELIEVE THE APPLICANT CAN PURCHASE FARMLAND AND DEED IT TO AN APPROPRIATE AGENCY TO SUPPORT THAT FARMLAND COMPONENT LOSS.

SO ANOTHER EXAMPLE WOULD BE A BUSY GAS STATION ON THE STREET CORNER SO THAT MAY HAVE SOME ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS POSSIBLY WITH THEIR GAS TANKS. MAY HAVE SOME IMPACTS BECAUSE OF TRAFFIC. THAT WOULD GOING DOWN THE PATH AS COUNCIL MEMBER FERGAZI JUST ASKED, THAT WOULD NOW GO THROUGH THE PLANNING COMMISSION AND THEN THE CITY COUNCIL. WHEREAS BEFORE IT WAS ADMINISTRATIVE. IS THAT CORRECT?

CORRECT. The council so wishes we would create a zoning amendment to create that provision.

May I interject for a moment? The proposal is that only projects with unmitigated impacts would go to the Planning Commission. And normally under CEQA, the environmental analysis has to look at all impacts and mitigations that are available. And the goal is to mitigate impacts if possible. So in the gas station example, probably whatever impacts it had WOULD BE MITIGATABLE. FOR EXAMPLE, YOU CAN DO SOMETHING TO IMPROVE THE TRAFFIC FLOW, FOR EXAMPLE. IN THAT CASE, IT WOULD NOT NEED TO GO TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION. IT'S ONLY WHEN THERE ARE IMPACTS THAT EVEN THOUGH THE CITY HAS ADOPTED MITIGATION, NONETHELESS, THE IMPACT IS NOT FULLY MITIGATED. AND MANY PROJECTS DO NOT OCCUR THAT WAY, BUT SOME DO. AND ALSO, JUST ONE OTHER COMMENT. MOST LARGER PROJECTS INVOLVE SUBDIVISION ALSO, AND THAT GOES TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION AUTOMATICALLY AND THEN CAN GO TO THE COUNCIL. THE AMAZON PROJECT WAS UNUSUAL IN THAT, LIKE SOME INDUSTRIAL PROJECTS, IT DID NOT REQUIRE SUBDIVISION. SO THEREFORE, IT DID NOT TRIGGER PLANNING COMMISSION OR COUNCIL REVIEW UNDER THE PRESENT ORDINANCE.

OKAY. FURTHER QUESTIONS? YEAH, GO AHEAD.

THIS MIGHT GO TO ANDY AS WELL. If there's a resident appeal, does it then go to our legal to see whether it rises enough to that it's an unmitigated issue and then it rises up to where it will come to council? Or no matter what, it's going to come to council because it was appealed by the residents?

Well, if under the new policy the matter goes to the planning commission, then that can be appealed to the council.

Okay.

It would not go to the Planning Commission unless the environmental impact report showed an unmitigated impact.

Right. And do we get a lot of these every year? I mean, is this going to be a swarm of potential appeals? I have no idea for the volume.

I think it's a small number, but perhaps Michael can explain.

No. ONLY IS IT A SMALL NUMBER, AND SPEAKING TO CITY ATTORNEY FAVOR, THE MAJORITY OF PROJECTS OF THIS SIZE HAVE MULTIPLE ENTITLEMENTS, WOULD AUTOMATICALLY BRING IT TO CITY COUNCIL FOR REVIEW. THIS IS AN ANOMALY, AN ARK IN SIGHT WITH AN EIR. IT'S NOT VERY COMMON.

All right, so we have no further questions. We will jump to public comment. We have quite a few speakers. So we're going to do one minute, please. And Kim, you can start introducing them, three at a time, please.

Thank you. Noah Hayes, Arianna Casey, and Rachel.

Good evening, City Council.

I attended the Amazon open house and was not impressed. The Amazon representatives are overtly enthusiastic about the project and eager, borderline aggressive to convince me this was a net good for Gilroy. They were also extremely supercilious when I told them I had a lot of questions. When I asked why Gilroy was chosen as the location for the data center, the prevailing response from Amazon was our welcoming economic environment and availability of resources. Please do not fall for this rhetoric. When they say this, they mean they saw a city with lax codes, ordinances, and laws they can take advantage of. The guardrails are not in place to keep Amazon contained and they will take and take and take. They will poison this community and then turn around and claim they are contributing to it with grants and programs that amount to a rounding error in their accounting. I employ counsel to adopt these new resolutions and to be vigilant and proactive in making sure that if they cannot stop Amazon now or any other mega corporation, that they cannot do it again. Thank you.

Arianna, Rachel and John.

Thank you for hearing me. This is my first City Council meeting, so this is all a little bit new, and I was thinking it was going to go a little bit differently. But I have a question. When we say environmental impact, what do we mean there? Are we talking about a red-toed frog, or are we talking about other kinds of impacts? Because I feel that the Amazon Data Center, as it was, may or may not have what I think of as an environmental impact. And I'm just trying to understand whether or not what I think of as an environmental impact would come before you. You don't have to answer that. You probably can't. But the next thing I would say is the two real big objections I have here is the lack of communication to the community. I know that you have a website now. with a lot of good information on it, but I just found out about it. I know there's another project coming that they're doing due diligence on right now, and I would really want the administrative process to not allow that to go forward without public input, at the very least, and perhaps control.

Thank you, Arianna. Yes. Thank you.

Rachel, John, and then Kyle, please.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Rachel Chambers. I moved to Gilroy just two years ago, and what struck me immediately was the deep sense of community here. People care about their neighbors, their land, their history, and the future they're building together. Gilroy isn't just a place to live, it's a place people are proud to call home. That's why I'm here tonight, to oppose the data center proposal. What concerns me most is not only the project itself, but the feeling that something significant is moving forward without the level of public awareness, discussion, and scrutiny it deserves. a decision that could permanently alter our landscape, community, character, and should not feel rushed, hidden, or quietly pushed through. The people of Gilroy deserve a transparent process and a genuine voice in shaping what comes next. The land being altered is more than a development opportunity. It's part of what makes Gilroy so special. Open spaces, natural beauty, and a connection to our surroundings are what draw people here and keep them here. Once it's gone, it's gone. We're not just speaking for ourselves tonight. We're a voice of the future. We are stewards of what makes Gilroy special for our children, grandchildren, and everyone who choose to call it home. Thank you so much.

There's your one minute. Thank you very much. Great job.

At this time, the first three speakers have spoken, so no additional speaker cards will be accepted for this item. I just wanted to make note. John, followed by Kyle and Jan.

I'm very concerned with the lack of community insight with this project, and I would like, you know, option one I'd like in the future for things that are this big and affect us this much. TO HAVE INFORMATION FROM THE COMMUNITY SO WE CAN STOP THINGS LIKE THIS.

THAT'S IT.

THANK YOU.

THANK YOU.

KYLE, JAN, AND MICHELLE.

All right, good evening City Council and Mayor. My name is Kyle Short. I'm a teacher here at Gilroy. I teach at Gilroy High. I really care about this community. I really care about the students that I teach, and I really hope that the City Council will, A, have more public awareness, more public outreach about issues like this, and B, oppose the construction of the data center especially the electricity cost, the water cost on the surrounding community. A lot of our students, you know, face difficult financial decisions, and this may have a very negative impact on their future. And because I kind of screwed up my speaker card, please oppose, join the amicus brief, and declare city property ice-free zones. Thank you. Thank you.

Jan, Guffey, Michelle, Nelson, and Kami.

Hi, my name's Jan Guffey and I'm a resident of Gilroy. Thank you council members Marks and Ramirez for proposing this ordinance to make land use decisions more transparent. We were blindsided by the construction of the Amazon AI data center and have many unanswered questions about the impacts of that data center on us Gilroyans. And it doesn't appear from this ordinance that transparency is still evident in this particular ordinance, but thank you for your efforts.

Michelle, Cami, and Heidi?

Before I start, am I going to be allowed to address 8.1 in mentioning water?

Why wouldn't you do 8.1 when 8.1 comes up?

That's what I'm asking. Am I going to be allowed to address 8.1 and mention the data center in 8.1 as it relates to water? Sure. Thank you. Okay, so for this, I'll do noise. Pull it up. Okay, I did read the entire environmental impact report, and while part of my concerns have been assuaged due to the mitigations put in place, I still have some questions, and I'll focus on noise. At first glance, it appears that the impacts in this category are only significant during the construction phase, and with the sound barriers, the impacts are reduced to less than significant. The results from the monitoring stations appear to fall within the city's zoning ordinance, although other reports indicate that the noise is disruptive. The supplemental noise analysis from Trinity from 2024 mentions the EPA's recommendation of a day-night average sound level of no greater than 45 decibels for indoors and no greater than 55 decibels for outdoors to prevent interference with activities and annoyance. According to the noise project, the range of 40 to 50 decibels is associated with a lack of sleep. Prolonged exposure may also cause headaches and irritability. Chronic exposure to sound levels above this range can also lead to impaired cognitive function, especially in children. The World Health Organization also mentions below 60. The applicable noise criteria for Gilray is 60. My concern is that's too high, and that's all I have time for. Thank you. I'll send multiple pages. Please.

Cami, Heidi, Charlene.

Can you pull the mic down, Cami, a little bit? Yeah, I've been told to do that. Can you hear me? Yeah, very well.

