City Council Unhoused Ad Hoc Committee - Regular Meeting

Thank you very much. Okay, I'm going to call this meeting to order at 5.04 p.m. on June 1st. This is a special meeting. Roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco. Here. Council Member Klein.

Here.

Council Member Fugazi. Here. Council Member Hilton.

Here.

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

Here. Thank you, Kim. Item 1.3, so this is an appeal hearing of the final decision in the matter of the administrative hearing regarding business license and tobacco retailer's permit issued to account number 16606725, the Rock Zone, located at 1323 First Street, Gilroy, California. So this is an appeal hearing, and from here I'm going to turn it over for a moment to legal Andy.

Thank you, Mr. Mayor. THIS, AS YOU SAID, IS AN APPEAL HEARING OF A DECISION OF THE HEARING OFFICER IN THE MATTER OF THE ROCK ZONE'S BUSINESS LICENSE AND TOBACCO RETAILER'S PERMIT. I'M GOING TO GIVE YOU JUST A BRIEF OVERVIEW, AND THEN WE CAN PROCEED WITH THE ACTUAL HEARING. THE CITY HAS A HEARING POLICY, NOT RESOLUTION 97-17, THAT GOVERNS MATTERS LIKE THIS. AN APPLICANT OR A PERSON WHO HAS A BUSINESS LICENSE OR A COMPANY or a tobacco permit or any other kind of permit that is subject to revocation or other proceeding has a right to due process under the state and federal constitutions and under our Gilroy City Code. That process is embodied in our hearing, our administrative hearing process, 97-17, and it provides for an initial hearing analogous to a court trial in front of a hearing officer that is brought in specially to hold the hearing. That happened here. A hearing officer was appointed, Mr. Seltzer, Alan Seltzer. And he held several hearings, made a number of rulings. He evaluated evidence. He heard oral testimony. He received written testimony. He received argument from city staff and from the applicant's attorney. And he rendered a decision. And that decision is tab 7 in your binder. Or page 49 in the packet starts it there. It's a long written decision where he evaluates the evidence and reached certain findings of fact and conclusions of law. Our process allows for his decision to be appealed to the city council and that's why we're here. The nature of this hearing is analogous to an appellate hearing in a court. where the appellate court does not hear new evidence, does not receive new written evidence, but hears argument from representatives of the two sides, and then renders a decision. So we are going to proceed in this proceeding in accordance with the memo that we sent you that's in the packet and at tab 12-2 of page 147 for the order of proceedings, which will be HAVE PUBLIC COMMENT NEXT FROM ANY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC THAT MAY WISH TO COMMENT THAT WOULD NOT BE EVIDENCE IN THE CASE BUT BECAUSE THIS IS AN AGENDIZED PUBLIC MEETING THE PUBLIC HAS A RIGHT TO OFFER COMMENTS THEN WE WOULD PROCEED WITH OPENING ARGUMENT BY THE APPEALANT WHICH IS THE ROCK ZONE FOR MAXIMUM 10 MINUTES OPENING ARGUMENT BY RESPONDENT THE CITY STAFF another 10 minutes, and then rebuttals by the applicant or appellant and the respondent for five minutes each. At the conclusion of those arguments, I will then address you briefly about to discuss the evidence and what I think has transpired. The council will then deliberate, and you have essentially three options. The hearing officer reached a decision which was to modify the business license and the tobacco retailer's permit such that there will be no tobacco sales for a period of six months. That was his analysis. He found violations had been established and that that was the appropriate penalty in his view. For you, it is to decide whether his decision finding the violations was supported by substantial evidence in the record. In other words, you basically agree that he properly found violations. And then secondly, to deliberate as to the scope of the penalty, you could choose to agree with his penalty. You could make the penalty harsher or less harsh, either way. It's within your discretion as to how to do it. You can revoke the license, you can modify the license, or you could suspend it for a period of time that's subject to your deliberation. So we should begin now with the oral argument. I would add also it is not appropriate at this point to discuss overall tobacco policy, which will come up later in the evening, or whether the police or the city staff should have enforced things differently or more or less as a matter of policy. Those items can be discussed later, but they're not part of this hearing. So I would like to proceed. Public comment. Yeah, I'm going to use that thing.

I always tell you public comment.

So the next order of business is to see if there is any public comment on this matter.

I have no speakers.

Okay, no public comment. Then I think we should open the hearing. The first item is opening argument by appellant, The Rock Zone. Is that Mr. DeFilippis? That's correct.

Okay. Before he begins, I want to be clear. So we are looking for opening argument from staff, The Rock Zone, and then rebuttal. And that's the time for questions and deliberation, correct? Not during? Or is it? Okay.

Well, let's hear the arguments. You could ask questions during the argument. It would be better if you let the arguments proceed, though, and then add deliberations.

Okay. So you have a clock for ten minutes? Thank you.

Thank you, members of the council. My name is Steve DeFilippis. I represent Del Amari. Gentlemen, see you to my right here. He does business as the rock zone for purposes of the proceedings here today. I think that in terms of what we are talking about here, I've got more to say in terms of the overall penalty that is being imposed than the nature of the violations. There certainly was a violation that occurred when An officer came in and made a controlled buy of a bar that contained psilocybin. That was a violation and certainly was something that could bring rise to these types of proceedings. The concern that I have though is, and This really is a function of the type of case that this is. Because there was criminal ramifications, there was a silence by the city in terms of producing documents that are certainly relevant for somebody who needs to come in and be able to defend against a allegation that's being made that has a pretty significant consequence to it. I mean, this is a gentleman who, at 72 years old, Has been doing this for 30 years in this city has been a productive member of the community Has not had any problems with the law before Has been able to conduct this business with dignity during that time and Has a violation but because there is criminal ramifications to it the city would not produce any documents to me and And that's brought up a number of times during the hearing process. And because of that, basically, I'm hearing for the first time, and Mr. Adel Omari is hearing for the first time, what the allegations are against him and what actually happened.

Now, we have something called the UTL that governs what is

allowed and not allowed to be sold in terms of a tobacco business. This is a pretty lengthy document. As you can see here, it's about two inches thick, printed out. And that document did not come out into existence until December of 2025. Most of the allegations in this case related to November of 2024, and March of 2025. And then there was the final seizure of some items that occurred in January of 2026. January 6, I believe it was, very quickly after the UTL came into existence. That doesn't give... a proprietor a lot of period of time to be able to respond and react and figure out what in their business they can sell and what they can't sell. What it also means is I sit here with this document and I have no information about what are the items that were seized. Mr. Omari wasn't present when the items were seized. His employee was present but told to stand in a corner and do nothing until the police were done and out of there. So they don't know exactly what was taken. I need to be able to look at what was taken and be able to compare it with the UTL and determine what was allowed. When that was done mid-hearing and we came back for another further proceeding on the hearing two weeks later, They found out that 126 items of the 300 were items that the UTL allowed, and that the bulk of the items remaining, we don't know if it's 99.5% of them or 51% of them. We don't know that because no information was given during the time of the hearing. The rest of them were what's called hookah tobacco. And hookah tobacco is allowed to be sold in the store, but is restricted when the store allows miners to come in to the store, even though they card people to not sell to anybody under the age of 21. There's no allegation that there's ever been any sales to anyone under the age of 21 here. What happens is we don't have the bulk of the information to be able to properly defend in this particular case. And what we're looking at here is we're looking at an individual that had a lot of good faith beliefs in what it was that he believed he was allowed to do, what he shouldn't be doing. And a lot of that has developed and been learned as a result of this process. He certainly is in compliance with everything now and has gotten himself into compliance while this proceeding was pending, not after it concluded. He made sure that he got himself into compliance quickly. He showed that desire to comply. There was also some issues about an aspect of the construction within the store. That wasn't part of the hearing, but it was complied with prior to the hearing occurring. Again, showing the good faith basis that Mr. Omari has been operating under. There is significant state consequences to this type of sales. When you sell items, if you have a box of 50 items and you sell, you're selling those boxes and those end up getting seized and are not on the UTL, those items, you can be fined for each item contained within that box. And so the fines end up being enormous in this case. Mr. Omari is facing fines of over $70,000. The hearing officer, Mr. Seltzer, I think appropriately determined that revocation of the license was not appropriate here and determined that there should be a lesser penalty. Now, he ended up suspending for a period of six months, but when you take six months and you add that on to the $70,000 of fines that are being potentially assessed in this particular case, that can shut down a small business like this. And I don't think that's what the purpose of the city of Gilroy is. The city of Gilroy wants to have thriving businesses within its community. And my suggestion to the council is to reconsider this in terms of what's the ultimate penalty that should be imposed. I would suggest that putting the business on a period of probation, making sure that they are fully in compliance, which they have been, they are currently, and will continue to be for whatever the council deems is an appropriate period of time. and maybe a short term that he is unable to sell tobacco products, perhaps 30 days. I think that would be far more appropriate in this particular case, particularly since a lot of this was the hookah tobacco. The confusion that exists, and Mr. Seltzer talks about it not being confusing, but It was confusing enough to the agents seizing the items that they left all of this hookah tobacco in March of 2025, only took it in 2026 after the UTL came out, and they discovered that that was not something that should be sold in this store. And it's not because it shouldn't be sold. It's because of the distinction between Do you card everybody? And is that sufficient? Is it sufficient to just card everybody and make sure they're over the age of 21? Or do you have to prevent entry? And the answer was you had to prevent entry. And so that was something that I believe was a good faith issue on the part of Mr. Omari. He didn't understand the regulations, which are quite extensive. And as a result, I believe that this council should reconsider that decision and reevaluate the nature of the penalty that's being imposed. Thank you. Thank you very much.

We now have opening argument by city staff. Is that Captain Powell?

Good evening, Mayor and Council. The role of tonight's hearing is not to conduct a new evidentiary hearing, but to review the administrative record, the hearing officer's decision, the appellant's written exceptions, and the arguments presented today. The record demonstrates that the appellant received extensive due process, notice of violations, representation by legal counsel, the continuance to prepare its defense, participation in a pre-hearing conference, the opportunity to present witnesses and documentary evidence, the opportunity to submit post-hearing materials, and full opportunity to challenge the city's evidence. Following two hearing dates and a review in the entire record, the hearing officer issued a detailed written decision. The appellant raised several exceptions to that decision. However, each of these issues was presented to and considered by the hearing officer. First, the appellant argues that the city failed to establish the products at issue were unlawful. The hearing officer specifically addressed this issue by requesting additional review of the products, considering testimony regarding the California unflavored tobacco list, and reviewing the applicable state laws. After considering all the evidence, the hearing officer reached his conclusion. Second, the appellant argues that the hearing officer improperly relied upon law enforcement testimony. The hearing officer heard testimony under oath from multiple witnesses, evaluated witness credibility, considered competing evidence presented by the appellant, and weighed all the evidence before making his findings. Third, the appellant argues that certain products qualified for exemptions under state law. Those arguments were presented during the hearing, supported by exhibits submitted by the appellant, and specifically considered by the hearing officer before issuing his decision. Fourth, the appellant argues that the penalty imposed is excessive. It is important to remember that the city initially sought revocation of the business license and the hearing officer declined to revoke the license. Instead, the hearing officer imposed a lesser remedy after considering all the evidence and arguments presented by both parties. This demonstrates that the hearing officer exercised independent judgment and reached a balanced decision. In conclusion, The police department's position is that the proceeding was fair, the appellant received extensive due process, the hearing officer carefully considered the evidence presented by both parties, and the decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record. Accordingly, the city respectfully requests that the council uphold the hearing officer's decision and deny the appeal. Thank you.

Okay, it's now time for rebuttal argument by Mr. DeFilippis, if you wish to.

Thank you, sir. The city argues that Mr. Omari received extensive due process. Mr. Omari was brought to a hearing where the loss of his business was at issue. He was not given any documents that showed what happened. There were search warrants. There were returns to search warrants. There were inventories of what was taken. All of these documents exist. There are police reports regarding every single officer that walked into that business. All of that are existing documents. None of those documents were produced. Those officers were then put on the witness stand. They were allowed to testify. Now, I've never suggested that they could not rely on law enforcement testimony, and I'm not sure where that particular phrase came from. What I've suggested is that it was a little odd that when those officers were through testifying and they had not identified any of the products that had been seized, So I didn't have the ability to say it was a brand X type of item and compare it with the UTL. And again, remember, the UTL didn't even exist during the first two actions of the police department in this case. But I then called those officers as witnesses. The statement was made, we were allowed to be able to call witnesses. I called those officers, each of those officers, to be able to ask them those kind of questions about what they had taken so that the comparison could be made to the UTL to determine what was legal and what was illegal. After they had taken over 300 items, they even conceded that 126 of them were illegal. This is after they had seized those items. And so as an attorney, I would want to be able to question that determination that the remaining 180 were actually illegal and what percentage of those were hookah products, which are very different than other types of items that are presented for sale. I couldn't do it. Each of these officers refused to testify. Mr. Faber said this is similar to a court proceeding. No. In a court proceeding, if those officers refused to testify, their direct examination would be stricken. Stricken from the record. It wouldn't even be allowed. They can't refuse to answer questions that are properly put to them. They wouldn't even sit in the chair, and avail themselves of being asked questions. That's a concern. And if you're going to talk about receiving extensive due process when you can't even call those officers, and they're the only ones that know what was seized and what wasn't seized, have no way of getting that information other than through them. I'm denied the documents, and I'm denied their testimony. So extensive due process didn't occur here. And again, what I'm looking for from the city is to reevaluate this. Look at this whether this individual who has a pretty good record with the city and a pretty good relationship with the city and a pretty good history of not doing anything wrong over the years until this came up. And a lot of that is due to confusion. And I'm asking that there be some leniency expressed towards him. Thank you.

We'll now have rebuttal argument from the city, if you desire.

Real quickly, I just want to clarify some issues here that have been brought up. The reason why the reports were not released to the appellant were because the The case is still at the district attorney's office for criminal prosecution, so we can't release the report because it's an ongoing and active investigation. Secondly, stating that we seized product that was later returned is partially correct. We did seize 306 items of evidence that we were advised by the California Department of Tax and Franchise Board that they were illegal at the time since the UTL list came out. 136 of those items were returned, so that the number is 170 items were still illegal to possess and sell. And lastly, the hookah argument. Correctly, he was allowed to possess and sell hookah products with a hookah license, but he was in violation of hookah laws by allowing people under the age of 21 even in the business at all. So you have to check the ID at the door. and it has to be consumed on-premises. You can't leave with the product, which he was in violation as well. So that concludes. Thank you.

That concludes the oral argument. The matter is now deemed submitted to the council. Just to summarize now, it's appropriate for the council to deliberate on the questions raised and determine whether the hearing officer's decision is supported by substantial evidence. I want to mention a couple of things, though. The hearing officer made extensive findings of fact and conclusions of law. And although Mr. DeFilippis argues that certain documents were not given to him, and certain evidence not presented, the hearing officer was very careful about what evidence he relied upon. He relied upon the evidence that was in front of him, and he found that there were violations of sales of a controlled substance containing psilocybin on November 15, 2024, or March 6, 2025, and that later on, in March 2025, January 2026, there were sales of hookah products without the restriction of requiring that no one under 21 be in the store, which had been in the law since 2022. It's an independent item of state law and is unrelated to the unflavored tobacco list. So I just want to make those brief corrections. On the other issue of due process regarding officer testimony, our hearing policy complies with the requirements of due process and does not allow cross-examination of witnesses, which is not required for due process. And in effect, if Mr. DeFilippis had been allowed to call the police officers to the stand as his witnesses, he would have been cross-examining the city's witnesses, which is not allowed by the policy.

So our opinion is there was no due process violation.

But having said that, I'm happy to answer questions if I can. But the issue now for the council is really to deliberate whether or not the hearing officer's decision is supported by the record. And if it's not, then you should grant the appeal and his decision would be rejected. Alternatively, if it is supported, then you should deliberate what penalty is appropriate. You can uphold the hearing officer's penalty that he decided, which as Mr. DeFilippis said, was not revocation, but was a modification of the business license. OR YOU COULD DECIDE TO MAKE SOME OTHER MODIFICATION TO THE BUSINESS LICENSE OR TO REVOKE IT. SO WITH THAT, I'M AVAILABLE TO ANSWER QUESTIONS AS YOUR ATTORNEY, BUT I WOULD TURN IT OVER TO THE COUNCIL FOR DELIBERATION AT THIS POINT.

SO, ANDY, THERE'S A LOT HERE TO CONSUME, OBVIOUSLY. HOW MANY SPECIFIC VIOLATIONS DID THE HEARING OFFICER FIND INDIVIDUAL

He found the sale of a flavored nicotine pouch and a Mushroom Magic chocolate bar on November 15, 2024, that's two items, intent to sell more chocolate bars on March 6, 2025, and possessed with the intent to sell the flavored shisha or hookah tobacco products, and there were several hundred of those, without complying with the requirements of state law, which were to not allow people under 21 in the store.

So would it be fair to say at least four, depending on how you count it, right?

I think you could say four. Under our code, you could probably say more, but I don't want to.

Right, but at least four. And also, the other question here is there are two things that we're looking at here, right, with business license and the TRP, right, both of them, at least in the way you have it see in number eight or see here in your.

That's correct.

Okay. That's it for right now.

THERE ALSO WERE TWO LAPSES IN THE TRP FOR A MONTH AT A TIME AT THE END OF 2025 AND 2024. THE HEARING OFFICER NOTED THOSE BUT DID NOT REALLY INVOKE THE PENALTY BASED ON THOSE BECAUSE THERE WAS EVIDENCE THAT THE OWNER THEN GOT INTO COMPLIANCE QUICKLY.

Councilmember Bracco.

YES. I DON'T KNOW WHO TO ADDRESS THIS TO. IS THE STORE OPEN NOW?

YES, IT IS.

IT IS? Do you have like a state association for these kind of stores? No. No. Has this happened before? Have we had issues with them before?

Never.

No? And... Since it has to be a, you can't allow anyone under 21 in if you're selling hookah, can you have like an area that's closed off with a door? Is that allowed?

That's not clear.

I would say that that question is not really appropriate for this. Oh, okay. Thank you. The state law doesn't deal with that issue. It just says they cannot come on the premises.

Let me go real quick. So there is an association for tobacco retailers, just to be clear.

Thank you. Let me go to my left. Council Member Hilton and then Council Member Ramirez.

So this would be for the city attorney. So there were two times, right, that they knew something had happened. There was the 2024, right? They knew that had happened. And then there was another enforcement in January 2026, and they knew that would happen. So they did have this previously. That would be a previous. Thank you.

If I may, I think what Councilmember Hilton might be getting at here is that when you have an enforcement action, it would

behoove a business to then really clamp down and figure out that, and that, I think, goes into part of this understanding that we're having here. Like, you have a violation, it's a known that something's happened, and then there's a continual pattern of violations.

Council Member Ramirez.

I don't know if this is a question that I can ask or not, but I'm Just curious, the items in question that were sold, are those items just readily available on the shelves as you walk in? Or are they things that maybe you have to go into the back room and get? Can I ask that question? Captain Powell can answer.

Okay. They're in like a glass display case. Okay. So then an employee has to help you get them out from behind the case.

Okay. Thank you. Member Klein?

Yeah, there were actually three violations because 2025 also.

Yeah, go ahead. What was the penalty in 2024?

So I can clarify on that as well. So Was there a prior violation? We got a complaint that they were in violation. That's what started our investigation. So there's one before this all began. That's how we were turned on to this establishment. We did one undercover buy in November of 24. We followed up with a second undercover buy in February of 25, where both times we bought psilocybin, which is a controlled substance and a felony for sales.

Excuse me, that's not part of the revenue.

The first time the store became aware of us and our involvement in this investigation was March of 25, which we did an inspection with the assistance of California Department of Tax and Franchise Board. So that is the first time they became aware of our investigation.

So it got strung out for over a year?

So we did the initial buy. We had to send off the product to the county laboratory that it tested to make sure it was a controlled substance.

Council Member Fugazi.

Yeah, so in addition to selling products that shouldn't be sold, they were also selling legal products without a TRP for some period of time as well? Is that correct?

If I can answer that. Again, there was about a month at the end of 2024 and another month at the end of 2025 in between applications. Correct.

And Andy, to be clear, is there relevance here to 1375 where it talks about how many violations you have and how long you can actually have a revocation based on one instance, two instance, three instance? Does that have any applicability here?

I don't think so, directly.

Okay.

I have a couple questions. I'll start with... CAPTAIN POWELL, DURING YOUR OPENING ARGUMENTS, YOU SAID SOMETHING ABOUT THE HEARING OFFICER FINDING LENIENCY BY NOT REVOKING THE BUSINESS LICENSE BUT INSTEAD FOCUSING ON THE TOBACCO RETAIL PERMIT? YES. AND THAT'S BECAUSE THERE'S OTHER PRODUCTS, NONTOBACCO PRODUCTS BEING SOLD IN THIS ESTABLISHMENT, IS THAT CORRECT?

Actually, I don't know. Is that correct? Okay.

So in the event that the six-month suspension is upheld, then other business will still take place in the establishment. Okay.

It would be allowed to by law. Thank you. Because the suspension only relates to the tobacco product.

Okay. Thank you. Further?

So I think I've got it. I just want to make sure. The two one-month lapses were for just he corrected them very quickly in terms of the lapse of the license.

Is that correct? That's my understanding. Okay. Okay. And then the first violation in 24, did he become aware of that?

prior to the second violation in 25?

No, those are both undercover buys, so he was not aware of either the one in November of 24 or the one in February 25. He was not aware of those until later when we filed the case with the district attorney's office, and then he self-surrendered that for the warrant arrest. And when was that? When was it filed? I don't have the date of the file, but I know he surrendered on the warrant in January of 26. Thank you.

I have a question about psilocybin. So, so far we've talked a lot about the UTL and the hookah and the shisha products, correct? But getting back to this, which are in certain cases allowed UNDER STATE LAW IF CERTAIN RULES AND LAWS ARE FOLLOWED IN EACH CITY, AND THOSE ARE NO ONE UNDER ALLOWED, 21 IS ALLOWED TO GO IN, IF I UNDERSTAND THAT CORRECTLY. AND THAT LAW HAS BEEN ON THE BOOK SINCE 2022, IS THAT CORRECT? YOU UNDERSTAND?

THAT'S WHAT THE HEARING OFFICER FOUND, YES. OKAY.

BUT SILOCYBIN, CAN YOU HELP ME A LITTLE BIT WITH SILOCYBIN, WHEREAS THERE ARE SOME PRODUCTS THAT TOBACCO ARE LEGAL TO SELL IN OTHER PARTS OF THE COUNTRY AND POSSIBLY OTHER PARTS OF THE STATE. but tell us about psilocybin. Where is that legal to be sold?

It's a controlled substance, just like cocaine, methamphetamine, or fentanyl. It's not allowed to be sold within California. So California law prohibits that. It is a felony to sell that. So where the other ones you're talking about, if you're selling them without, if you're selling the flavored tobacco, it's a misdemeanor violation.

To follow up on that, part of the testimony I thought was interesting and maybe can be recounted here in case some of the other council members didn't is the advice given by employees on how to consume that. Can you, I don't have it in front of me here because I think it's important if they hadn't seen it in terms of micro dosing and if you, I'm paraphrasing so I'd rather hear it.

Everybody to hear that on the record so the employee advised our undercover officer if they had never Sampled this product before to do micro doses do not eat the entire chocolate bar at once because it could be dangerous to your health So and I think I correct me if I'm wrong But I believe they advised to do just at most half of the bar in one sitting or you might be tripping or something like that Yes

Other questions?

Yes, I still have another question for the appellant. You had mentioned that he admits wrongdoing. What part of the wrongdoing is admitted to here?

Well, clearly the sale of the psilocybin bar was illegal. The possession, there was two bars possessed in March when they came in to the premises. That's all the The rest of the products that have been deemed illegal.

The rest of the products that have been... Can you start from the beginning again so it's on the record?

Sure.

The question, just to be clear, was you had said that the appellate had admitted some wrongdoing, and I was asking what do they admit to wrongdoing?

The wrongdoing that's conceded is the...

sale of the psilocybin bar to the undercover officer and the possession of the two remaining bars that were still in the premises in March of 2025. After that, there have been no more of those. The only thing that is additional issues of illegality would be the hookah tobacco products, which The owners and people at the business believe they were allowed to sell as long as they carded everybody and didn't sell to anyone under the age of 21. That is an incorrect belief under the law.

And he believed at the time that it was legal to sell these chocolate bars with magic mushrooms in them?

Yeah, apparently they're sold at a lot of the businesses, and he's seen that and didn't really understand what it was.

Wow, that many years. So Zemos, wasn't that also one of the things that was?

That's, I believe, the one we're talking about. No, that's flavored tobacco. That's flavored tobacco, that's right.

Yeah, it's not even tobacco. It's actually a nicotine product, right? And that was also found there, is that correct?

Yes, you are correct. And they sold it to the officer as well.

So does he admit that was wrong too?

Yes, those are not. There's very much more clarity now with the UTL coming out where you can look these things up specifically and find whether they are or are not illegal. That didn't exist prior to the end of December of 2025. Okay, thank you.

Just for clarification, the UTL deals with flavored tobacco products, unflavored products, not with controlled substances. All right.

OK, so it feels like we're getting to a point where I'm going to remind council of the possible actions. So the possible actions that we're asked to be considered today are, number one, deny the appeal. This action will uphold the decision of the administrative hearing officer, which means a six-month suspension of the tobacco retailer permit. The second option is to grant the appeal, which means this action overturns the decision by the administrative hearing officer to modify the business license and the tobacco retail permit, which means that tomorrow that they could go back into the regular business that they've been in.

Correct.