Okay. First of all, thank you, council members, for your time this evening. I suspect we may be in some alignment in that we recognize that the process that was applied to the Amazon data center did not meet the needs or desires of the community. What happened, I believe, was that the zoning code was applied as appropriate at that time. I do want to step aside for a moment as a member of Indivisible South County that we do not and would not condone any negative or threatening comments or emails made to any of your staff. NOT APPROPRIATE, AND I WOULD NOT UNDERSIGN THAT. HOWEVER, AS YOU KNOW, IN THIS CASE, THERE WAS NOT AN OPPORTUNITY FOR PUBLIC REVIEW OR COMMENT, AS IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN. GIVEN THE SIGNIFICANT IMPACT ON POWER AND WATER RESOURCES AND QUALITY OF LIFE FOR THOSE THAT FALL WITHIN THE SOUND SCAPE OF THE FACILITY, THIS PROJECT SHOULD HAVE REACHED THE LEVEL OF PUBLIC NOTICE. OUTDATED ZONING REQUIREMENTS. I'm going to ask you that you review your process so that this doesn't happen again and that we can serve the community better that way. Thank you.

Thank you, Kimmy.

Heidi, Charlene, and Steve.

Good evening. Thank you for the opportunity to share tonight. My name is Heidi Mayer. I'm an educator. a parent and a neighbor here in Gilroy. Among the many concerns already voiced, there's one that I assert is the most important to consider. Surprisingly, it's not that these centers are known to negatively impact things like our already unstable electrical grid. We have rolling blackouts every summer or the overuse of precious resources, namely our fresh water. or the increased pollution proven to be dangerous for infants and those with existing respiratory conditions. Believe it or not, it's also not that the negative impact this would absolutely have on the farming community, which makes our city an absolute gem here in Silicon Valley. The noise pollution, which primarily impacts neighborhoods that are already plagued with the noise associated with being built near freeways. It's the fact that current residents do deserve a say in this, despite any decisions that have already been made. Thank you.

Thank you. Charlene, Steve, and then Pat.

Good evening. My name is Charlene Pewter. Thank you for letting me speak tonight. I'm a relatively new resident of Gilroy, and I love living here. However, it's been suggested that myself, an average everyday citizen or resident of Gilroy, contributed to the process, the problem with the data center, because we didn't let people know early enough that we were not in favor of this. I assume there was a process, though after tonight, I don't know, maybe there wasn't. But I don't think the process was knowable to the average everyday resident. And prior to this year, I don't think most people understood what data centers were and the impact they had on communities. So also, I don't think if I had asked questions, I would have gotten very good answers based on what happened at the Amazon session. So I would feel that even tonight's agenda, I'm confused about the data center and water usage, and that hasn't been made clear to me. So I'm asking that we pause this process and get more information. Thank you.

Thank you.

Steve, Pat, and Perla.

So I'm not aware of any friends or neighbors that are in favor of this project, although maybe I'll meet somebody tonight. While I'm hopeful this facility will not be completed, I understand that's probably not realistic. I would encourage you all to take a more aggressive approach in soliciting community feedback prior to projects being completed, particularly on projects that draw down on our resources that we all are asked to conserve. I think that's pretty important. And lastly, I think the community would appreciate that and I think it would be good for your collective political careers. Thank you.

Thank you very much. As I mentioned before, we want to keep this meeting moving along smooth tonight. So you can come on up. And if you guys could please hold it in the clap for after this meeting, that would be very helpful.

As a respect for everyone else who asked to speak. Well, out of respect for all of you, I think the people that have already spoken have done a great job. They've circled the wagon around all the questions that are out there. One question I do want to address is, as we are talking about amendments to the code, That actually happened in 1981. If someone wants to go ahead and take a look at the data that's out there. So where we are today where the public does not have a say, that started in 81. I commend you on actually taking a look at it, you know, in front and moving down that road. So beyond that, I think there's opportunities to hit restart. Hit, back in the day, it was pause and restart, and that was already mentioned. Okay, so you have a chance to go ahead and back up. And that being said, there's three action items I want to address. A, let's start with stop the construction of the Gilroy Amazon data center until a neutral party EIR is completed and openly shared with the public. Put it before the voters on the November 26 ballot. for a public vote on whether to proceed or not. Moratorium on or ban. I know that's the line. Thank you very much.

Thank you. Great job. Thank you. Thank you so much.

Perla, Mac, and Georgene.

Hello again. Hi. Like many have spoken about the data center, I'm here also to oppose that. I am requesting that, and not requesting, I think where a lot of us are demanding a moratorium on the data center. I come here today as a breast cancer survivor, health is important to me, and I know that we don't have enough data, ironically the word data, we don't have enough data around the data centers, but what we do know is there's places such as in Georgia where 30 million gallons of water are being utilized and now the community is getting muddy water that's undrinkable. That can happen to us here. Again, we have farm workers and we use a lot of water in our farmland here. And we are also sometimes being prohibited from watering our own grass. So if we're getting prohibition from watering our own grass, how does a data center get millions of water, recycled or not? So I'm asking of you to take courage and we need to change the zoning laws. We need to do something about this data center currently. We can still stop it. Monterey just did it. Monterey just stopped any future data center building. So we can do it.

Mack, Georgine, then Debbie.

My name is Mack. Thanks for letting me talk, Mr. Mayor and Councilman. Not in my backyard has been a slogan in this manufacturing facility for years and years. It has killed many, many manufacturing jobs throughout the U.S. I come from a manufacturing industry, work in this country 40-plus years in manufacturing. Less don't kill more job. data center will be built here, there, or somewhere else. How long we gonna keep on importing everything we use in our life from somewhere else, some other countries? You guys in this room has information, have the datas, have the credentials, have the right to know everything you guys know more than most of us in the community. So please make a right decision, make a proper decision. Let's do what's good for the nation, good for the people, good for manufacturing, good for jobs. Thank you.

Thank you, Mac.

Georgine, Debbie, and Landon.

This council has now been notified four times about the same unresolved problem. The city cannot show the public the basis for its own finding that our water system can handle a data system facility this size. I've asked for the memo, the acre engineering memo by public record request. I haven't received it. That's the basis. Your own paperwork says it was modeled and evaluated after that, but we can't see it. we you have on your item 93 you're asking for an urgency ordinance we want an urgency ordinance for this to put a temporary moratorium so we can change the zone zoning until we can figure out what to do that's what we need that's all we need is a temporary moratorium on all data centers you can you keep stalling you don't get it we don't want it here you can't even prove that it's that your paperwork is sufficient for it. Why can't we get a copy of the paperwork? What do I need to do? Thank you.

Debbie, Landon, and Daphne.

Let's see if I can adjust this. There we go. My name is Debbie Carrick, and I'm a resident of Gilroy. I prepared this whole nice thing to say, but it seems that at least some preliminary steps are being taken in the right direction. I just want to echo that, you know, I think Amazon came in here to our small community and found a loophole and took advantage of it, and here we are. And maybe it's delayed, but I think it's, I really want to encourage the council to approve and adjust the current building codes the way they are so that it's more transparent and so that the community does have some input on all of this. So thank you for your time.

Thank you very much. Landon, Daphne, and then Ron.

Good evening, council members and to those in the gallery. My name is Landon Sepulveda. I'm one of the organizers of South Valley Community Resistance. You have and will hear today many people from all walks of life come to you as their representatives and plead for a ban on all future data centers to be constructed within our city. It is not a surprise that the majority of people do not want a data center within their town. It is an issue that reaches across both aisles. In fact, 71% of Americans oppose data centers, so why would we create more in our city? Amazon often cites a study about the lack of impact on the communities that they construct in. However, in that very same study, it makes it clear these are numbers for a single data center, and more data centers could indeed have an impact on the utility cost, environmental, and power grid. We understand that the current data center was not the fault of the council, but of the outdated processes that these projects have to go through. So we ask you to not only move forward with the transparency, but to ban all future data centers from being constructed in Gilroy. Thank you.

Daphne, Ron, and Armando.

Hello. Good evening. Thank you for being here today, everybody, every member of this Gilroy community that I love so much. I'm here with my two-year-old, which is hard enough, right, to have your two-year-old even at home. So I've been here for probably three hours now with a two-year-old. So I really mean this with all of my heart. I am beyond disappointed about this data center. I look at my daughter every day, and I want the best for her, whether it's her diet, whether it's her activity. And I wake up every day knowing that there is going to be something in my backyard that is known to cause a decline in her health, that is known to have an increased chance of her getting childhood cancer. My daughter's a NICU survivor, and I'm so grateful she's made it this far. And it would be heartbreaking to have something like that in my backyard for both of us as we both have grown up here. And I'm so grateful there for this place. And I know we're Gilroy strong, and I know we all know what that means. And that means we defend ourselves against any type of harm, not just imminent threats like that day. We defend ourselves through and through.

Thank you. Thank you.

Ron Kirkish, followed by Armando and Annador. Good evening, Mayor, Council.