And thirdly, thirdly, option is to modify THE BUSINESS LICENSE NUMBER AND THE ACTION BY COUNCIL, WHICH WILL TAKE SOME FURTHER CONVERSATION BY GOING IN A DIFFERENT DIRECTION.

HELP ME OUT. THE MODIFY COULD INCLUDE SUSPENDING OR REVOKING OR DOING WHAT THE HEARING OFFICER DID, WHICH WAS TO MODIFY THE LICENSE FOR A SHORT PERIOD, FOR SIX MONTHS. YOU COULD CHOOSE A DIFFERENT PERIOD. IF YOU CHOOSE EITHER OF THE LAST TWO OPTIONS THAT THE MAYOR MENTIONED, THEN IT'S APPROPRIATE TO STATE YOUR REASONS ON THE RECORD SO THAT IF we can come back to you with a resolution that would embody in writing the reasons given by the council for your decision. If you want to deny the appeal, there is a resolution already prepared because that did not require any additional findings.

Okay, I'll go to Council Member Fugazi, then Council Member Bracco.

My position on this is that it's not a harsh enough penalty. We have a lot of... We have a lot of reasons here to want to give somebody grace, you would think, but then this is a business they've been in for 30 years. They're supposed to be knowing these things, and they had multiple incidents happening. We have a really hard situation, but personally, I don't think it's strong enough, and that's where I stand on the matter at the moment.

Councilman Bracco.

I agree with Councilman Fugazi. At minimum, I would uphold the decision. As a business owner, it's your responsibility to know what's going on in your business and know what's legal and what's not. I mean, if drug dealers said that every time they got busted, I mean, it just doesn't make any sense. And you do have a state association that you can join that walks you through this stuff. I belong to mine in the towing industry. First of the year, we get a brief on all the new laws that affect our business, and also the Chamber of Commerce does the same thing. So it's out there. help to get you through this. You have made the choice to sell this stuff, so I can't help you with that.

Comments? Council Member Ramirez.

So I'm in agreement with my two colleagues in that this is something that I think that we have been working on collectively as a council in really watching out for and ensuring that especially the youth in our community are kept safe from these types of instances and establishments. So, you know, I, at a minimum, I would say uphold, but I am certainly open to a stronger penalty.

Council Member Klein.

I would agree with my colleagues on the matter. I agree with the decision that's been made. And if there's collectively, if we look at something harsher as a group, open to hearing the argument on that.

Council Member Hilton.

Yeah, I would like to go farther. I would like to go to at least one year suspension is what I would go for.

Okay, why don't you make a motion on a one-year suspension? Let me have one more comment.

Okay. Because we are going to be taking up all these other things that we're doing today, and I'll say the reinforcement for that for me is, yes, the kids and all of that, but there are legitimate businesses out there that basically want to be in this, and you... You have to have responsibility, as the other council member said, and it reflects on all the other businesses, too, that want to legally do this kind of business. And that's really where I am from the business perspective.

Go ahead. Okay. Okay, I'm looking for a motion. Based on the conversation we've had so far, I'm going to turn it over to Council Member Hilton.

So would this be a combination of basically one and three is what we're looking at, where we deny the appeal, but then – deny the appeal, have a suspension for one year, and continue the matter to a date certain for a final resolution?

We've been given three options. Do we have to officially deny the appeal, or can we go right to item three, which is... Or a combo of both.

I think you're doing both. In effect, item three includes a denial of the appeal, and we can draft a resolution appropriately. So we could bring the matter back in two weeks with a resolution to suspend for a year, if that's what the motion is.

Okay, so my motion then would be to deny the appeal and suspend for a year. Second.

Okay, I have a motion by Councilmember Hilton and a second by Councilmember Fugazi.

Just for clarity then, that would be a suspension of the business license as a whole or the business license to sell tobacco products? For tobacco. So it would be like what the hearing officer did, but for a year instead of six months?

Correct. So the business can stay open, but no selling tobacco products.

Okay, so I have a motion by Councilmember Hilton and a second by Councilmember Fugazi. Roll call, please.

Councilmember Bracco? Yes. Councilmember Klein? Yes. Councilmember Fugazi? Yes. Councilmember Hilton?

Aye.

Councilmember Marks? Yes. Councilmember Ramirez? Yes. Mayor Bozo?

Yes. The motion passes 7-0. Thank you for coming in.

Okay, that concludes.

So we'll take a quick eight-minute break, and we'll start the meeting on time at 6 o'clock. Thank you.

We're now adjourning the special meeting.

Thank you. Okay. Thank you. How are you? Where is this one? Thank you. Thank you. Now I'm gonna hit this. Thank you. Yeah. Yeah. Thank you. Yeah, we all.

Excuse me, sir. They know I'm here?

Thank you. They're already on YouTube. They're already on YouTube. I wish I could say, I got to go. I know. I apologize for the singer. Come on. I meant to call you out there. Um... Good to see you there. Yes. Hey Brian. Yeah? Hi, how are you? Yeah, I did, I did, yes. We had a great couple of times. Yeah, he's a good guy. He's a good guy. I like him.

I like him.

You can go to your other meeting and come back. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. . . Okay.

Okay, everybody. Thank you very much for coming this evening. I have a couple announcements. If I could get your attention, please. Thank you very much for coming. If I could have your attention, please. Great turnout tonight, ladies and gentlemen. Thank you very much. How about an applause? I love it. The challenge is... that we got some issues with the fire department. We have to have the aisles clear. So unfortunately, those of you that are standing in the aisle, if the aisle is blocked, you either either have to find a seat. And now that, it's safe to say, Kim, that some of these seats that are reserved, those can be used now, correct? Okay, thank you very much. Go ahead and do that. And for the others, you're going to have to go out in the foyer and watch it from the TV, unfortunately. And keep in mind, as the meeting goes on, if this is a topic that yours is later, typically the meeting will clear out a little bit so there will be chairs. But this group over here, unfortunately, cannot stay. Don't go away. Just go in the foyer, and we'll see you in a while. Okay, so find a seat, please, or clear the aisle and clear the doorways, please. This side over here. Thank you, you guys. This side over here needs to look like this side over here, please. Thank you. I promise you won't miss anything. Yeah, it's all set. The TV is on. I think I see two chairs over here, correct? There's two over here on my right, Bryce. They're not together. All right. Thank you, everybody. And thank you for those of you in the foyer. Thank you very much for helping us out. Meet the obligations that we have. Okay. So officially, I'm going to start this meeting at 6.11 p.m. on June 1st, 2026. A regular meeting. A call to order. And I am going to ask for a roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco. Here. Council Member Klein. Here. Council Member Fugazi.

Here.

Council Member Hilton.

Here.

Council Member Marks. Here. Council Member Ramirez. Here. Mayor Bozzo.

Here. Item 3.3, City Clerk's Report on Posting of the Agenda, please.

Thank you, Mayor. This agenda was posted on Thursday, May 28th at 4.20 p.m.

Okay. Please stand for Pledge of Allegiance led by Council Member Hilton and then invocation by Pastor Malcolm McPhail.

Thank you so much, Mayor Bozo. If we could remain standing for the invocation, would that be okay, please? Thank you very much. First of all, I want to say thank you to the mayor and our city council for the privilege of being able to share the invocation with you and pray for you and pray for our city and our community at large. But most of all, I want to let you know that I don't take it lightly. And the church pastors and other churches that are in our community don't take it lightly either. Many communities don't have an invocation or prayer. Our community chooses to be able to take this moment and this time to ask for help from somebody more powerful than all of us, right? And so thank you very much. And I just wanted to share one thought with you as I was coming tonight. I read it out of a motivational book, and it said a leader knows the way, goes the way and shows the way. And that's the big challenge that we have as leaders and our city council members and mayor have as leaders, that we would know the way, we would go the way, but we would also show the way by example. And so I will pray for you tonight to have wisdom and guidance as you look at different ways of civic duty in our community tonight. So let us bow our heads if we can, please. Dear Lord, we just ask for for just your guidance and your direction in our community of gilroy where we pray for we pray for all of our first responders god that you would keep them safe bring them home at the end of their watch and and protect them and guide them as well touch our mayor our city council members tonight give them wisdom and guidance as they pave the way to the future and to things that are happening that are up ahead, God. We pray you'll give them wisdom, guidance, instruction, and good counsel, and we trust you for the results, and we ask that in the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Spirit. Amen. Thank you very much. Thank you.

MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 3.6, WHICH IS ORDERS OF THE DAY. SO FIRST ORDERS OF THE DAY IS ITEM 8.1, PUBLIC HEARING ON DOWNTOWN GILROY STREET BANNER POLICY AND PROGRAM GUIDELINES AND FEE SCHEDULE AMENDMENT HAS BEEN CONTINUED TO THE AUGUST 3, 2026 REGULAR CITY COUNCIL MEETING. And I have another one. We are going to be moving item number 10.1, which is the consideration of reopening the Hannah and Wayland Street parking lots at Los Alamos Park. I'm going to move that to right after the consent calendar, which runs through item 7.9. So that will come up at item 8, I believe. YES, ITEM 8. I'LL SAY THAT AGAIN. WE WILL MOVE ITEM 10.1 TO JUST AFTER THE CONSENT CALENDAR ITEM 8. OKAY, MOVING ON TO ITEM 3.7, EMPLOYEE INTRODUCTIONS. CITY ADMINISTRATOR MATT MORLEY TO INTRODUCE OUR NEW POLICE CHIEF, BRANDON SANCHEZ.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. After an extensive search, multiple panels, including panels of the community, business members, and city staff, I'm proud to be able to announce that we have a new police chief, Brandon Sanchez. He's here today with us at the end of his first day. Welcome, Brandon. Brandon's been in the police field for 28 years in command-level experience, most recently as a deputy chief of field operations with the city of San Jose. Brandon prides himself in community engagement and problem-oriented policing. It would be a great addition to us here in Gilroy. Brandon lives in Gilroy, as a matter of fact, with his wife and the youngest of his three daughters. Brandon, welcome to the city of Gilroy.

Thank you, Mayor, Council, City Administrator. Thank you, community. It's an honor to be here. It was a long process, but we're finally here. I'm excited. This is my home. So thanks to my family for being here. Thanks to the members of the department, both past and present, for welcoming me and being really warm to me on my first day. I look forward to what this department will do in the future, what we will do as a city together. You'll see me out in the community quite a lot. So I'll save a lot of my comments for Thursday, because I know we have a lot on the agenda. But honored to be here. Thank you very much. I look forward to what we're going to do together. Thank you.

Next, we have another new employee introduction by Public Works Director John Dowdy.

Thank you, Mayor, community, council members. Pleased to be here to introduce Sebastian Guitron. He came to us and now is working as an engineer one within the Public Works Department of Engineering. We're thrilled for that. He recently earned his bachelor's degree in environmental engineering from the University of California, Merced. Well, I'm proud to say we stole him from Morgan Hill. But previous to here, he was working for Morgan Hill. He also worked for Merced County Public Works as well as part of his process with that. He's very skilled in all the technology. that comes with it, ArcGIS, GIS itself, AutoCAD, all the things that we want and need within our department. He is bilingual fluent Spanish, so we appreciate that for helping the folks around to come to our community and to our counter. And when he's not working for us, he's hanging out with his tabby cat named Aiko. So with that, I'd like to introduce Sebastian. Welcome him. Thank you.

Good evening, Mayor, city council members, and everyone here tonight. My name is Sebastian. I am excited to serve the Gilroy community and contribute to projects that improve the city's quality of life. I appreciate this opportunity to be such a part of this dedicated team, and I look forward to supporting the city's continued growth and success. Thank you so much.

Now moving on to item number four. This is presentations to council. So this is public comment by members of the public on items not on the agenda, but within the subject matter jurisdiction of the city council. As you may imagine, and as you can see by all the cards we have up here, we have a lot of public comment tonight. So we are going to go to one minute of public comment. And why don't you go ahead and take it away. Kim?

Thank you. I have... I'm going to call up Kelly Larson and Jennifer and Rebecca Armendariz to start.

Thank you, Kelly. You have one minute, please. Thank you.

Question one is, who's paying for that energy infrastructure? Is the governor required to cover the cost of the new infrastructure facility or is it to .

Question two is, where is the energy from the data center coming from?

Which PG&E power station will we be drawing from? Is it natural gas, coal, or nuclear? There should be policy reforms to help ensure that data centers and any future sources of our electric demand are powered by clean energy. Phase one of this data center says it will be constructing a new substation. And again, how will that be powered? Natural gas, coal, or nuclear? Question three. What are the actual economic benefits? The Amazon VP stated in the dispatch just this week that they will be providing 90 jobs.

That's your one minute, Kelly, so sorry. Don't forget, this is a message for everybody. You did say you were going to submit that to the public. Everybody up here will get it, and it will be registered on our portal. The entire community will see it. Okay. So don't worry. Thank you very much.

Dan O'Kar, followed by Rebecca.

Before Jennifer goes, I hope you guys, I'm glad everyone's here today, and we started off, I got everybody clapping, so that was not an invitation to clap throughout our public comment. As you guys recall, we have some great decorum in this council chambers, and clapping is not one of them. So you are welcome to be as excited as you want. But please, please do not clap after each public comment. Please do not do that. So with that being said, Jennifer, you have one minute.

Thank you. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. I'm Jennifer Payton with Amazon Web Services. I wanted to come tonight to personally invite you and members of the Gilroy community to an open house we are hosting this Wednesday evening, June 3rd, from five to eight at Gilroy High School. We'll have folks from our project team there along with representatives from the supporting utilities, and we'd like the chance to talk with community members, answer questions, and share more about our data center project currently under construction. We'll also have Spanner speaking team members there as well as a translator. So if you are curious, or if you know anyone who is, which it sounds like there is, so please feel free to stop by any time on Wednesday, June 3rd, between 5 and 8, and we welcome the conversation. Thank you.

Thank you.

Rebecca, followed by Armando and Connie.

Good evening, honorable mayor, council members, Rebecca Mendarez. I'm here on behalf of Caras and Bay Rising Silicon Valley. I know we can't clap, but if you stand against the ICE Detention Processing Center in Gilroy, please stand up. I want to thank you all for your item 7.9, the resolution, and for your commitment to the diverse members of our community. This statement of values is important as a first step to asserting where our city stands in terms of an ICE facility coming to our community. However, I urge you to take the next step towards making our community feel safer, making them feel appreciated and heard. This step means developing and adopting a strong policy prohibiting the use of city property for civil immigration enforcement to protect the safety and well-being of all of our community members and city employees. Gilroy should join Campbell, Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, San Jose, the County of Santa Clara, VTA, and other cities across the country in adopting such a policy to support everyday community members who are living in fear in Gilroy, in our county, and throughout our country. With the threats of a proposed ICE facility here and in Dublin, our community needs strong leadership. Thank you.

Thank you very much, Rebecca. So just as a reminder, thank you, Rebecca, for... encouraging the crowd to follow what my request is. And just a small reminder, this is not the end of the world, but during this public comment, it's for items that are not on the agenda. So in this particular case, that public comment would have taken place. You guys can sit down. Thank you, sorry. In this particular case, that item would have took place during the consent calendar.

Yes.

Please.

So if anyone filled out a public comment card for items not on the agenda and you're wanting to speak on item 7.9, that will happen during consent.

You can come let me know.

Take it away, Armando. Thank you. Mayor and council members, I believe this body should consider starting discussions to address the community's concerns over the approval process of Amazon's AI centers. The purpose of the discussion should be to determine a need to establish reasonable regulations and standards that will apply to Gilroy's future high-impact industrial developments. It is my hope that one of you will submit a fair memo to start the process. The community deserves the opportunity to hear their elected representatives participate in a transparent policy discussions on the matter below. Agenda is a study session through a fair memo will allow the community to know where each of you THE ELECTED REPRESENTATIVES STAND ON USING YOUR LEGISLATIVE AUTHORITY TO ESTABLISH CLEAR AND ROBUST STANDARDS APPLICABLE TO FUTURE HIGH-IMPACT INDUSTRIAL DEVELOPMENTS. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU VERY MUCH. SO CONNIE'S NEXT. CAN YOU LIST THE OTHER TWO, KIM?

JOANNE AND THEN BILL O'CONNOR.

SO JOANNE AND BILL, CAN YOU GUYS PLEASE GET IN LINE AND GET ON DECK? THANK YOU.

GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL MEMBERS. MY NAME IS CONNIE ROGERS. and I do support the Anti-ICE Center, but I'm here to talk about something else. As a former planning commissioner and council member, I'm here to let you know that many of us, including some of your current planning commissioners and even council members, felt blindsided by the lack of a public hearing for the data center being built. The fact that a project of this magnitude and complexity, which significantly affects our environment, did not allow for public input seems undemocratic. Many of us feel frustrated, let down, and disappointed because we elected you to protect us and our beautiful city, but it doesn't feel like you did. We don't believe that a project that could significantly affect our water supply and electricity should be approved just because it's located in an industrial zone. I'm asking that you put a discussion of amending the zoning code on your agenda in the near future. Even though there is a lengthy EIR, it has been my experience that they do not always include information that could be detrimental.

Thank you very much, Connie. Your minute is up. Thank you very much.

Erin O'Brien, followed by Joanna Corona and Ashley Castillo.

But Joanna's next, and then Bill, and then Erin.

Bill was speaking on another item.

Okay, thank you. Okay, so Jan, and then Erin. Go ahead. Sorry. Thank you. Sorry, Kim.

All right. Good evening, guys. Armando and Connie covered a lot of what I was going to say, but let me just say it plainly as a resident here from 30 years. We feel blindsided is the truth because it was not transparent what was happening. In fact, it seems to be very devious. They say they're going to open a distribution center, there's going to be jobs, and guess what? It's not, and there aren't. So I don't want this to happen again. How did it slide through without any of us knowing, or did we know, and we just couldn't talk about it? I don't trust them. I think they'll try for more. And if it isn't Amazon, it'll be somebody else. So let's get it on the agenda. Let's get set standards, and let's do something about to prevent the next one if we can't take care of this one. Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Joanne. Erin? Who's after Erin, please, Kim?

Ashley, and then Alina and Emily, and Ezra.

Good evening, Erin O'Brien. And first I want to, and I'm not going to speak to this item, but thank you for proposing and presumably passing the resolution opposing the ICE facility. That matters to our community. But I am here tonight to speak to you about the need to go further. Northern California has the lowest ICE arrest rate in the nation, 217 arrests per 100,000 undocumented citizens. compared to a national average of over 1,000. That's not luck or happenstance. Experts attribute that directly to sanctuary policies, community resistance, supportive leadership, and the absence of a local detention infrastructure. That low rate means thousands of families in this region have stayed together, thousands of kids have gone to school without fear, and that's what's at stake here. Santa Clara County has no formal non-staging policy, but you've heard many local jurisdictions do. So with an ICE detention processing and staging facility being attempted in the backyard, we need one. So I'm asking this council to agendize and adopt a no-staging policy in alignment with our neighboring jurisdictions to protect our residents. Thank you.

Thank you, Erin. So while we're waiting for the next speaker, is it Ashley? So while we're waiting for the next speaker, is Ashley present? While we're waiting for possibly Ashley to come up, I want to let... THE GROUP KNOW THAT WE ARE GOING TO CLOSE ANY MORE CARDS BEING FILLED OUT FOR PUBLIC COMMENT FOR THIS ITEM AND FOR THE NEXT ITEM FOR CONSENT CALENDAR. WE HAVE PLENTY OF THOSE AT THIS POINT THAT WE CAN HANDLE TONIGHT. WHO'S NEXT? ASHLEY?

ASHLEY CASTILLO.

ASHLEY, YOU HAVE ONE MINUTE.

Okay. Thank you very much, and good evening, mayor and council members. My name is Ashley Castillo. I am 18 years old, and I attend Gilroy High. I'm speaking on the agenda item 8.2 and 1.9 regarding tobacco retailers and smoke shops. I am here today to ask the city of Gilroy to adopt strong tobacco relegation regulations that will protect young people both now and in the future. I support establishing a clear definition of a smoke shop, adopting a local ban on flavored tobacco products, and ensuring that there are strong enforcement measures in place. These policies work together to prevent businesses from finding loopholes and to stop bad actors from returning to the community. in the future. As a youth, we're often targeted from tobacco products, industry marketing, and especially through flavored products that make nicotine seem harmless. We deserve protection that puts us our health first. Go Right has an opportunity instead of waiting for problems to grow. I encourage you to adopt strong policies now so that the future generations of young people can grow up in a healthy way.

Thank you, Ashley. Thank you very much.

Elena and Emily, followed by Ezra.

As Elena and Emily are coming up, just a reminder, these are for items that are not on the rest of the agenda. So Ashley just spoke on items that are on the agenda later. It's okay, Ashley? Probably your first time?

This is not about tobacco.

Right, so are you guys talking about tobacco?

Yeah.

Okay, then you will wait until a little bit later when the item's on the agenda. Don't worry, you'll get your chance to speak. Don't worry. Don't worry. Okay.

Is Ezra and Maya, is that tobacco also? Yeah. Okay. Thank you. Philip Garcia.

Good evening, Mayor, Council Members. My name is Phil Garcia. And the reason that I'm here this evening is I am very concerned about the handicapped parking, removal signs from our properties. We never got a notice. We never got a mail. They just came and they took our handicapped parking away. My wife is disabled. She has diabetes. several ailments, we've had to handicap parking for 15 years plus. I came to the engineering department, spoke with the engineering people, and they told me that there's 90 handicap stalls in residences in the city of Gilroy, and that every one of those will be removed. I would like to put it on the agenda. FOR A FUTURE DATE. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU, PHIL.

I HAVE NO FURTHER SPEAKERS.

ALL RIGHT. THANK YOU VERY MUCH, EVERYBODY. OKAY. MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER FIVE, REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS. COUNCIL MEMBER BROCKO. COUNCIL MEMBER FOGATI.

Yes, from Visit Gilroy. Visit California, the largest state-run tourism organization in the United States, chose to feature Gilroy last week in their California Now Discover the Splendors of the Bay Area 30-minute video podcast. Ruben Dario Villa and Joely Rosales were interviewed, and they focused on art, culture, and Gilroy gardens. Both did a magnificent job at promoting Gilroy and all we have to offer. Thank you both for being such articulate, enthusiastic, and sincere ambassadors for Gilroy. In line with Visit Gilroy efforts to promote Gilroy as a destination for meetings, gatherings, and events, Gilroy is now listed on CaliforniaMeetings.com, a major resource for meeting planners. We encourage you to visit CaliforniaMeetings.com to see how Gilroy is being promoted. Lastly, good news from the hotels. This is one of the key measurements that we have from Visit Gilroy. Last month, Gilroy occupancy increased over 18 percent from the previous year. It's a significantly larger increase than Salinas, Monterey, or Morgan Hill had. And in addition, revenue per room was up 21.8 percent. Definitely go out to YouTube, check out that video, you know, drive up the Participation so we get more people looking at it is really good to see how we're represented in that video. Thank you Thank you.

I saw that video too.

It's incredible really good council remarks Yes, the habitat implementation board met last week I chaired that particular committee meeting and councilmember Ramirez was with with me and she will be giving the report later on when it's her turn on Friday Valley water took some of us on an Anderson dam tour it was extremely informative the dam and IS 76 YEARS OLD THIS YEAR, AND THE NEW ONE WAS STARTED IN 2013 WITH A COMPLETION DATE IN 2033. IT WAS TOTALLY ENLIGHTENING TO SEE WHERE MODERN TECHNOLOGY HAS COME AND HOW THIS DEM IS BEING BUILT. IF YOU EVER GET THE CHANCE TO GO UP THERE AND SEE IT AND TOUR IT, YOU'LL BE PLEASANTLY SURPRISED. THANK YOU.

COUNCIL MEMBER HILTON. NOTHING TO REPORT. COUNCIL MEMBER RAMIREZ.

GOOD EVENING. Just a few things. I want to thank you, a big thank you to city staff for having the second downtown town hall. From the comments made by the businesses, they appreciate the immediate actions that have already been put in place and the next steps outlined in the 90-day action plan. Congratulations to all our local heroes who were honored at this year's Exchange Club's Blue and Gold Luncheon. They were all very well-deserved. And congratulations to Joni Lewis for being honored with the Book of Golden Deeds Award. I attended the Public Works Open House with my grandson, and he was in heaven with all of these heavy equipment that were on display that he got to climb around. It was a great opportunity for everyone to come and see and meet the team members who work daily to maintain our city and keep it in good condition. Council Member Marks and I attended the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency meeting on May 21st. We approved the lakeside caretaker residence improvements, had a presentation on the plan's fiscal year 2025 report. The executive officer reported on fiscal year to date, his advocacy trips to Sacramento and Washington, D.C., updates on land acquisitions and conservation actions. Thank you to city staff for holding a developer roundtable. Again, it was very well received by attendees. Yesterday, I attended Gilroy's first farmer's market that was held in the 7th Street parking lot. There were a number of booths, and they have plans to expand every week. It is from 8 to 2. I encourage everyone to participate. And then to council and staff, June 11th is the City Association annual picnic. I encourage our electeds and staff to attend. You've received an invite, and you can RSVP to that. Thank you.

Thank you very much. Council Member Klein.

Yes. I shadowed her in a lot of the places she was at, so a lot of good things happening. And I also, on May 20th, I chaired the VTA Mobility Partnership Committee meeting. On the 21st, I attended Visit Gilroy's California Welcome Center board meeting as an alternate, and we got to see that video. It was a great video. You've got to go online and check that out. And on May 28th, I chaired the Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority board meeting. They're getting ready for FIFA coming up this month, so stay tuned. So thanks.