And I don't think it would surprise you to know that I'm actually pro the dating center. And the biggest hurdle, it seems, is the water issue, along with the electronics, too. But the water issue seems to get a lot of people very upset. So I think I want to address that tonight. The Lagos water basin holds 93 billion, 20 million gallons of water. 93 billion. The data center says it's going to probably use around 4 million gallons a year. That's 0.004% of the water table that we have. 0.004%. I don't understand why people are so hysterical when it's such a minimal amount. I know 4 million sounds like a lot, but 4 billion is a heck of a lot more. Now, in addition to that, we have water. Oops, I guess I'm done.

Thank you, Ron.

Thank you.

Thank you so much. Armando.

Armando, followed by Anador and Diane.

Thank you, council members. You know, it was an anomaly, but it was an anomaly that the Amazon Center was an anomaly because of the fact that it was based on or approved on outdated and non-relevant zoning code. And you ask how long have we been approving these centers, and it's been forever. Yes, it's been forever, but we haven't had AI centers forever. In fact, if you look at Santa Clara County Valley water, they're just updating their code so that they do get or deal with zoning issues in regards to water. I think what needs to do is you're representing the people, and I think what you need to do, you need to update the code. You really need to make new policies, new standards, new thresholds. You cannot just go on and accept number two and think that that's okay with the people. The people want a solution, and the solution is option three. That means you revise the code, you set ceilings, you set standards, And you represent the people, the interests of the people. That's what they want. They don't want you to just have option two. That's not a good choice. Thank you, Armando. THANK YOU.

ANNA DOR, DIANE, FOLLOWED BY BRIT.

THANK YOU, ESPECIALLY TO COUNCIL MEMBER RAMIREZ AND MARX FOR BRINGING THIS TO THE COUNCIL AGENDA. OBVIOUSLY THERE'S TREMENDOUS INTEREST IN IT. I SUPPORT THAT YOU'RE PUTTING EXTRA LANGUAGE IN THE ZONING CODE. I WOULD REQUEST, ASK, SUGGEST THAT YOU PUT ON A MORATORIUM FOR AT LEAST SIX MONTHS that has the specific language of data center in it. So that the time can be taken because having been a planning commission member for the last four years, I know that you're instructing the staff to do verbiage to put in the zoning, but that can take many, many months. And in the meantime, we might end up with a second data center. And that next data center might be a hyperscale data center of 3.8 million square feet. And if nothing gets changed or locked down right now, that can slide in under the same rules as the first one did. And then we're in even greater trouble, right? So kind of consider that. And so in addition to voting on the current language that's being proposed in the staff recommendation, which I support, add maybe an addendum or an amendment that says, let's do a moratorium for six months so we have time to study it and get the language tightened down to address all the comments and concerns of the community. And like one of the other audience members said earlier, be brave.

Thank you. Thank you very much.

Diane Edson followed by Britt Smith and Colleen Crew.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. THANK YOU. I KNOW IT'S TOO LATE FOR THIS DATA CENTER. AND I'M HOPING THAT THE CHANGES GO FORWARD TO STOP ADDITIONAL. BUT I WOULD HAVE SOME CONCERNS THAT I WOULD LIKE TO HAVE ADDRESSED. IS GILROY DEVELOPING A CONTINGENCY PLAN TO RESPOND TO UNEXPECTED EVENTS? LOOK AT TRACY. NO, IT WASN'T A DATA CENTER. Yeah, it happens, emergencies. Risks that disrupt normal operations for this city. In the event of leaks, fires, explosions, what is the city doing to prepare? for these possibilities because they are possibilities. Nothing is impenetrable. Ask the people on the Titanic. 1600 out of 2200 people died because they said that ship couldn't be sunk. There wasn't enough lifeboats to save people. Make a plan to address potential problems before they happen.

Thank you, Diane. Britt is next.

Britt Smith, Colleen Crew, and Connie Ludwig.

Good evening to my neighbors on the council, in the chambers, and watching online. My name is Britt Smith, and I first stood before this body in January to raise concerns about the impending construction for an Amazon Web Services hyperscale data center. At the time... because the city's communication approach, even the one proposed, is quite inadequate. And there really were cited significant unavoidable impacts to groundwater that went uninvestigated, as called out by Valley Water. Many of us, six months ago, were not aware of the full extent of this project, but a lot has changed. Now almost daily, there are groundbreaking, often terrifying studies about the real impacts of data centers on their local communities. From dizzying drones of a data center to watching tap water turn fluorescent yellow, the evidence is in front of us in our news feeds and it's impossible to ignore. What's worse, those data centers were supposed to be sustainable too. This council has said many times that it's too late to act. And while that may be the case for a Royal Circle site, we are here to ensure that our voices are going to be heard going forward. This council has admitted that our ordinances are outdated, so let's start there. Next, organize a committee to open to all residences and businesses that will oversee impending data center impacts while also reviewing proposed future impacts or projects of a similar scale.

Thank you, Britt. One minute. Thank you very much.

Colleen Crew, Connie Ludwig, and Deepak.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Colleen Crewe and I'm proud to call Gilray my home. At a time when California communities are being asked to conserve resources, Gilray is being asked to accept a facility that will consume enormous amounts of electricity and require significant water resources for cooling operations. Residents have every right to ask whether this is the best use of our land, our infrastructure, and our limited resources. But for me and for many of my neighbors, this isn't just about power and water, it's about trust. Trust that when a project has the potential to reshape our community, residents will be informed, that trust that our voices will be heard before decisions are made, trust that the future of Gilroy will be shaped with the people of Gilroy, not simply around them. Many, if not most, residents first learned about this project after construction had already begun. Whether process followed existing rules is not what concerns me most. What concerns me is that so many people felt left out of a conversation that should have included them from the very beginning. Gilroy is a community that values relationships. We know our neighbors. We volunteer in schools. We support local businesses. We show up for one another. That same spirit of openness and community involvement should guide decisions that will impact the city for generations. The decision made today will outlive all of us in this room. Years from now, our children and grandchildren will either thank us for protecting the character of this community or one another.

Connie, Ipak, and Joshua.

Hi, my name is Connie Ludwig. I'm from San Martin, and I appreciate the opportunity to speak today. In San Martin, about 20 years ago, we did have a water problem. Some deep wells are still being studied and tested because of perchlorate, and nobody thought at the time when there was the Olin factory that something like this could be a problem. So I am concerned about the water. On June 5th, the City Council was formally asked to issue a written determination under CEQA Guidelines Section 15162 addressing changes to this project's water and employment figures and certification. The determination has not yet been issued. It remains outstanding. Amazon certified... Final EIR states this project will use 7,494,550 gallons of water per year, 23 acre feet. On May 29th, Amazon's vice president published a column stating the project will use approximately four million gallons, about roughly half. On the June 3rd, Amazon certified final EIR states, whoops, Anyway, please address this. Thank you so much.

Thank you very much. Great job.

Deepak, Joshua, and Jennifer.

Hello, Mayor. My name is Deepak Nair. I'm a techie, so it makes sense I could speak here. So I want to say one clear thing. So I went to the Amazon hearing that was conducted. They were giving us fake data as a public. The information that was provided that the data center will use water for 18 homes, and then they will use ambient temperature. for cooling the data center. That was falsification of information. That was completely false information provided to the public. I personally have built data centers, and I know it takes far more power, far more water to cool it. So please, please look at this thing very, very closely. And I, as a member of the public, do not approve of the data center. Thank you.

Thank you.

Joshua, then Jennifer.

I found out about the data center in January when I was driving. I just looked out my window on Arroyo Circle and saw the billboard. That was six months after it had been approved last June. And that was my introduction, all the way out by Costco. I've done research since then. I've looked at the power consumption. They're going to hook this data center up to 49 megawatt. That's 49 million watts of power, capacity power line. to the power line that supplies the Renz Lane substation which supplies all of us. Using information from the Energy Information Agency and from the California Financial Agency, I found that this is roughly equivalent to the power of 50,000 homes, and in Gilroy we have about 19,000 occupied homes with an average of three people or more. That's more than two times the amount of, that's more than two times the combined total of the electricity all of our homes are using. This is unacceptable.

Thank you very much.

Think about it.

Jennifer?

Hello, good evening. Hi, Mayor. Just to kind of go off of what he just, can you not hear me? Sorry, thank you. I think we all know that these things are just gonna suck our resources. I think everyone's hip to the game now. If it was a good thing, it would have been announced a big celebration. We're bringing this wonderful thing into our community, but it wasn't sneaky. And now people are freaking out because they realize what their lives are going to look like. And I think that's a really unfair thing to do. to people in this community. I've lived in Santa Clara County for 44 years. I know a lot of people and the more I share about this, either people don't know anything about them or they're terrified and they don't want them. I live currently in Santa Clara and there's about five or six nearby me. I wasn't aware. I moved in there a year ago and now I'm freaking out because I need to move. I don't know where. Where's a new one gonna pop up? From what I understand, I think there's more projects going to happen here in Gilroy. i you know i think the people need to know i have no further speakers no that was the other connie there are two connies

One minute, right? You got this, Connie.

Thank you. Okay, my name is Connie Rogers, and I want to thank Councilwomen Ramirez and Marks for submitting the fair memo. And I believe we, as a city, we did not have the right rules in place, but also I'm afraid that Valley Water didn't have their right rules in place because tonight I learned that... Our water figures were based on their report of 2021 and next year, they have a deadline of next year to update their water management plan because they weren't taking into account data centers and there have been a whole lot in San Jose. So I am asking that we try to put a pause on everything until we can get accurate research, especially on the water. You were talking about significant effects. I think the water is the most significant effect, and I would like to see our new ordinance have specific numbers or percentages to avoid the problem that we're in. And I do think we need a moratorium until we figure this out.