Thank you very much. I have a couple announcements. From the Valley Transportation Authority, Valley Transportation Authority entered into an agreement with an advertising agency and company, so part of the agreement is that Valley Transportation will be, an advertising agency will be putting advertising on or around or within any type of Valley Transportation Authority BUSES OR BUS STOP AWNINGS AND IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT PART OF WHAT IN EXCHANGE FOR THAT IS ALL OF THE BUS STOP AWNINGS IN THE VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY DISTRICT WILL GET MORE ROUTINE CLEANING AND MAINTENANCE SO LOOK FOR THAT SO I'M EXCITED ABOUT THAT SECONDLY PUBLIC WORKS I LIKE TO CALL OUT PUBLIC WORKS A LOT WHEN I CAN SO IT WAS JUST TWO YEARS AGO IF YOU RECALL JUST TWO YEARS AGO THAT ALL OF THE ELM TREES on the west side of town down on Miller and on Fifth Street and Fourth Street and on Third Street were affected by an elm leaf beetle and they shedded their leaves. So by August, all of the leaves were gone and was brown all over town. And thank you to the Public Works Department for taking a proactive approach. If you ever see somebody with a stick that they're injecting ingredients into the ground on people's lawn. This is because they're doing a very, very safe systemic application. And we're already seeing a huge difference last year and a big difference this year to protecting our trees. So thank you very much, Public Works Department. That concludes my comments. And moving on now to item number six. This brings us to the board and commission interviews. So just a little feedback for everybody else in the room. We have the youth commission interview. So this is with these young people that are sitting up here. They're applying for the youth commission. And they're going to come up here and they're going to say a few things about themselves. And as I said to you guys before, we have your applications. So if you don't get a lot of questions and stuff from us, we want to hear from you and a brief statement, a little bit about yourself. But we have read your applications. And then for the rest of the community, the way this works is that on June 15th, at our next council meeting, is when we will make the appointments. So are you going to call out? Okay, thank you.

Thank you, Mayor. So the city opened the summer recruitment period on May 20th to fill seats on the Gilroy Youth Commission with the terms expiring June 30th, 2028. There are a total of five seats available. So I'm going to call you each up, five at a time. And you can just come and sit at this table and pass the mic down. Just do a quick introduction and introduce yourself to the council and let them know why you're interested in the Youth Commission. We're going to start with Mia Gibson, because she has a prior engagement. Abigail Nguyen, Alexandra Anderson, Annabelle Pham, and Astrid Bolaños, please.

So there's three. I think you called out more than three. Does that mean?

It's okay.

We'll keep moving. Okay. Okay. Take it away.

Hello, my name is Mia Gibson. I am interested in being part of the Youth Commission because I found out about it through the Beyond Glory program that you had, and I realized that you don't have to be old to be able to do something for your community. Are you talking to me? And I just want to help the community in ways that I can do the process while I'm young so I can have experience in a lot of things.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Abigail Nguyen. I'm an upcoming junior at Dr. TJ Owen's Early College Academy. I wanted to join Youth Commission due to, I think that's a great way to help improve soft skills such as planning, brainstorming, and overall being a more well-rounded character. AND I BELIEVE THAT I CAN OFFER SOME MORE DIVERSE OPINIONS AND EXPERIENCE INTO PLANNING THAT CAN APPLY TO MULTIPLE GROUPS IN THE CITY OF GILROY. THANK YOU.

THANK YOU. WHAT WAS YOUR NAME?

ABGIL NGUYEN.

FIRST ONE ON THE LIST. FIRST ONE? SORRY.

GOOD EVENING. MY NAME IS ASTRID VELANOS, AND I'M AN UPCOMING FRESHMAN. And I'd like to come up with creative solutions for youth in the community.

Thank you. Great job.

Can I ask something?

Yeah, of course you can.

What school do you go to? I go to South Valley. I'm in eighth grade.

And you will go to what high school?

To Gilroy High School.

All right. And then you said TJ Owens Academy, correct? Seventh grade at South Valley. Seventh grade at South Valley. Okay.

And I just wanted to make sure that Alexandra Anderson and Annabelle Pham were not here. Okay.

Okay, you three, you can leave the mic right there. And thank you very much. You guys can return to your seats. Thank you very much.

Thank you very much.

You're welcome.

Next, we'll call up Avery Lucero, Clarissa Lustre, Cormac Stump, Genesis Ruffino, and Jacob Angelo Ono.

Jacob. So you want to find a few more since those others aren't here?

Jackson Liu. Jeremy Vu. Casey Walker.

Thank you. All right, take it away. Good evening, mayor and city or council staff. My name is Cormac Stumpf. I attend St. Mary's. I'm in seventh grade. I'm interested in the youth council. because I want to create a space for people my age. I attended Taekwondo through the City of Gilroy Recreations, and I was surrounded by children, very little children, and I felt alienated because a lot of this stuff revolved around younger activities. I had difficulty trying to find people and friends my age to join me, and I wanted to create more spaces like that. I have a lot of experience planning things. I do a lot of fundraising things with my mother and I'm interested in helping animals. I do a lot of fostering. I foster kittens every summer.

Alright, thank you.

Good afternoon. My name is Jackson Liu. I'm an incoming junior at Dr. T.J. Owens Gilroy Early College Academy. As I sat here today, I saw a lot of different problems and looked at the agenda, and I realized there are so many things going on in Gilroy that I had no idea were happening. I want to be able to work in with everyone else in Gilroy, and I want to be able to create these sorts of changes that everyone in this room and on the board is looking for. I want to be able to push these new boundaries for what Gilroy should be, and I want to work with everyone else, hopefully some people, or hopefully the people up there to create the type of place Gilroy should be to have a more better community. Thank you.

Good evening. My name is Jeremy Vu. I'm an upcoming junior at Dr. T.J. Owens Gilroy Early College Academy. And I was interested in joining the Youth Commission because I would like to impact my community with engaging events for our youth. I've noticed that the Youth Commission has already planned events such as the Opportunity Team and the and the intergenerational dance, which I highly recognize and admire. However, I would like to add on to it by creating more events to impact our preteens and regular teens for areas outside of the academic and professional setting, such as in sports. I've realized that a lot of students have turned to more sedentary and dull habits, such as video games or the dreaded iPad, but it's become very hard to access sports due to the highly selective nature of student sports at schools or because of the high prices of club leagues. So I'd like to create, I'd like to propose an event such as a free camp where it could be three days of different sports such as basketball, soccer, volleyball, badminton, tennis, or spike ball. And these could help students get out and build soft skills such as friendship, teamwork, social skills, while also getting the physical activity they need and get out into the community. And I'd like to re-engage our youth. Thank you. Thank you, Jeremy. Good job.

Hi, my name is Casey Walker, and I would like to join the Youth Commission because I care deeply about the community and the people in it. I am hardworking, talented, fluent, organized, and enjoy working well with others. I want to help create positive changes to the youth and to the families of Gilroy. I believe that I would be a great candidate for the Youth Commission, and yeah, thank you.

Thank you. Casey, what school do you go to?

I go to Brownell Middle School, and I'm a seventh grader.

Seventh grader. Any other questions? All right. Thank you, you four. Great job. Thank you very much.

Kiara Brenton. Linda Diacova Lizeth Gomez-Rodriguez. And Paige Lott. Robert Garive, Ryan Nguyen, Sarah Isaac, Sarika Day, Shawn Anderson, Asiana Teal, Trinity Wagner, Violet Ramirez, and William Purdy.

ARE THERE ANY ADDITIONAL APPLICANTS WHO HAVE NOT BEEN CALLED YET? RAISE YOUR HAND. SO IT FEELS LIKE THIS IS THE FINAL FLOOR. ALL RIGHT. TAKE IT AWAY.

ALL RIGHT. GOOD EVENING, FELLOW MAYOR AND COUNCIL. I WANT TO JOIN THE GILROY YOUTH COMMISSION BECAUSE I JUST SIMPLY ADORE PUBLIC SERVICE. GROWING UP, MY PARENTS TAUGHT ME THAT IT'S THE MOST NOBLE THING THAT I CAN DEDICATE MYSELF, AND I JUST REALLY ADORE IT. I have a bunch of experience volunteering at different schools, at my prior middle school, elementary school, other high schools. I just really love to represent other people. Right now I'm a part of the student advisory committee at my high school where I ask for opinions from my fellow classmates and I act as a liaison to my principal. I am involved in my community. I love living here at Gilroy. I think we're a really close-knit community, and I think that's what really makes us strong. So I would do anything to be able to improve that and to keep it going because I feel really... Like I belong here and I want to promote that to our youth So if I was a part of this committee of this commission, I would love to promote Events including our cultures. I would love to have like a multicultural event day. I would love to organize dances and etc I just really want to represent voices that are often talked over and I want to ensure that everyone in our community feels like they belong Thank you. Thank you. And your name again is Lizette Gomez Rodriguez. I DR. TJ OWENS, I'M AN INCOMING JUNIOR.

THANK YOU. GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND COUNCIL. MY NAME IS ROBERT GRIEVE, AND I'M AN UPCOMING JUNIOR AT DR. TJ OWENS GILBERT EARLY COLLEGE ACADEMY. AT MY SCHOOL, I'M A PART OF THE ASSOCIATED STUDENT BODY, WHICH GIVES ME A LOT OF LEADERSHIP EXPERIENCE AND ALSO EXPERIENCE WITH HELPING PEOPLE. AND IT WAS MY FIRST YEAR AT THE STUDENT BODY, AND I REALLY ENJOYED ASSISTING MY PRINCIPAL AND MY PEERS And I started researching more opportunities and how can I do that, especially with my local community living in Gilroy. And I found out about the Youth Commission. And those are mainly the reasons that I want to join. I want to leave a positive impact on my community by working with peers, the Youth Commission, and the committee itself to address certain issues and help people. Thank you. Thank you.

Good evening, everyone. My name is Sarah Isaac, and I'm an incoming junior at Dr. TJ Owen's Geary Early College Academy. In this position, I would wish to be able to strengthen my leadership and communication skills, as well as also be able to be a voice for the youth in this community. And I believe that this opportunity would allow me to do so. Thank you.

Thank you.

Good evening, Mr. Mayor, members of the Gilroy City Council. My name is William Purdy. I am currently 16 years old and an incoming junior at Christopher High School. I would love to be a part of the Gilroy Youth Commission as I am extremely interested in the issues that affect our youth in our community. And I believe it's very important that the youth makes their voices heard and that these solutions are found to the issues that affect them. I believe using my experiences as part of serving on the Christopher High School's focus group for when they were constructing the Wellness Center to being the president and founder of the Asian Student Union at Christopher High School, also along with numerous community service activities such as serving at the Garlic Festival, I believe that I can work with the team and bring a lot of creative solutions and original solutions to the table and hopefully address the issues that affect our community. Thank you.

Thank you very much. JUST ONE LAST CHANCE. ANY OTHER APPLICANTS THAT WE MAY HAVE MISSED AND LOOKED OVER? OK, so thank you very much. You guys can leave the mic there and return to your seats. So again, just for the public, these are some of the youth of our community. You can hear how they speak. You can hear what they've done already, some of them before they're even in the seventh grade. So the challenge that we have as a council is that there are 12 or 13 folks who showed up today to speak. There's probably over nearly 30 applicants, and we have to choose five. So now, what you've heard from these students today, and I appreciate you guys coming here, this is the time for applause for these kids. BEFORE WE MOVE ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7, JUST FOR YOU FOLKS, AND THIS IS FOR EVERYBODY WHO DOES PUBLIC COMMENT AND THAT TYPE OF THING, FOR YOU FOLKS, YOU ARE NOT REQUIRED TO STAY HERE ALL NIGHT. YOU'RE WELCOME TO STAY AS LONG AS YOU WANT, BUT YOU'RE NOT REQUIRED, AND IF YOU DO LEAVE AT SOME POINT, IT IS OKAY. KEEP THAT IN MIND, OKAY? SO MOVING ON TO ITEM NUMBER 7, THE CONSENT CALENDAR. COUNCIL, ANY QUESTIONS FROM COUNCIL? NO? ALL RIGHT, LET'S GO RIGHT TO PUBLIC COMMENT. AND HOW MANY DO WE HAVE?

Thank you, Mayor. We have 15 speakers.

Okay, one minute, please. One minute for each, please.

Michelle Nelson, followed by Arcelia O'Connor and Jan Guffey.

Good evening, Mary Bozzo and council members. As you may have heard, the Gilroy Unified School Board of Education approved a resolution last Thursday opposing the ICE detention center. The school board often reads resolutions, but because it was at the end of a very long meeting, we did not. We just approved it. I WAS SURPRISED TO SEE THAT YOUR RESOLUTION IS IN THE CONSENT AGENDA. TYPICALLY THAT'S FOR ROUTINE ITEMS THAT ARE NOT CONTROVERSIAL AT ALL. I WAS WONDERING, AND I KNOW YOU CAN'T RESPOND RIGHT NOW, BUT MAYBE YOU CAN THINK ABOUT IT, TO HAVE IT READ OUT LOUD GIVEN THE NATURE OF THIS ISSUE. do a roll call vote. I don't know if it was going to be a roll call for the consent, but as a resolution, typically it's a roll call if I'm not mistaken. Thank you.