Thank you, Connie. All right.

Now I have no further speakers.

Okay, thank you. Okay, now I'm going to bring it back to council. I don't see anybody on the board yet. I am. Okay. Go ahead, Council Member Ramirez and then Council Member Fugazi.

So first of all, thank you for everyone for your comments. A huge thank you to Council Member Marks for working on this with me, to Legal for working with us on this, and to city staff for all the work that you've done on this. So just a few comments that I want to make. When Council Member Marks and I started this, we realized that perhaps With new and emerging technology, our codes were a little bit outdated. That's why we're here tonight. We would like to update them, and I think staff has done a really good job of encompassing really what we were looking at, the end result providing the community with those opportunities. The one thing that I would like to add... In terms of public outreach, we have a newsletter that goes out every week. We have had a really good link to our current projects. Help me with the name of that link, I'm really... with all the projects, any project at all that's at the city and shows the status and stuff. We have a development project list. There we go, that. If that could be added just at the bottom of every newsletter or whatever so people can just easily click on that and they can see housing developments, business, industry, whatever, where they are in the process. I know it's already on our website, but maybe having that link... And then perhaps if there is some kind of a special project, having a paragraph or something about that with a link to that. Because I do know you do make all of these separate web pages for projects and just having a link to that. And then, yeah, I think this covers all of our concerns. So thank you.

Council Member Fugazi.

I have a question. Obviously, we're thinking about these three different options, and it would help me to understand right now how many projects would fit in the data center, and I'm using air quotes on purpose because I don't know how exactly you define it, realm right now in the city.

So just to make sure I'm clear, taking all the applications for a formal development application? Right. Zero. Zero.

Okay. And the stage at which, what's the time period it would take for somebody to put an application in to like even get to the first stage? How long would that take? Whatever those stages are, you can inform people. So I put in an application. I've got to then, I've got to go send out and do work. Maybe Andy can help with this to know, because people are asking for a moratorium, right? So if we put a moratorium in place, How does that prevent people from putting in the application? We have to still look to know whether it's a data center. Explain how that might work or not work because I don't know the process enough.

Matt. I can respond briefly. The Amazon project was under review for several years, for example, and when a project was applied,

Hold on a second, Andy. Hold on a second, Andy. If you guys don't mind, we just sat here for 35 minutes and listened to your comments, and now we have the city attorney trying to give you additional information. So as I asked for earlier this evening, we're just looking for decorum in this room. So if we listen to your comments, I'm hopeful that you'll listen to our comments, including his.

So what I was saying was that the... With housing projects, certain projects get priority from the date of the filing of an application. That's generally not true for these kind of projects, these industrial projects, because the laws simply are not the same. They're not as pro-development as they are for housing projects. As a result, a project can't slip through very quickly. and particularly with the staff option recommended of an EIR with significant unmitigated impact, you don't know that until the full EIR is done, which typically takes at least a year. So in terms of urgency of needing to stop something, Michael, perhaps comment, but I don't think there is any such urgency right now.

But at the same time, if we took a deep breath right now, we wouldn't be holding up anybody who was in the process right now because there isn't anybody else in the process. That's fair enough to say, too.

That's probably accurate, right?

So, you know, one of the things I can say is we just spent a lot of time working on something that A lot of people had strong feelings about, in terms of health, which is the smoking ordinances that we had, that we talked about. And obviously people have a strong feeling about health on this, and we have ordinances on our books for regulating things from card rooms to massage parlors to smoking. I know this is part of our building code portion of our code, but it stands to reason that if there is a significant potential more health risk, and I don't necessarily know if there is or isn't, that we might want to investigate how we might want to adjust our code to accommodate that in the approval process. Again, from my limited amount. One other thing I want to say, too, in terms of being informed, I think that it's the responsibility for every citizen, every resident to go seek out and get the information. I think some are more required to do that than others. activists or so-called or self-described activists. Information is out on our website all over for you to consume. It can't be dropped off on your front doorstep all the time in order to say you didn't know. I've been for many, many years with the City of Gilroy looking at the website, digging in, asking questions, asking questions of people on staff and everybody else, and every one of you have kind of an obligation to do that as well. I think that data centers are something that we all use. In fact, during this whole process, all of you were using them quite a lot. And they have to go somewhere. Or they might end up being relegated like fuel refineries where our fuel goes up to $7 a gallon or something. I think we have to figure out how to have these data centers in places around the state and in communities, do it safely, and if we have to make a change in our code to accommodate that and we need to look at that, I'm certainly open to doing that as opposed to rushing through and going one, two, and being done. So that's where I am.

Question? Council Member Klein, I saw you looking this way. I'm going to ask a quick question while it's fresh in my mind. I might be leaning on City Administrator or Michael for this question, but as Council Member Fregasi was asking about the application process and when does the EIR process start on that, and then I believe Andy said that could be a year or two down the road, correct?

Yes, that's correct.

Correct? So this is the question I have for you guys is, THAT DOESN'T PRECLUDE ANY TYPE OF REVIEW THAT THE COMMUNITY IS LOOKING FOR, CORRECT? SO IT WOULD STILL COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION ONCE THE UNMITIGATED CIRCUMSTANCES WERE REALIZED, AND IT WOULD COME TO THE PLANNING COMMISSION, IT WOULD STILL COME TO CITY COUNCIL, AND AN EIR, THEY COULD, A COMPANY COULD SPEND A LOT OF MONEY ON AN EIR AND IT COULD STILL BE NOT APPROVED, CORRECT?

That's true. The EIR is at the tail end of the process. So with a project, the application comes in. When the application is deemed complete, when there's sufficient information for staff to be able to evaluate the project, that's a major trigger point. There's, at that point, a significant amount of information that's made available on the website for the community. That project information is shared. What we're talking about now is, at that point, Should there be additional community outreach? And that's one of the staff's recommendations is that we at that point start additional community outreach to get the project information out there that would also align with Council Member Ramirez's idea of an item on the newsletter identifying projects. And then at that point, somewhere along that point begins the environmental study. The environmental study looks at California's environmental regulations, taking in a whole series of a dozen or more different components of environmental analysis done by third party separate consultants for each one. So it's a very detailed and very expensive process for a project to go through in order to identify what impact that project may have on the environment. And through that process, it's a data analysis process, so it's not a subjective, it's an analytical process to identify based on regulations that are broader than what the city has, what the impacts might be for that project, and then a whole analysis on whether those impacts can be mitigated or not. And what we're saying is if through that process it's identified that there is gonna be a definite impact to the project cannot be mitigated, it cannot be fixed, the Planning Commission and the Council need to hear about those projects and those should come forward for evaluation. So that's the long and the short of what we're suggesting as a solid process to be able to have detailed community input including hearings like this one for projects.

Can I just, one clarification on that? Sorry, the appeal process happens because of a particular unmitigated item in the EIR. And when they appeal, does the decision on the appeal reside only in that space, or it could be for any other reason or arbitrary reason that gets a majority vote on either the planning commission or the council, and that's probably for legal.

I think the answer is that In this process, it's not strictly an appeal process because if the EIR shows this kind of unmitigated impact, the matter would go to the Planning Commission for a decision or a recommendation, depending on the exact thing, and then to the Council, at which point it's a de novo hearing in either one. So it's not just on the one issue where there's one impact because an EIR might deal with 15 different impacts.

So I'm going to go one more time, and I'm going to get back to what Councilmember Marks said earlier, and Matt, I'm going to ask for your help a little bit again. Councilmember Marks earlier was talking about the environmental impact report that have significant and unavoidable impacts. I heard a lot of people say that today, and I appreciate that. And you were saying earlier that you were concerned that that was too specific, but the fact is it's broad.

Well, that it was too subjective. So maybe what... I FELT SOMEONE ELSE WOULDN'T FEEL THE SAME WAY.

CAN YOU COMMENT A LITTLE BIT ABOUT THAT? THE FACT OR MICHAEL, I'M SORRY, ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT THAT HAS SIGNIFICANT UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS, THAT COULD BE A LOT OF THINGS THAT BRING IT TO PLANNING COMMISSION AND COUNCIL, RIGHT? IT'S NOT JUST A NARROW ITEM.

YES. THERE ARE STANDARDS THAT THERE'S THRESHOLDS LIKE SCIENTIFIC THRESHOLDS THAT MEANT THAT It's not a subjective term if I feel like it's an impact or you feel like it's an impact.

And I felt you answered it adequately before. And even Matt, when you were to explain it to me, you had a very adequate answer too. So maybe the two of you can combine it, you know,

I think if you're looking at an analysis and you heard some of it in the testimony today about some of the objections to things like noise or the amount of water that is being used or the amount of electricity that is being used, all of that is analyzed based on data and based on calculations and available information from from the consultants where they actually go in and do an analysis. It's not something that somebody says, I feel like this is impactful. It's data analysis that drives those decisions. And that's why CEQA is such a powerful tool in California and why California's environmental rules are stronger than any other state in the nation.

Council Member Ramirez.

I forgot what I was going to say.