Thank you, Michelle. Next, Joanne.

Arcelia.

Excuse me, Arcelia is next.

Followed by Jan. Good evening, Mr. Mayor, council members, and staff members. I said some of this at a previous meeting, but I'm going to say it again. I am a first generation American. My parents were both from Mexico and became proud American citizens. Their hearts would be broken about what has happened to this country, this country where I and my siblings were born. The sadness, hate, lawlessness, and in too many cases, death that has been inflicted on many individuals by ICE agents, including American citizens, that has engulfed this nation is now on Gilroy's doorstep. And even though the detention center planned would not be in our city limits, I am thankful that the council has taken a stance to oppose it and included a resolution in the agenda for tonight's meeting. Democracy, our democracy, can die one step at a time. Thank you for making your voice heard to say that we will not let Gilroy be one more step on that path. Silence is not an option. Thank you for not being silent. Thank you very much. Next speaker, please.

Jan Guffey, followed by Armando, and then Edwin.

Hello, I just wanted to say I'm a Gilroy resident. These are the facts. Since our current president took office in January 2025, AT LEAST 48 PEOPLE HAVE DIED IN ICE DETENTION FACILITIES. ANOTHER STUDY SHOWED INCREASING RATES OF DEATH IN ICE CUSTODY. THE 2026 FISCAL YEAR FROM OCTOBER 1, 2025 TO JANUARY 19TH HAD THE HIGHEST DEATH RATE IN THE 22-YEAR PERIOD. RECENT INCREASES IN DEATH WERE OF SYSTEMIC WEAKNESSES IN MEDICAL CARE, MENTAL HEALTH PROTECTION AND MORTALITY REVIEW. Of the people booked into ICE this fiscal year, nearly three in four had no criminal conviction. Nearly half had no criminal conviction or even any pending criminal charges. Only 8% had a violent or property criminal conviction. My faith teaches me to respect the inherent worth and dignity of every person. Mark 1231 says, love your neighbor. As yourself, Matthew 25, 40 says, whatever you did for one of the least of these brothers and sisters of mine, you did for me.

Thank you, Jan. Armando. Who's after Armando, please? Kim.

Edwin. And then Cynthia. Cynthia.

Mayor, I strongly support this resolution and urge the City Council to adopt it and take every lawful action available to stop the ICE detention facility from locating in our city. Such a facility would have significant impact in our community, and residents will have a clear commitment that Gilroy will stand up for its values, protect community trust, and oppose projects that do not reflect the priorities of our community. Our immigrant community will feel safer knowing that this body is taking the right stance and sending a clear message that reassures them. Thank you for taking this stand. Thank you. Edwin.

Edwin Salazar.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR AND CITY COUNCIL. I WAS BORN AND RAISED HERE IN GILROY. I'M 18 YEARS OLD. I'M GRADUATING NEXT WEEK. BUT I CAN'T THINK OF ANYTHING ELSE OTHER THAN THE FACT THAT AN ICE FACILITY MIGHT BE BUILT NOT ON GILROY CITY PROPERTY BUT AROUND IT. I urge you to agendize a no-staging policy for June 15. As a Mexican-American, I see my community, 60% of which is Hispanic of origin, and I see that if this building is allowed to be constructed, they will live in fear. Imagine our downtown with its lively parties, with its lively events. Imagine that without 60% of the people who attend it. Imagine how our community, which claims to be made of workers and a tight community that boasts itself on garlic, on agriculture, How can we allow ICE to be present on our community? Thank you.

Cynthia, followed by Yvette and Yuli.

Good evening. I'm a member of this community, and I'm here to express that I'm against the building of an ICE concentration camp. I hope all of you here make the choice to not be complicit in crimes against humanity. Thank you.

Yvette?

Is Yvette Garcia here? Okay, Yuli? Hi, I am Yulia Boundis and I am a local educator. I strongly support the proposed resolution to oppose the possible ICE detention facility in Gilroy. I also urge you to agendaize a no staging zone policy for June 15th to provide concrete protections for the community by prohibiting the use of city property for civil immigration enforcement. As a descendant of immigrants my parents came to this country to give me and my siblings an opportunity to receive an education. I understand the importance of supporting our immigrant caregivers and their children as they navigate the school system. Now as an educator I can see how the youth's mental health and quality of life has been heavily impacted from the escalation of immigration immigration enforcement in our surrounding communities. I believe that the development of a detention center, otherwise a concentration camp, would only increase the fear and anxiety of our local children living life by impacting their short and long-term health. We have already witnessed student absenteeism this past school year. This is not aligned with values of equity and mutual care for all of our youth. All children in immigrant communities are entitled to live free of fear, and it is our responsibility as leaders to positively support our community's sense of safety.

Thank you.

Nasli, followed by Gabriel, and then Ron.

You're not Yvette, are you? Okay, good. All right, so why don't you just hold on a second. We'll get you back in there. So thank you for making eye contact with me. Good job. She's staring me down. Good job.

Good evening, Mayor and City Councilmember. I'm here to oppose the concentration camp and to urge you to give these youth right here a good example of what we do and how we stand up for our community. We are a diverse community, and the backbone of this country is at risk. Yeah, I urge you to give a good example to the youth. And just like you're protecting the trees and the community, like our beloved community is at stake here. And that's all I have to say.

Thank you. Yvette, why don't you come on up?

Thank you, Greg, Mayor Greg Bozo. Good evening. My name is Yvette Gasca, and I am a Gilroy resident, a therapeutic behavioral service coach, and a non-profit agency and a second-year Masters of Social Work student at San Jose State University. First, I want to express my sincere appreciation for your intent to adopt the resolution opposing the development of this detention center. Your leadership sends a strong message that Gilroy values the well-being and dignity of the residents in Gilroy. I oppose this proposed... because I work every day with children and families who are already experiencing trauma and hardship. A detention center would only create more fear, stress, and instability in our community rather than to provide support and healing. Gilroy is a diverse community and this facility would disproportionately impact people of color and immigrants and other families. Many residents may feel less safe in accessing our services, schools, and community resources. As a social work student and a community member, I believe that we should invest in programs that strengthen families and promote well-being, not systems that cause harm and division. I urge you to continue standing with our community and reject this proposal. Thank you very much.

Gabriel, followed by Ron and then Lillian. Gabriel Uribe.

Good evening, City Council. My name is Gabriel Uribe, and I'm a local educator. Building an ICE processing detention center facility would be detrimental to the city of Gilroy, Bay Area, Central Coast, and the entire communities of California. These are modern-day concentration camps that affect the most marginalized and working-class communities. As local elected officials, it is your obligation to support the safety, prosperity, and autonomy of all people, especially undocumented people who are the backbone of this country. There would be no Gilroy and no United States of America without indigenous people and immigrants. The people who are being targeted are people of color, and this fascist government uses ICE in the same way that slave catchers would hunt black, brown, and any person that were not white. That is why I'm standing here today speaking on behalf of our communities that don't have the privilege of voicing their demand, and it is important that you fulfill your obligation as city council members to do everything in your power to make sure that ICE processing detention center is not created in any of our communities. It is imperative that people are not detained, kidnapped by federal agents for being undocumented, which is a civil offense. A civil offense is not a...

Thank you so much. Your one minute is up. Thank you very much. And don't be afraid, as I said before, any type of public comment you have, you can submit. We will all get it, as will the community.

I believe it's my turn, Mayor.

Yes.

Good evening, Mayor, Council, and community. I strongly oppose this proposition against having an ICE facility here in Gilroy or in our sphere of influence. Bambi Larson was killed by an illegal immigrant, stabbed multiple times. She was... He was... in jail on the ice hold in Santa Clara County, refused to honor the ice hold. He got out and he stabbed her and killed her multiple times, a torturous murder. Just Thursday, this last Thursday, a grandmother, her daughter, a mother, was killed along with their two-week-old baby and a four-month child in the house that is in the hospital suffering, killed by an illegal immigrant who ICE wouldn't...

Thank you very much, Ron. You're one minute up. Thank you very much.

Lillian, followed by Batman of San Jose and Bill O'Connor.

Lillian? Lillian? Batman?

Lillian Silva?

I saw Batman leave. Oh, there he is. Batman, you're up.

We all know why we're here. We know that ICE has multiple planned detention centers for California, specifically targeting the Bay Area, including Gilroy. It is your responsibility as the potential host city for one of these centers to do everything you can to stop it. Not only do you need to put in place a rejection of the very idea of such a monstrous building being built in your vicinity. You must also refuse to cooperate in any instance. Fire police officers who cooperate. Bar ICE from using city property. Whatever measures need to be taken in order to protect the people that are in front of you, you must take them. Because ICE does not play fair. It's time to play dirty. Do whatever you have to.

Thank you, Batman. Bill.

Bill O'Connor. At the last council meeting, I urged the council and the city to oppose, to take a stance opposing the ICE facility. I was pleased to see that action was taken so quickly. I KNOW THE DOCUMENT READS REALLY WELL. I REALLY LIKE THAT. I KNOW THERE'S LITTLE YOU CAN DO LEGALLY BECAUSE IT'S IN THE COUNTY AND THE STATE, BUT THANKS FOR DOING THAT. I SUPPORT YOU. THANK YOU, BILL.

LISA?

IS LISA THE LAST? YES. OKAY.

LILLIAN?

LILLIAN. YEAH. SORRY ABOUT THAT, LISA. NO, DON'T GO AWAY. Lillian will go and then Lisa.

She can stand with me too. All right, sorry, I'll be really fast. Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Lillian Silva, Program Manager for South County with the Youth Alliance. I'm here to speak upon Item 7.6, the Old Poet Remendation. Since 2022, we at the Youth Alliance have been leading fentanyl awareness efforts in our community long before this crisis became a headline. Our work has focused on protecting youth and families through education, prevention, honest conversation. Over the past several years, we have organized and delivered presentations, hosted a community, town hall, Lead tabling events have created with centered learning spaces that teach in real dangers of fentanyl in a way that is trauma-informed and respectful. Our goal has always been simple, to make sure the young people and their families have access to clear, accurate, safe, life-saving information. With your support, Youth Alliance can lead a comprehensive youth-centered prevention strategy rooted in cultural relevance, leadership development, and healing-informed practices for youth and families. Each activity will primarily focus on substance use intervention, naloxone training, education, resource patching, Youth Alliance will coordinate and implement activities across our core categories, culturally relevant leadership, preventing group, healing circles, peer-led support spaces, workshops, harm reduction, youth resilience prevention campaign with Youth Alliance.

Thank you. Good job. Wow. Very good. Okay, Lisa.

Okay. My name is Lisa, and I am the mother of Fernando Sanchez, who died from fentanyl poisoning in 2020. So I was just here to support Lillian and the funds that were given to Gilroy to support education on opioid use. And I've attended many of Lillian's trainings, and every year she invites me and other parents back to give fentanyl education. So I was just in support of her to see about those. I know that there was a big amount of funds given to Gilroy, and just any organizations that want to fight this opioid use in Gilroy should be all hands on deck. So I was just here to support her.

Thank you. Thank you, Lisa. Thank you very much.

I have no further speakers. Okay. Thank you very much.

All right, so back to council. Are there questions or comments? Or I'm looking for a motion to approve the consent calendar. Go ahead, Council Member Ramirez. I would like to make a motion to approve the consent calendar.

A second.

OK, I have a motion by Councilmember Ramirez and a second by Councilmember Klein to approve the consent calendar item 7.1 through 7.9. Roll call, please.

Councilmember Bracco? Yes. Councilmember Klein? Yes. Councilmember Fugazi? Yes. Councilmember Hilton? Yes. Councilmember Marks? Yes. Councilmember Ramirez? Yes. Mayor Bozo?

Yes. Motion passes 7-0. Thank you, everybody. Thank you, everybody, for the decorum that you showed throughout this part of the meeting. Appreciate it very much. All right, let's move along to item, so remember what I said earlier, we are 8.1. Okay, we're going to take a 10-minute break. Sorry, kids.

Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Okay. Thank you. Thank you. so so Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. Hey, guys. What's up? This is going to go until like 9.30. Thank you. Thank you. Thank you. I've been outside

Hey, Charlie.

Dion, can you clear up the room for me? Yes. Are you ready for District 6? No. Come on! See? I'm tired.

My daughter bought it. Oh, okay.

Okay. Good. Only. Perfect.

Perfect. I don't know, it's ideal to... I don't know.

I don't know. I don't know. I don't know. Thank you very much. Thank you. Thank you. How are you doing? Nice to see you again. Yeah, I understand. It's alright, we'll indulge when we can. Thank you.

Let's resume the meeting please Councilmember Klein have a seat Council Member Ramirez, missing in action. I'm not an owl. Oh, hi. Okay. Thank you, everybody. Okay, so what I was about to say earlier before I called for a break is that we are going to move on to item... Number, sorry, 10.1. So 10.1, consider reopening Wayland and Hanna parking lots at Los Animas Veteran Park. Staff report, please.