Well, I'll just, my point was, and I'm trying to reach the community when I, I've said this a couple times, is that it feels like the direction that we're giving council, okay, that we're giving staff, is that the, you know, that the, to require a Planning Commission review and approval for development projects that require environmental impact report that have significant and unavoidable impacts. It's going to go to Planning Commission, it's going to come to Council, It's going to go out to the community, and that is the direction that we're giving you today. And I believe, I know that this group would be interested in additional items, but at this point, I believe this council is suggesting that that's the direction that we're giving you, some of the direction we're giving you this evening. Okay? Go ahead.

So I just want to touch a little bit on the process, the lengthy process that this comes in. So are there times when a developer comes in and puts in initial plans and paperwork, if you will, and then it just sits there and then really nothing ever happens or they ask for an extension because there are time, you know, things have to happen within certain, you know, the laws require responses and resubmissions and all this kind of stuff on a schedule, if you will. But there are times when they ask for extensions. The developer does, which then extends the project. And the EIR is really the last thing because of the cost to the developer. They want to make sure that everything else has approval. FIRST. IS THAT CORRECT?

YES. THERE'S TIMES WHEN A PROJECT CHANGES WHILE THEY'RE SUBMITTING. SO THERE'S STAFF IS DILIGENT IN MAKING SURE A PROJECT IS COMPLETE. AND WHAT I MEAN BY A PROJECT BEING COMPLETE IS THAT WE PROVIDE THEM A CHECKLIST AND THEY PROVIDE ALL THOSE EXHIBITS, ALL THOSE ITEMS. BUT ONCE THE CITY FEELS AND THE APPLICANT BELIEVE THAT THE PROJECT IS COMPLETE, THIS IS WHAT THEY'RE PROPOSING, THE ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW PROCESS GOES INTO EFFECT. What we're proposing in option one along with option two is that once we deem the application complete, we put the onus on the developer to start noticing the community members, to do a community meeting, to share the project components for this complete project, to gather feedback, and then even after that, if it's a full EIR, that EIR process would start, which would again command additional meetings.

Okay, and those original meetings that you're talking about are neighborhood meetings within a certain radius of the development?

Correct. Staff is proposing or recommending that if a project is deemed this, it's an architectural and site permit. If an applicant comes in with an architectural and site permit, even a CEQA, there's no EIR even required that it's noticed within 500 feet and a community meeting.

Okay, within that 500 feet. Anyone could attend the thing, but they don't have to notify the entire city about a project at that point. Correct. Okay, I just want to clarify. And then if this EIR report then triggers that threshold, then that changes things and then it comes forward to Planning Commission, which is a public hearing.

Right, right, if I may. Once the application is ready to go to Planning Commission, because of the government code and the standards of the city of Gilroy, we are required to notice it in a public newspaper informing residents of the project, as well as the project coming to a public hearing to get a recommendation to, again, come to council, which, again, we'd have to notice in the newspaper.

Okay, thank you. FOR THE COMMENTS? OKAY, SO I'M GOING TO SEE IF I CAN GET A CONSENSUS FROM COUNCIL HERE ON THE GUIDANCE THAT WE'RE GIVING STAFF. WHAT I'VE HEARD, THE RECOMMENDATIONS FROM STAFF IS TO ENHANCE PUBLIC OUTREACH AND INITIATE THE PROCESS TO AMEND THE GEARWAY ZONING CODE TO REQUIRE PLANNING COMMISSION REVIEW AND APPROVAL FOR DEVELOPMENT PROJECTS THAT REQUIRE AN ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT AND HAVE SIGNIFICANT AND UNAVOIDABLE IMPACTS, AS WELL AS COUNCIL MEMBER RAMIREZ SAID, SHE WOULD LIKE LINKS EARLIER IN THE PROCESS AS POSSIBLE. SHE WOULD LIKE SPECIAL PROJECT LINKS AS EARLY IN THE PROCESS AS POSSIBLE. AND JUST FOR THE COMMUNITIES TO BE CLEAR WITH THE COMMUNITY, WE ARE NOT VOTING ON THIS TONIGHT BECAUSE WE WANT COUNCIL TO GO BACK TO HEAR WHAT EVERYTHING YOU GUYS SAID TONIGHT, TO HEAR WHAT WE SAID TONIGHT, AND THEN THEY'RE GOING TO COME BACK AT A FUTURE MEETING, MOST LIKELY IN AUGUST. I KNOW EVERYBODY WANTS US TO MOVE ALONG FAST. IN AUGUST, AND THEN THAT'S THE TIME THAT WE'RE GOING TO TAKE ACTION ON THIS ITEM. RIGHT? OKAY. SO YOU'VE HEARD GUIDANCE FROM US. ANY QUESTIONS FROM STAFF? NO, UNDERSTOOD. ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU. THANK YOU, EVERYBODY, FOR COMING IN TONIGHT. WE'RE GOING TO TAKE A 15-MINUTE BREAK.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Test test test. Go, go. Thank you. All right. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you.

Maybe I should get ready. Where are we? Where are we, man? Item two? 7.1. All right, we're going to get started again. Thank you very much, everybody. Hi, Mr. Felios. Could you shut that door, please, for us? I have a feeling some people are in the foyer talking, which is fine. Thank you very much. Okay, we're going to get going again, all the way back to the top. Item number seven, bids and proposals. 7.1, award a professional services agreement to Kimley Horn for a not to exceed amount of $237,117 for the development of the City of Gilway Comprehensive Roadway Safety Action Plan. Add the project to the capital improvement program and adopt a budget amendment resolution to appropriate grant and gas tax funds to the project. Yes, sir. Staff report, please. All right, Nisha, take it away.

Great. Good evening, city council, staff, public. I'm Nisha Patel. I'm the city engineer. And this item is to obtain approval of a professional services agreement with Kimley Horn for the comprehensive roadway safety action plan. To give a bit of history behind this, FHWA awarded an SS4A, that's the Safe Streets for All grant, in the amount of $190,000 for the development of a comprehensive roadway safety action plan in January. Thank you. in January 2025, and on October 6, 2025, City Council approved a resolution amending the budget for the City of Gilroy for fiscal year 2024-25 to appropriate the SS4A grant. Then in December 2026, staff released a request for proposals for development of the Gilroy csap and then on january 23rd 2026 proposals were due and staff received six proposals then april 23rd staff conducted interviews with the top three consultants and then on april 28th staff selected kimley horn to develop the gilroy csap The CSAP aims to reduce traffic-related fatalities and serious injuries through initiatives such as implementation guidance, a list of priority projects along the high-injury network, and conceptual design plans for priority locations. The CSAP will study the most recent crash data to aid the city in identifying factors that contribute the most to local traffic crashes. It better positions the city to receive safety implementation funding from state and federal grant programs such as Highway Safety Improvement Program, Safe Streets for All, Active Transportation Program, and One Bay Area Government. These grant funds are only available to communities with adopted CSAPs. The CSAP will align with city and regional transportation planning documents, such as the City's Drone Roll Plan, Traffic Circulation Master Plan, Caltrans Strategic Highway Safety Plan, and the Safe Systems Approach. It'll analyze collision data and roadway conditions to develop a prioritized list of safety improvements. And it will also include funding opportunities, implementation, monitoring, and evaluation plans to address systematic traffic safety concerns. It will be data-driven and objective, with many opportunities to engage stakeholders and the community to identify traffic safety concerns. So the total project cost and the services agreement with Kimley Horn is in the amount of $237,117.25. Now the SS4A grant reimburses 80% of the cost. So although the grant is in the amount of $190,000, they'll reimburse $189,693.80. The city is responsible for 20% of the cost, and that'll be $47,423.45, and we'll fund that through gas tax. So a budget amendment is requested for the anticipated grant reimbursement revenue and the required local matching funds for project number 801180, the Comprehensive Safety Action Plan. So staff recommends the City Council award a professional services agreement to Kimley Horn for an amount not to exceed $237,117.25 for the development of the City of Gilroy Comprehensive Safety Action Plan, project number 26RFP-PW529, and authorize the City Administrator execute the contract and associated documents. And to add the project to the fiscal year 2026 capital improvement program with project number 801180. And adopt a resolution amending the fiscal year 26 budget within gas tax fund 205 to appropriate $189,693.80 in fiscal year 2026. 2024 SS4A grant funds to the project and along with 47,423.45 in local match from gas tax fund balance for a total of 237,117.25. And this concludes my presentation. Happy to answer any questions. Council Member Fugazi.

Question. So at the end of this, we're going to get an understanding of a lot of dangerous places in the city. Is that pretty much an assessment? So we'll know where all the dangerous spots are?

Yes. And mostly the areas with high collision, with fatalities or injuries.

And it'll be prioritized?

Yes.

And if the mitigation of that, and this is maybe a question for a city administrator or for legal, if the implementation of that is stalled because funding and other things, because it costs a lot sometimes to mitigate some of these things, and we were to have another incident there, does that increase our liability because we now know about it whereas before we wouldn't have known about it?

I guess the answer would probably be theoretically yes. However, if we did not take the opportunity to learn about these things, we could be criticized for that as well because if we intentionally stick our heads in the sand and then something happens that we would have found out and could have cured, then that probably looks even worse.