John. Thank you, Mayor, council members, community. Before you is a request for consideration of a trial reopening of the Wayland and or Hanna parking lots at Los Animas Veterans Park. In considering this, we ask that you look at the following questions, and those are here, which are, do you wish to consider reopening Wayland Park parking lot at Los Animas Park? If yes, are conditions attached to the reopening? Does the city council wish to consider reopening Hanna parking lot at Los Animas Park? And if yes, again, are there conditions attached to that? As a point of reference, on February 9th, the City Council considered a fair memo presented by Councilmember Marks. The memo sought support to reopen Wayland parking lot on a trial basis. As noted in the report, staff included the Hanna parking lot simply because it was closed at the same time and had many of the same issues. So I think there are community members here who are also very concerned about Hanna and would like a conversation regarding the status and where they stand with that. We were directed to come back at a later meeting, and that is tonight. Thank you. Staff has provided significant background in the staff report, which led to the original closure of the park, and I'm not going to reiterate that, but it is pretty extensive in going back to that. Also, the staff report was attached as well as... OTHER MATERIALS TO THE STAFF REPORT. KIND OF THE ALTERNATIVES LAID OUT IN THE REPORT WOULD BE TO OPEN THE WAYLAND PARKING LOT, OPEN HANNA PARKING LOT ONLY, OPEN BOTH LOTS AND OR ALTERNATIVE FOR LEAVE BOTH LOTS CLOSED IN THE ANALYSIS IN THE REPORT IN TERMS OF WHAT THE ISSUES ARE. I'LL WALK THROUGH THOSE VERY BRIEFLY. Wayland parking lot. This is what that looks like sign to the left come into the swing gate that was put in prior to closure and Then you come up into the park. There is the one security light there on the far right and then this is the basic condition in the Third to from the left of the of the pavement so workable Livable not great at some point in the in the pretty near future. You definitely want to Rehab that or reconstruct that but it's still functional The primary issue identified is basically the ADA, the space itself both has a cross slope issue and a running slope issue. So it's both sideways and forward and back and forth. The other concrete has a problem with the running slope. And there are some needs for the bridge itself to get you your path of travel compliant with ADA. And we've identified and laid out some of those issues there. And that would be required as part of reopening. This is the only thing we've identified that would be absolutely necessary for reopening the parking lot. Hanna parking lot looks much like this today the swing gates were installed again at the same time prior to the full closure of this parking lot this is standing from Hanna Street itself and and looking to basically the edge of Los Angeles Park where the swing gate is. This is the Hanna parking lot, the ADA space. This space needs new signage, new striping, a little bit of a refresh, but really very little to move forward with that. This is, to the right, is the accessible path of travel into the park. Again, compliant. It's been reviewed and looked at by staff, including the CITY'S ADA COORDINATOR. KIND OF A THIRD ISSUE THAT GOES ALONG WITH THIS, THE HANNAH STREET, IS THE ISSUE OF WHAT TO DO WITH THE REMAINING PIECE OF HANNAH BASICALLY EXTENDING TO THE PARK. AND THIS SORT OF IS LEFT IN THIS SCENARIO WITH THE SWING GATE AS KIND OF A NO MAN'S LAND. IT WAS RESTRICTED IN TERMS OF THE PARKING. YOU CAN SEE THE SIGNAGE THERE, 11 TO 6 A.M. There's still, you know, by reports from residents, activities occurring there and some issues and concerns. We did temporarily and have temporarily closed that point with these barricades, which is to the left. That was done. To to try to pilot and see what would happen if these this section was completely closed off for a period of time I think it has been from the neighborhood perspective successful other than we have heard from one resident who has raised concerns about the fact that this parking is limited and lost and is now being felt by other portions of of the neighborhood for on street parking and So the recommendation that I have received this report, consider community input, discuss and provide direction on whether to initiate reopening of Wayland parking lot and or Hanna parking lot at Los Animas Veterans Park. Thank you.

Okay, I'm going to start with questions from council. I don't see anybody on the board yet. Council member Fugazi has some questions.

So the ADA access outside the $30,000 that was up to $100,000, that would not have to be done if the parking lot was not reactivated?

The additional accessibility issues and path of travel issues are separate from this. They are actually related to the tennis court and they run from basically the spectator viewing area from the tennis court and needing to run to the bathroom, to the restrooms, the new restrooms that were put in for a path of travel. And that's separate and would not be subject to any, this project would not be subject to that.

It's likely we'll have to do that anyway at some point.

At some point you would definitely want to and need to do that per ADA and per just general accessibility issues.

And we received a lot of feedback on this obviously ourselves and we also had it through the Parks Commission. Did anybody do a tally of like for and against on this?

It was, the staff basically There was no one who spoke in favor at the Parks and Rec Commission toward reopening. It was the neighbors, and I think that's understandable from perspective. Thank you.

Council Member Marks.

John, I have a question for you. This is before your time here, but in 2019, Public Works was given a grant, and THEY WENT THROUGH THE PARK ALL AROUND THE TENNIS COURTS, BY THE HANDBALL COURTS, AND THEY WIDENED ALL OF THE WALKWAYS. SO I CAN'T IMAGINE HOW MUCH WIDER YOU WANT TO MAKE THOSE. BECAUSE A CAR, POLICE DRIVE ON THEM WHEN THEY'RE PATROLLING THE CAR, SO IT'S BRIGHT.

THROUGH THE MAYOR, COUNCILMEMBER, IT'S NOT ABOUT THE WIDTH. IT'S ABOUT A NUMBER OF THINGS, BUT PRIMARILY One, the surface itself, but more importantly, there are areas with 10, 11, 12% slope where you've got to access, and this is between Courts 5 and 6 and the main Courts 1 through 4. There's an area that you go down to the spectators, or the spectators, if you're going to the restroom, have to come up. And it's in very bad shape in terms of the actual surface, but more importantly, it's 10, 12% well above the threshold for the ramping. So there's multiple things that have to be done there. Also, there is an issue that there is not adequate ADA spectator space there. So that would require some work. And then we would also need to connect through into the restroom itself. So again, it's not about width. It's about many other things.

Okay, so I understand that. So basically, from what you're saying, even if these two parking lots did not get opened, access would come in from Mantelli's side, and they would experience all the same sloping and the unfinished surfaces. Am I correct?

If I can, through the mayor. Los Animas Park and many of our facilities have a lot of need across the board. So if you think about the park, taking it completely away from the parking lots we're talking about, the other side, the parking lots on Mantelli are in rough shape. There's needs there, there's ADA needs there. There's ADA needs associated with a lot of things in this building as well. What we need to do is prioritize those to address them within our means, and that's what John's done on this one, is prioritize the parking lots that we're talking about as a priority to address for this particular discussion, acknowledging that there's other needs throughout the city that we need to put on the list for sure.

Okay. I do have another question. Just a quick one. Council Member Hilton, and then back to Council Member Fragatti. Okay.

Thanks. I just want to clarify, it's in the agenda packet, too. On March 24th, this was taken to the Parks and Recreation Commission, and by a 6-0 vote, they recommended City Council to keep the Hanna and Wayland Park parking lots at Las Animas Veterans Park closed pending further evaluation and community input.

Thanks. Council Member Fregatti.

So whether it's the Parks and Recreation Commission or Public Works, has anybody made a recommendation for these parking lots? If we do choose to keep them closed, should they be reclaimed as grass areas in the park? Are there safety issues if they're left as they continue to deteriorate and trip hazards and these kinds of things? What will happen if they are to remain closed?

That would certainly be a next step in the process. These were closed with no understanding of exactly when they would reopen. And I think at this point, definitive answers to where the council stands. I would suggest this. We are going through our parks master plan. And one of the things that we talked about with the Parks and Rec Commission is that we're in the process with an RFP for that plan. This would be a great time to evaluate and go through this process and look at and also take community input on sort of a re-envisioned Los Animas, including potentially the Hanna and the Wayland parking lots. So I would hedge against not making an immediate action to that point, allow that process to work through, allow the community input, and some of that community input beyond and extending beyond the immediate neighbors and the community itself. We also don't know exactly what the implications of pickleball are going to be, and I think there's some value in holding off making a decision in terms of the ultimate deliberation of that until pickleball plays out as well.

Thank you. Other questions? So I have Councilmember Klein.

Well, one of the items you had in here is on April 10th of 2023, It said that that city administrator met with representatives of the Georgia Tennis Club to discuss the Wayland Lane parking lot closure. Around that time of the closure, the city received complaints, and we know all about that. At that time, the city administrator offered to allow the GTC use of the lot during tournaments and other significant events, but otherwise determined that the health safety issues outweigh the convenience of those parking spaces. Have they made any requests to access for special events? Did you guys make any requests?

I'll answer that. It was offered, but the key was never given to us.

I have a question. So you mentioned that what we're considering is a trial basis.

Mm-hmm.

That was the request, yes. Thank you. So if this ended up getting passed to reopen the parking lots and based on the trial basis, you'd be coming back to us, possibly PD or yourself or some other staff members with updates about how the progress is going?

I think that would fall under what conditions would you agree as a council to reopen, and part of that would be a check-in at obvious reasonable points of time. to see how it's going.

Thank you. Council Member Ramirez.

So we had, from my understanding, correct me if I'm wrong, a while back we talked about the security company that was patrolling the parks in the evening, and we had some issues with them in terms of reporting and kind of doing what they were supposed to do. Has that improved?

Significantly improved.

Thank you.

Council Member Bracco.

John, how about if we did like a trial run with opening it up on weekends, you know, close at dusk. Would we have security to handle opening and closing the gates? and making sure there's nobody in there? And would our police department be able to patrol it now and then to make sure there's nobody loitering there and doing anything that they shouldn't be doing?

As noted in the staff report, we do not have necessarily the capacity to deal with the closure of these. It falls outside of the norm of our contract for services, which would then require additional services or modification to the contract with our security. And otherwise, that would be having to call staff in on the weekends for a two-hour overtime call-out.

You didn't check with the security company to see if they could do that? It's part of this.

I have no doubt that they can do it. The issue is cost and the current contract. But I believe it's just an issue of cost more than it is anything.

Then I have a question. What does a security company actually do at Los Animas Park if they don't lock up anything? I'm very confused. So as far as you know, what is the contract?

The security contract covers from 11 p.m. to 7 a.m. The issue we have is that if you want to close at dusk or a set time, any time before that point, that would require a separate call-out or modifying, expanding the hours of service for that contract.

And that might be a good option to modify? Because when they work between 11 and 7, what do they do for Los Animas Park? Do they drive through? Are they checking to see if people are camping there, loitering there? I don't know. Do you know what they do to take care of that park?

They walk the site. They make sure the restrooms are locked up. They are responsible for other lockups and just making sure that no one's camped out. say, in the restroom itself, that we have folks out of the parking lot where possible. The other two parking lots are not locked. They're not swing gates. So folks can park there, but they generally try to reduce those. They do walk about. They're required to check through various places just to make sure things are there. But they cover basically the four larger parks and a drive-by basically of parking. I think 13 or 14 other parks, not all 26, but about 14 of the parks they're going to see.

Councilmember Fugazi and then Councilmember Ramirez.

So I'm quite familiar with the prior security contract that came or tried to come before us numerous times. And one of the things in that contract was the clearing out of people in the parks. Is that current in the current contract now or was that taken out when it was decided to be done without council approval?

It's within the contract service.

So they clear out campers and other people who are in there, or do they contact police to do it for them?

They will contact police if they feel uncomfortable with it, but they basically are there, their presence. But again, they're covering a broad spectrum of park areas, and so You know, it's a time and place in which they're there. So we have an RFP out right now, request for proposals for Park Patrol, basically the security services. It was a one-on-one year contract. So there's scope. Those are all online and available for anybody to look at and deal with that.

So hypothetically, sorry, because this is going to be a long meeting. Hypothetically, if somebody... from the security team were to see cars that were in the parking lot when in one of those two parking lots, if hypothetically they were open, and it was now time 11 p.m. to close those lots up, what would be the process at that point?

Since we haven't had them operational, and I can't tell you definitively what that answer is, but the normal protocol would be to lock the gates, to inform the folks if you can find them that it's closed, lock the gates. Typically, you would have a phone number for the non-emergency PD call, and basically they would come and unlock them and let them out, or the vehicles would remain in place until the next morning when they reopened. That's typical protocol.

Last question, I promise. And it's not maybe for you, but it might be for Captain Powell and PD in general, which is do they have an opinion on their ability to be able to adequately police these lots, or do they feel themselves that it might be overburdening them given the way that they're staffed at this point? And he's right behind you.

I thought it was Batman.

As council knows, our staffing levels have not increased since 2020 when we first locked the parks. So by opening the parks, we will increase our calls for service. We will handle those calls as they come in based off the priority level. So do we have adequate staffing for it? It hasn't increased since then. So we will just handle the calls as they come in. There might be technology advances since 2020 that could help us out, like cameras, but that's something we can look into at a later point in time.