We might get some leeway if it was a large amount of money and we just couldn't get it done and that would probably be okay then. I mean, because clearly there's going to be a lot of things, I think, in this that are going to cost a lot of money to mitigate. And it will also obviously be public, and there will be a lot of people who will know about this, and we're not doing anything about it.

Well, the city will have to adopt priorities, and somewhere along the line, fixing the worst things will become a higher priority, one hopes.

We do risk management on a daily basis, right? And this is part of that. It's assessing where we need to spend some time and some energy to understand where the risks are so that we can address them.

And isn't it, what I read through the packet was that by having this action plan that provides us the leverage of getting grants then that would mitigate whatever is found in the action plan. And Are those pretty forthcoming then once we have this?

There's a varying number of grants depending on federal circumstances and state funding, but the grants, a lot of the times the grants will have components that require that we have the safety plan in place and the study in place in order to even apply for them. Okay, thank you.

I have a question. Do you know how long the study is going to take? Don't remember. Do you think it's going to be longer than a year?

I think it was around a year. Okay.

Council Member Bracco.

How many fatalities did we have last year?

I don't have that information readily available.

Okay.

Okay. Okay, I'm going to move to public comment.

I have no speakers. All right.

Any further? Yeah, go ahead, Councilman Bracco.

Where is the company based out of?

Well, Kimley Horn is like a national company, but they have local offices, I think, in Salinas and San Jose. Okay.

They have one in my building above the floor that I'm on, in fact, in downtown San Jose.

Okay. You know, as usual, I'm going to bring it up. We're having some out-of-town company give us a report that, you know, we respond to accidents every day. You're not going to predict where they're going to be at. Accidents are caused by people. You know, I think this is a huge waste of money, no matter if you're getting a grant or not. I understand what Andy's saying about, you know, you're damned if you do and you're damned if you don't, if you do it or not. So that's what I got to say.

Any other deliberations? Nothing? Okay, I'll entertain a motion. Anybody like to make a motion?

I'll motion.

Okay, so there's quite a few here, so I'm going to start off with the first one. I have a motion by Councilmember Klein. to award a professional services agreement to Kimley Horn for an amount not to exceed $237,117.25 for the development of the City of Gilroy Comprehensive Roadway Safety Action Plan, project number 26RFP-PW529, and authorize the city administrator to execute the contract and associated documents. I'm looking for a second.

Second.

I have a second by Councilmember Ramirez. Roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco?

No.

Council Member Klein? Yes. Council Member Fugazi? No. Council Member Marks?

I'm right here on the fence.

No. Council Member Ramirez? Yes. Mayor Bozo?

Yes. So it's a tie, three to three.

So the motion failed.

And there's no other action on the rest of it? Will we continue with another day? Yes.

Great.

Yeah, so if the motion fails on this one, then we wouldn't be awarding a contract for the grant. We would go back and let the granting authority know that we don't want the grant dollars, and we would not proceed with the project.

And would this ever come back to council? I know it didn't pass, but would it ever come back to council in different circumstances, or this is it?

No, I would think that this would be the council's direction, and this would be it.

Okay, motion fails. Moving on. Item number 7.2, adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications for the Los Animas Park Pickleball Courts project, appropriating $499,190 to the project and awarding a construction contract to Monterey Peninsula Engineering for an amount not to exceed $1,226,401 with a total project construction cost including contingency of $1,288,000. Staff report, please. Yes.

Good evening, City Council, staff, and the public. This item is to obtain approval of the plans and specifications and the construction contract with Monterey Peninsula Engineering. I thought I hit it. Okay. for the Las Animas Park Pickleball Courts. So the Parks and Recreation Commission included the development of the Pickleball Courts in their fiscal year 2026-2027 work program with the budget. And in June 2025, $862,500 in fiscal year 2026 capital budget was put towards the Les Animas Park Pickleball Courts. On June 17th, 2025, The Parks and Recreation Commission recommended placement of the pickleball courts between the community room building and the dog park at Las Animas Park. On October 6, 2025, City Council gave direction on the design of the pickleball courts. So construction of the pickleball courts includes six asphalt pickleball courts, concrete and asphalt pathways, accessible parking space, paving, striping and signage, fencing and gates, storm drainage system, storm water treatment facility, landscaping and irrigation, lighting and site furnishings. And the build alternates of the project are reinforced concrete slab, a six foot high chain link fence, three covered cabana benches, an eight foot high windscreen, and then a six foot high windscreen. The project was advertised on April 10th, 2026, and bids were received on May 14th, 2026. There were six bidders listed below. There were Monterey Peninsula Engineering, MPE, Radius Earthwork, Gear Construction, Silicon Valley Paving, Galeb Paving, Ramcon Corporation, and the lowest bid was for Monterey Peninsula Engineering. And this slide shows the bid results and Monterey Peninsula Engineering with a bid of $1,226,401. And the next higher bid was only $25,000 above that by Radius Earthwork. Then there was one outlier, that's Ramcon Corporation, but about four of the bids were around $150,000 of each other. And Monterey Peninsula Engineering was found to be the responsible and responsive bidder. All bids exceeded the early project cost estimates, though. So the approved fiscal year 2026 capital program budget was $862,500. We've spent $61,690 in design and related support services. It would have been more, but we did the project in half. design in-house. MPE's construction cost is, again, $1,226,401, and the construction contingency is $61,599. We'll need design services during construction, which will cost us around $12,000. That includes materials testing. So our budget shortfall is $499,000 And that can be paid from the facilities fund 615 and also the recreation fund 290. So that budget shortfall appropriation request is 499,190. So our alternatives are you could award the contract to MPE. or you could reject all bids and re-advertise the project. If you re-advertise the project, that'll delay the project delivery and get the project into construction in the winter rainy season. And if we re-bid the project, we don't expect the bids to come in lower. Our next steps are if council approves the award of the construction contract to MPE, The contract will be executed, staff will work with MP to begin construction, and staff will secure materials testing and design support services during construction. So staff's recommendation is to adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications for Los Animas Park Pickleball Courts and award a construction contract to Monterey Peninsula Engineering for an amount not to exceed $1,226,401, and a total project construction cost, including a 5% contingency of $1,288,000. And that concludes my presentation. Happy to answer questions.

Council Member Fugazi.

I have a number of questions. The first question is, Is there anything materially different in this plan to what was presented to us in the third option that we ultimately kind of decided on in October 6? Is there anything materially different?

Not material. I wouldn't call it materially different. Detail, obviously, design detail. Geotechnical work was done just to ensure work. Also, ADA, one of the things that wasn't fully vetted out when those original plans came was exactly the extent of the ADA improvements that would be necessary to and from the site and within the site, connecting particularly to the restrooms as a necessity that wasn't, I think, fully vetted at that point.

Okay. And that's because we just didn't have staff that knew how to draw that stuff up?

Well, I would say, again, when we came, those were still considered early estimates and early cost estimates. We disclosed that. We had looked at, if you recall, we had looked at and based our assumptions on cost. BID PROJECTS AND BID QUANTITIES AND BID MATERIAL, YOU KNOW, THAT'S ALWAYS A DANGER, LOOKING BACKWARDS RATHER THAN UNDERSTANDING WHAT THE MARKETPLACE IS GOING FORWARD. IT'S IMPOSSIBLE TO FIGURE OUT WHAT THAT GOING FORWARD IS, BUT THE BOTTOM LINE IS THAT IT WAS AN EARLY ESTIMATE, BUT STILL WHAT WE FELT WAS CLOSE. UNFORTUNATELY IT WASN'T.

SO THE WALKWAYS IN THE PLAN THAT WE HAVE NOW, THEY'RE CONCRETE, RIGHT?

The combination, some are concrete, some are asphalt.

Because on the picture I saw the ones, I don't know if they're purple or blue or what have you.

The ones in blue are both, there are call-outs there. Some of that's asphalt, some of it's concrete, but all ADA compliant.

Why is some of it concrete and some of it asphalt? I mean, because in the original plan you said all of the walkways would be asphalt.

We had, well, first of all, we were matching some of the concrete, so it made sense to basically deal with where we had tie-ins to concrete. Primarily, this was put primarily to asphalt because we weren't sure at the time. Remember, we had the additive to go to potentially the post-tension slab concrete. We assumed at that original point that if we were doing concrete slab, post-tension slab, we would have a better rate coming for concrete. So the vast majority of that work is still asphalt because it ties into the asphalt work that's going to be done for the courts themselves. But there is a small amount of concrete.

There's some additional picnic table pads as well that were created, right?

Mm-hmm.

Okay. And... I didn't see in any of this when this is supposed to be completed. So is it still on track to be done by late summer?

60 construction days. We're looking at mid-July for a start, which would put us basically in early to mid-October for final completion.

Okay, so that's not going to be ready for the summer. Why do you think we're 40% over? I mean, we approved like $960,000, right? And now we're at like 1.366 or something when we're all in. Why such a huge discrepancy?

You know, I can't predict. No one on my staff can predict the marketplace. I mean, the fact that we received five out of the six bids that were all within $100,000 to $125,000 of each other is an indication that the marketplace is setting what the price of this is. So that's first and foremost. I can't control and I cannot predict that. You know, I'm... I was hoping not to be here under these conditions. Obviously, we were hoping for and believed that we were closer in our predictions. The bottom line I will say is that we had, there's questions about delays and all these things. There were a lot of things going on, including basically staff vacancy that created some of our challenges and part of that. is that what was believed to be a lot further along in design and in detail was not. You'll note that we are suggesting a 5% contingency in great part because we spent the time and effort to really detail this out and believe that this is not going to be a change order project. Our concern with the original design and the original work that we were working from is that it was set up for significant change orders. And we could be looking at a similar price increase because of a need for change orders and coming back for a modification to the contract. So we took the conservative approach, which was to get the best possible design and see where the marketplace found us.

As far as, and this might be for Matt or for finance, the $400,000 or whatever that comes out of the REC fund, what does that put us at in the balance on that? And is it going to affect any other future projects like our parks and REC plan that we have at $750,000 or whatever? Current balance...

is about a little over 1.2 million. Removing this puts us roughly at $900,000. And that already has the funding for the assessment taken from it. So it's basically $900,000 left if you allocate this money.

And out of fees and the $1.5 million out of general fund, are we still looking to be net positive going into the account at the end of this fiscal year? Because I know we have been about $3,000 to $450,000 net positive going to bank in the account. Is that going to continue, or is this going to put us to where we're in the negative?

So I'll have to look back at how the REC fund is funded. I believe it's funded through year-end fund balance up to sort of.

One and a half million direct, right?

Yeah, and I believe, here comes Harjo, so he'll be able to help us with an answer to the question. So Harjo, the annual contribution to the REC fund at a million and a half, we have that budgeted from an ongoing perspective? Correct. And this project won't impact that at all?

Correct, yeah. And we'll still end up on an upside in terms of adding money into the fund based around that, plus whatever receipts they get from their functions.

Correct. All we're doing on this project is just using accumulated fund balance that's already existing in the fund, so it's not impacting any ongoing revenue.

And you can confirm what he said, which was it's going to draw it down to about $900,000 now once this is all said and done? That's correct. Okay, thank you. Yep.

Council Member Klein.

Thanks for this, John. I know in the world I live in, you don't control your cost, just there's so many things coming. So I'm not surprised by this, but the fact that you have a group, five of them, within 100,000 of each other, I mean, at least that shows you're pretty good with your design and what you put out there.

I see the fluctuation.

Because I bid in the general market, and the low bidder is the one that gets the job. And so it's those who take the risk of reducing their costs to try to get a job is the challenge. But I'm good with this, just knowing what you have to deal with. And thanks.

I'm going to jump to public comment.

Thank you. Wendy and Emily.

Hi, guys. I don't have much to add, except I hope you just consider going ahead with this project because if we wait longer, it's just going to cost more and prices are going to go up more, and we see everything is costing a whole lot more now. So please keep it at six quarts. Thank you.

Thank you.

Emily?

Emily? Hello, my name is Emily Miller and I serve on the Parks and Recreation Commission. Today I'm speaking in my personal capacity and expressing my own views. I'm here to express my support for awarding the contract and moving the Los Animas Pickleball Courts forward. This project represents years of community input, advocacy, and collaboration. By approving this contract tonight, you have the opportunity to demonstrate that when the community speaks, our elected officials listen and take action. I respectfully urge you to approve the contract and keep the long-awaited project moving forward. Thank you guys for everything you do.

Thank you.

I have no further speakers.

OK, we'll bring it back up to us. I'm going to take a, I'm just going to give a slight answer, in my opinion, on the upgraded costs, is that the majority of the products that are on this job are asphalt, base rock, and galvanized metal with all the chain link and all the pipe on the poles. And so much of those products, in my opinion, are connected to petroleum and electricity and transportation. Pardon me? But was that all-time high, right? So I believe that's why some of the prices – I mean, that's my take on it. You had asked, and that was my take on it. And everything so connected to petroleum and the transportation of everything which is connected to petroleum, which prices are still very high, that's my guess. So other comments? Yeah, sorry.

You might want to add, just being in California, everything costs us more. You know, business, all my costs go up constantly all the time. So, but, and if you put this off, they're going to come after us with torches and pitchforks. I just think it's taken way too long. All right. Council Member Fregatti?

I'll at least start out by saying I will support this. However, I think that we are continuing a long tradition in Gilroy of coming in over budget, coming in late, and disappointing some residents with projects, like the Gourmet Alley is one I can think of as an example. So my only hope with this is that it comes out better than that particular project did. I think as far as timelines are concerned, echoing what Councilmember Bracco said, I think it takes far too long when we are thinking we're going to do pickleball courts and then we approve a budget and then it's four or five months, you know, until we actually can give direction and then another six months until we get a bid and then this. We also have a real not consistent way of communicating to people. I'm all about delighting people, not disappointing them. And so when you're straightforward and transparent with people about how processes are going, you're going to be able to delight them instead of disappoint them. We have a website that says this is going to be ready by late summer, and it's not going to be ready by late summer. And we knew for quite some time it wasn't going to be ready by late summer. Also, in the packet, I looked long and hard to find – any commitment in the contract for when the contractor should be finished. I could not find it. I spoke to the city administrator to help me find it. We could not find it. It needs to be in there. I'm hoping that doesn't hold any of this up, that us you know, approving this, it's okay that that's not in there. But I expect those things to be in there when I look at, you know, our projects to approve. So definitely be approving this. I think the community wants it. The community needs to get it. But we should be able to be delighted once in a while that something's going to come in under budget and ahead of schedule. Thank you.

Thank you. Council Member Marks, did you have any comments?

No, I agree. With Council Member Bracco, this has been long in coming. And Council Member Fugazi, you're absolutely right. These projects take way too long to get through the pipeline because we've been talking about this for two years. So it has my support.

Okay. To my left. You guys good? Okay. Council Member Marks, would you like to make a motion?

I would. Can I just say so moved?

Sure.

Okay.

I have a motion by Council Member Marks. I'm looking for a second to adopt. Council Member Bracco. I have a second by Council Member Bracco. To adopt a resolution approving the plans and specifications for the Los Animas Park Pickleball Courts Project No. 26PW305 appropriating $155,000 from the Facilities Fund, which is No. 615, and $344,190 from the Recreation Fund. which is number 290 to the project budget, awarding a construction contracts to Monterey Peninsula Engineering for an amount not to exceed $1,226,401, establishing a 5% contingency for a total construction contract amount not to exceed $1,288,000, authorizing the city administrator to execute the construction contract and authorizing staff to approve any amendments, extensions, and change orders until completion of the project in accordance with the plans and specifications up to the project construction amount. Roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco. Yes. Council Member Klein.

Yes.

Council Member Fugazi. Yes. Council Member Marks. Yes. Council Member Ramirez. Yes. Mayor Bozo.

Yes. Motion passes 6-0. All right. Moving on to item number 8. 8.1 is a public hearing, public hearing and adoption pursuant to California Water Code Section 10642 for the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan and the 2025 Water Shortage Contingency Plan. First question for council, any ex parte communications to report on this hearing? I have none. Staff report, please.

Second. I'm trying to.

The council might find it interesting. We are in preparation for next month where we have to comply with 707 and Zoom meetings. We are piloting this meeting on Zoom. So that's the technological changes that we're doing and you're experiencing today as we learn how to make it all work. So this is actually in the background, a Zoom meeting that we're using as a test meeting so that when we go live in July, we don't have to stop a meeting because of technical difficulties. Now that we're underway, please.

Sorry, I apologize. I didn't know I have to share through Zoom, so I'm sorry. Good evening, Mayor Bozo, council members, members of the public and city staff. My name is Isabella Kerloganu, and I'm the senior management analyst for the utilities department. I'm here tonight to introduce our consultant, Tony Akel, who helped us and supported us and guided us through the development of the 2025 Urban Water Management Plan. Tony has over 20 years of experience in infrastructure modeling and master plan. He also has an extensive experience KNOWLEDGE ABOUT GILROY'S COMMUNITY, ITS WATER AND WASTEWATER RESOURCES. SO I'M GOING TO GIVE IT AWAY TO TONY TO PRESENT TONIGHT. AGAIN, SORRY ABOUT THE PICKUP. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, ISABELLA. MR. MAYOR, COUNCIL MEMBERS, PLEASURE TO BE HERE TO GIVE A PRESENTATION ON THE 2025 URBAN WATER MANAGEMENT PLAN. What is an urban water management plan? We'll talk a little bit about it, but it's a document required by the state, and it's prepared every five years. I was here five years ago. I was here 10 years ago giving the presentation about our water supplies, about our water demands, And essentially, how are we meeting the requirements that are set forth by the state? And every five years, the states add more requirements. They change the requirements. They optimize the requirements. They ask us to do a little bit more. And we'll talk a little bit about those today. They essentially release a guidebook at the beginning of the year, and they did it in January of 26, and they asked us to follow the guidebook. So the report that you have reviewed essentially follows the guidebook. Ten chapters, we followed the guidebook. In addition to the guidebook, there's a very large Microsoft Excel workbook that has a lot of information that we're supposed to send it and submit it to the state. What is the purpose? We'll talk about this very briefly. We'll talk about compliance with the Water Conservation Act, SB Senate Bill X7-7, Water Shortage Contingency Plan. What is it? Water supply reliability, and then we'll talk about serving future growth through year 2050. The purpose, really with the purpose, why the state wants us to prepare it. It's not just mandated. They want us to make sure we work on a reliability for our water. They want to make sure that we have adequate water supply that is available. Of course, water conservation. We'll show a graph about water conservation. They've been asking us to work on it for many years, and we'll see if it's been effective. And then finally, they want us to come up with a plan for dealing with droughts. When there's a drought, we shouldn't be panicking. We have a plan when there's a drought. Or when there's an emergency that requires us to cut back on water, we have a plan. And the next slide looks at population versus water use. And if I can draw your attention to this green line that shows the population over the past 25 years, population continued to grow. The bars are how much water we've been using as a city in Gilroy. And it shows that after a certain time, after a certain year, that that water has been managed. It didn't parallel. It should, in theory, continue to grow with the population, but it didn't. And that's the effect of water conservation. The bars in purple show drought years, but it shows that your city staff have been effectively managing the water. The next graph shows the SBX7-7. What is the Water Conservation Act? It's also known as 20 by 2020. Back then, in 2009, the state said, statewide, we want every community to reduce 20% of your water use by year 2020. So that was 2010. So they gave us 10 years. They said, within 10 years, we want you to reduce. How did we do? That's the graph that shows it. The graph shows that right here, this is where we were. That was our average up to 2010. And the mandate was here. They gave us 10 years, dropped 20%. And this blue line shows our annual fluctuation. So we were fluctuating up and down. And then our water conservation shows that we dropped well below our target. This line was our target for 2020. We dropped below that line, and we stayed below it since. The state, and this was called 20 by 2020. The goal was to meet that by 2020, but the state says, don't stop. You need to stay below that line. Don't exceed it. We're going to continue to monitor you. But we're doing good. Then there's a component of the plan that's called the Water Shortage Contingency Plan. And the state established those levels on the right-hand side, six levels. which are essentially different levels to address different levels of drought. Red and it's color coded also. Red means it's some kind of an extreme drought and they give it a name and they call it emergency. Orange is a crisis, critical, all the way to normal on the state level. In Gilroy, we have four levels and we are, meeting the state requirements with our existing four levels and every level has actions that will cause us to save on water so that's how we manage our water when we are hit with a hopefully it doesn't happen but if it if the water shortage happens we have a plan to deal with it then we look at reliability reliability is how are we handling our supply versus demand during a normal year. How are we handling it when we have a single shortage year, one year that happens? But the state also wants us to look at what if you have five consecutive years you're in California, these things happen. So that was what we looked at. And so we have a plan to deal with those droughts. And then they ask us to project for the next, we looked at the past 25 years, they want us to project for the next 25 years and make sure that you can meet those conditions, that you have enough water during a normal year, that you do have enough water during a drought year in the future if it happens, and also if you have five consecutive drought years. Can you meet those? And the answer to that is yes, we can, and we have a plan. And that's the plan. And the graph on the right-hand side is important to note because that's the groundwater underneath Gilroy. It's the same basin that connects us also to Morgan Hill. It's called the Yagas Basin. That's where our water comes in for Gilroy. That's our source of water. And this groundwater is managed by Valley Water. And they monitor the basin. They are making sure that there's enough supplies for the next 25 years through 2050. We use their numbers. We use their latest numbers. And they take action. And they have a very resilient portfolio that they manage. And they manage the basins. We use recycled water as a supplemental source in Gilroy. And Value Water also supplements water into the basins all the way from Morgan Hill. So it's all connected. And it's all managed by Value Water. We are in good hands. So with that... What is the next step? The next step is adopting the urban water management plan after this public hearing and then submitting this plan to the state by July 1st, before July 1st. And then, of course, making it available to the state library and making it available to the stakeholders. And state will review it like they did in the last time. They'll review it. They'll make sure we're complying with all the sections. And if they have comments, they will send us their comments and advise us to change things. And with that, that concludes the presentation. Thank you for your time. Council Member Ramirez.

I just have three. Quick questions, thank you so much for your presentation. Can you go back a few slides to the different levels, emergency, critical, there we go. How often does Gilroy fall in emergency or crisis or critical in the last 25 years? We don't fall in those categories.

Those are extreme categories that – but the state wants us to be prepared. Right.

I understand that.

So, like, can you tell me where we have gotten? We have gotten – I can tell you in – we follow – this is our guide. Our guide is on the left-hand side. Okay, so we have gotten to critical? So we haven't gotten to critical. We follow these here. We've gotten to stages one, as an example, where we have to save up to 20%. Right. So those are our categories. Minor shortage potential, save 20%.

So we haven't fallen to the moderate shortage percent or the critical shortage?

I think we have fallen here in the past. Okay. But we have not fallen into the critical shortage.

Okay. And, oh, thank you. Other cities, how do we compare to, I mean, when you, I'm assuming your organization does this for a number of cities, especially in California.

Yes.

If you were to give us, like, a report card, how would we compare to other cities? Or do all cities perform this well? How would you rate it?

You've used the word that I love the most, report card.

It's a former teacher in me. What can I say?

I've done a report card on infrastructure for the whole state. That was released back in December, and that's another subject. And our grades were not as good on the report card. But this is a report card of how do we come up with a plan for managing our water. We are... in the same boat, I can tell you, as other agencies. In fact, some struggle a lot more. Some have to declare higher levels of shortage more frequently than we do. I mean, we live in California. At the end of the day, we're in California. Some communities are lucky. that they have more waters. But the state are doing this plan, requiring us to do this plan to deal with drought because they know most communities have this challenge to deal with. And this is intended to give us a guide. When it happens, we shouldn't be panicking. It happened While back and the state came in with some goals the state came in with targets for us and said City of Gilroy your target is 25% in a city of San Jose your target is 30% and Agency were going, wait a minute, how are we supposed to do this? There was a lot of complaints. And then the state went, all right, we're going to give you the tools, put them in your hands. You come up with the plans. You manage your plans. So your staff monitors this not only every five years. Every year your staff monitors this. Every year we determine, do we need to go beyond level zero, which goes up to 10% savings? Do we need to go to level one? Every year your staff make that assessment, and so you are in good hands. And every agency is doing this. Every municipality, every district, they have to do this.

Okay, thank you. I just have one last question, and it's probably for staff. If our residents are mandated to conserve X percent or whatever, our businesses, industries, all that type of stuff, are they also held to the same conservation requirements? Yes. Thank you. Council Member Marks.

Yes. So what is a water audit, and who gets audited?

I'm sorry, what is the water?

Water audit is mentioned in your report.

Isabella, why don't you step to the mic, please.

Okay.

Yes, I can answer that question. So every year, starting two years ago, there is a water loss audit that the department has to submit to the DWR, Department of Water Resources, by December 31st. So we submitted a water loss audit last year, and our next one is at the end of this year on December 31st.

So do you just look at residential use for your water audit?

No. Water audit looks at the losses throughout the entire infrastructure. And basically, the state put a certain percentage, like it's It's a standard, it's a different standard for every city. And again, it's a recent report. It's only two years of history of this report.

So it's just kind of a general audit of everyone who's in the area that's using water, including businesses?

It's an audit for our entire infrastructure. We look to see how much we pumped, how much the water was sold, and if we have any losses in the infrastructure, right?

Okay. For those that know me, you know I'm heading towards something here. I was looking at your metering section, section 9.1.2.1, and this is a quote. Large industrial, commercial, multifamily water users may be required to undergo a water audit, but city staff does not conduct them. So I assume an outside agency would do it. So if those groups are not being audited,

I think probably the phrase is a bit different. It talks about our water conservation team normally looks at commercial or industrial if they have leaks. And if that happens, then they go on site and they try to discuss and possibly audit their overall consumption. But It's not an audit of the commercial. I was talking about the water loss audit overall as a department that...

So then, in essence, you, not you personally, but I mean... I don't know who I would say, I guess your department, whatever. You don't know how much water companies then actually use or large industries actually use.

We do, we do, we do, because we have another report that is called the Water Objective Report, and we look to see how the 20% users of our city are. I'm sorry. and to see what are the 1% users. So we do know the top users of the city, and then there is policy in place that we need to make sure that we conform with in the next couple of years, and look and address those.

And is that public information?

Yes, I can provide you the state policy

has been passed. I mean, if a citizen got in touch with you, they could say, how much does the ABC company use? You can tell them.

I can provide that information for you. I don't know if I'm allowed to share it this way, but yes, I think the city manager, if there is a request, or my director, can probably share that information with the public. Okay. if you want to know the top 20% users.

Well, I think as industries come to Gilroy, I think people are going to be very interested. If there's a drought, if we're conserving, I want to know that all of those businesses and industries are conserving as much as me.

Yeah, I know.

And I think the public would be very interested in making sure that that was actually happening. So, yeah, that was my thought. Your concern is valid.

Yeah, sorry.

I think you were asking about metering, like, about usage.

Well, that's what I was thinking about what it was, and it turned out to be different from what I thought. I mean, because I was thinking it was going to be an individual measure, Like, how much water do you use? How much do I use?

But they do know, right? Just like your meter at your house, at every single commercial and business industrial meter in Gilroy, they have the same meter, they're just bigger. So they know how many acre feet or gallons. Every water user, which is almost 16,000 connections? 15,935.

I took a shot.

They know exactly how many gallons are using it every single meter.