Council Member Ramirez?

So, John, you mentioned the four parks. So my understanding is we have Los Animas Park, San Ysidro Park, Miller Park, and Christmas Hill Park as community parks. and then the other 14 that you refer to are more neighborhood-type parks. Is that correct?

We throw in also Monterey.

Sports park. Sports park, sorry. So then all of these questions, for example, that Councilmember Fugazi are bringing up in terms of patrol and cars locked in, parking lots and this and that, they potentially can occur in all these different parks.

They can.

Okay. Vandalism or sleeping and checking all the bathrooms at all the different parks and making sure nobody's camping in any of these bathrooms as well.

That's part of what they do as well.

And so I'm just wondering if opening these two small parking lots is going to increase the significantly increase, and maybe this is for Captain Powell, significantly increase Issues of camping, issues of people locking themselves in the bathroom at night, all of those different things. Are you going to see a significant increase in that with opening these two parking lots?

I wish I can give you a definite answer, but we don't have the data. We don't have the statistical data to prove now versus five years ago or six years ago now, because we changed over to a new record management system. So it's not an apple to apples comparison. Will we see a significant increase? So in 2020, the reason why we closed these lots is because we were seeing an increase in activity, illegal activity in these two parking lots specifically, but that could have been COVID related. Okay. The only way to know for sure is if we open it up and try it. Okay.

And then the other question is for you probably as well. And forgive me because I'm having, you know, a brain pause. The laws have changed with the Oregon camping.

Grants pass.

Thank you. Grants pass. And now you have, as the department, you have more ability to move people along.

You are correct.

Okay. Thank you. That's it.

I think I'm going to move to public comment. So, Kim, let's go ahead. I know you have, it looks like you have seven or so, and we're going to do two minutes. Please. Thank you very much. And it looks like Carla is first, then Ed, and then Dennis. Did I do that correctly, Kim?

Yes.

Carla, Ed, and Dennis. There she is. Thank you.

Sorry, I'm not getting used to this hearing loss thing and these hearing aids and everything sounds kind of strange. So sorry about that. That's OK. Good evening, Mayor and Council. I'm here to ask you to reconsider the continued closure of the Wayland parking lot at Los Animas Park. And to think about Los Animas Park not as a problem to contain, but an asset to reclaim. This closure was presented originally to us as being temporary. Instead, it's effectively become permanent. In the meantime, that lot is sitting there unused, it's deteriorating, it's behind closed gates and signs, while regular park users have lost their access to a public space. This isn't really about convenience, though. When a city closes public facilities because of antisocial behavior, rather than addressing that behavior itself, it sends the wrong message. The public loses while the bad guys win. This is not how great parks or great cities are built. Gilroy already has a successful example of another approach. San Ysidro Park used to be known as PCP Haven. It had a reputation, and people avoided it. The city's invested in programming, in staff presence, and surveillance. The park has been reclaimed, and it's become a community asset. Los Angeles doesn't require that level of intervention, but the principle is the same. Positive use discourages negative use. The most effective way to push out unwanted activity is to increase legitimate activity in the park. Open the lot, add quality surveillance cameras, program the space, encourage recreation, create reasons for people to be there doing good things. The tennis community would be willing to work with the city, to partner with the city, to support activities that will help activate the park. Let's treat Los Angeles as something worth investing in, not something to lock up. Thank you.

Thank you.

Ed, followed by Dennis.

Perhaps you guys missed my request earlier.

They were outside.

Yeah, I know you were outside. But the decorum is that we're not clapping for items during public comment, because there's some reasonable people that might not really like this idea. So please do not clap. We'll wait to have the kids back, and we'll clap for them.

Ed, followed by Dennis, and then Joe.

I'm the backup speaker in case she ran out of time.

Yeah. Thank you.

Dennis, and then Joe, followed by Shannon.

Good evening, honorable mayor and council members. My name is Dennis Bulger. I'm a resident of Gilroy. I live on Arnold Drive near the Wayland lot. I'm here to express my support in keeping the lots closed. The biggest reason why I believe this should continue is just the public safety. I've lived in the neighborhood for 15 years. Before when the gates were open and since they've been locked, the positive impacts on the neighborhood and the park and the community have been amazing. And I've seen it all, like all the illicit and illegal activity that was outlined in the staff report, like I saw it. So number one is like public safety. You know, keeping the lots closed is not impeding anyone's entrance to the park. It's not keeping anyone out. People can still access it. But myself and my fellow residents, you know, believe it's a big public safety thing. Also, based on the staff report, I believe it should still be closed because of the ADA concerns. Also, city departments don't necessarily have the wherewithal to fix things right now and patrol and lock and unlock things. It's going to come to an additional cost of the city to look at the contract for security and redo that. Also, you know, there's 130 Gilroy residents on file on petition that are in favor of keeping this locked. I have them here. They were also emailed to you all this morning. I would say let the numbers speak for themselves. You know, we have 130 on record saying for the safety of all and the good of our community, keep the lots closed. Yeah, and I just want to say in closing, you know, it's I love Los Animas Park. I go there every day. I've seen the positive impacts, and I hope you choose public safety over opening the lots for convenient parking options. Thank you. Thank you, Dennis.

Joe?

Hello, everyone. I moved to Gilroy looking for community. I'm proud to say that I have found it here. I came from another state, didn't know anyone, and I've really found a home here. And I'm here today to talk about an issue that directly affects my community, my neighborhood, and my neighbors, the opening of Los Animas parking lots. We're talking about two small parking lots tucked away in single-family neighborhoods. Parking lots that are patrolled, that are THAT ARE UNDER PATROLLED AND A COMMON VENUE FOR GANG FIGHTS, DRUG DEALS, AND MY PERSONAL FAVORITE, ALCOHOL FUELED PARTIES THAT LAST WAY INTO THE MORNING HOURS. BY OPENING THESE PARKS, WE'LL DESTROY THE SAFETY OF OUR NEIGHBORHOOD. WE'LL GIVE AN EASY ACCESS TO CRIMINALS TO AN AREA TUCKED AWAY AND FORGOTTEN BY THE PUBLIC SAFETY DEPARTMENT, WHO WE KNOW ARE ALREADY UNDERSTAFFED AND STRETCHED EXTREMELY THIN. This is a serious concern for everyone who lives in my neighborhood. It may be a slight inconvenience for people using the facilities for a few hours, but the people who live in these neighborhoods, it presents a danger to the families and to the children that use our park. I ask that you keep these parking lots closed and safe. I also suggest that you look into transitioning these parking lots into usable space for the community. I think that that'd be much more beneficial for everyone involved and all the park users. So I'd like to say thank you and have a nice afternoon. Thank you.

Shannon, followed by Skip.

Good evening.

I am Shannon Glasper. I am a homeowner at Wayland Court. So our house faces the park. This is not a matter of ADA compliance. This is not a matter solely of ADA compliance. It's about convenience versus burden. And the burden is on the families that live in the houses that have to witness the illicit behavior that happens. We are talking about two or three times a week that tennis players, users of the park come And they're inconvenienced, not eliminated. Their parking spaces are available. There's other parking areas. We're not talking about taking access away from the park. But I want you guys, I challenge you all to think about the burden we have versus the slight inconvenience people have to visiting the park. They get a chance to come play tennis and go home and not be left with the illicit behavior that we have longstanding way after they leave from their tournaments, from their tennis matches, from baseball in the park. We live there. I have no intention on moving. It's my home. I have great equity in my home, and I'm staying. So my challenge to you is to consider what outweighs the most, your inconvenience for a day, for a few hours, or my inconvenience as a homeowner who has to live here and deal with what my neighbor Joe spoke about. the illicit behavior. My neighbor's kids who find hypodermic needles in their yard because they toss it over the fence from the cars that they're sleeping in. If there was an opportunity for the police to have staff and money to be able to patrol, it probably would not be an issue. I also ask that you, when you're making this consideration, go to the data that you have, take a look at how many police calls were made prior to the close the park being closed to what it is today. I'm pretty sure that data is available, maybe not at the extent that you're hoping for, but it's there. So take our testimony as well as the data to help you make that informed decision. Thank you.

Thank you.

Skip, followed by Jackson, and then Ron.

Good evening, Council.

Thank you for letting us have a speak. My name is Skip Bloom, and I also live on Wayland Court, and I'm also burdened by the activity that happens in that parking lot. The Wayland Lane parking lot at Las Animas Park was closed a couple years ago because it was used as a meeting and hangout spot for teenagers and young adults, which is what the park is for, but not the parking lot. It was the partying, the loud noise, and the nighttime get-togethers that made the park more of an annoyance than an asset. I love the park. I feel it should be open to everybody. But the rudeness and lack of consideration by so many people who use the Wayland Lane parking lot as a hangout, a place to play their music as loud as they wanted, a place to drink alcohol and do drugs without any consideration of the families living or playing nearby. The City Council voted to lock the gate to the parking lot for some very specific reasons. Noise, trash, camping, and the quality of life for the neighborhood. Let me ask you, what has changed? What has been done to change, improve, or eliminate our concerns? Nothing. Nothing has changed. Nothing is going to change. It's still the same park with the same problems. Having a Gilroy police officer drive through the parking lot once or twice a day or night is not going to change the negative aspect that this parking lot brings to the neighborhood. Since the parking lot was closed a few years ago, the quality of our lives have improved for our neighborhood. No more loud music, large groups of cars and people congregating playing loud music, fighting, partying. Our neighborhood is a nicer, quieter, and safer place to live. It's been a substantial and significant difference. The burden of the open parking lot should not be on the neighborhood. Please consider the neighbors in the neighborhood when making this decision.

Thank you.

Thank you, Skip.

Jackson, followed by Ron and Araceli.

Good afternoon. So just a couple minutes ago, I decided I wanted to talk about this. So if I'm not fully prepared for this, I apologize. I want to start off with a personal anecdote about life before we closed the parking lots. Before we closed the parking lots, nightly, I would have to walk the dogs. It would often have to be a quick sprint there and back, trying to just get my dogs to pee quickly due to the lack of safety that I would have when I was in the parking lot. I understand that some people may want to have these parking lots open, but it's not a need, especially when you compare it to the lack of safety that many people in the area have. Shannon was talking about the kids who had to see needles, or had to find needles. They live right next to the parking lot. There's a singular gate with very wide areas that people can throw things through or anything. It's a large safety hazard for me, my family, and everyone else in the area, just due to somebody wanting to play tennis in the area sometimes. This isn't a real problem that we need to open the gates. It's a problem of keeping people safe. Thank you.

Thank you. Ron is next.

Hello, Mayor, community. Carla, doesn't she have beautiful eyes? Those are beautiful blue eyes, aren't they? I liked what she had to say, that, you know, I'm listening to both sides, and I believe that there's a happy medium. We can mitigate both their issues. We need parking, but we also need... figure out how to deal with the issues that these people have to suffer. Obviously, that's going to be an issue of the police. So we'll have to deal with that. But I think we should open it up and do what it takes and figure out how to make these people's livelihood, quality of life good. Thank you.

Thank you, Ron.

Araceli, followed by Alicia.

Good evening, Mayor, City Council members. My name is Araceli Vaquera, and I am here today to advocate for the ongoing safety of Las Animas Veterans Park and its surrounding areas. I have provided you all via email with the history of what led to the closures of the parking lots, as well as with the petition with the signatures of Gilroy residents advocating for the continued closure of the parking lots. the city council members were to move forward with the vote to reopen the parking lots, then I trust, I trust as a resident and as a mother, that you as city servants will ensure the safety of every resident who frequents and or lives in the surrounding areas. I trust you will also consider the park hours, currently 6 a.m. to 11 p.m., the increased noise levels, the traffic throughout the surrounding neighborhood, and other safety concerns. I also trust you will do so considering the fiscal impact this will have on the city budget. As a resident who lives on the corner of Hannah Street and Arnold Drive, my other request for you today is for the gate located in that specific area to be moved out approximately 40 feet closer to the corner but allowing enough space for city vehicles to park and other vehicles if needed without blocking the intersection moving the gate out towards the street will discourage the congregation of cars and people in the dark cul-de-sac I sent you the picture there's absolutely no lighting in the Hanna parking lot and right outside Appreciate your time and again, I trust you will keep the safety of the residents in mind when you submit your vote tonight Thank you.

Thank you Alicia Hello good evening mayor and council members I just wanted to come speak on this item in regards to a couple things the safety of of the community members that live around the park. Um, as a reminder, you all represent every citizen in Gilroy. We have not redistrict yet. So every one of you represent each citizen that lives in this community. And so the safety and wellbeing of the citizens that live around this park that have to lay their heads at night in their houses and their homes, I just really want you to consider their safety and the fact that our captain has stated that we just don't have the capacity safety wise. to patrol the park. And by the public works director's definition of what the scope of our security company, it really didn't sound like the security company is doing much or keeping log of incidents that are happening at this park. So that's the safety aspect that I'd like you all to consider. And I've seen it firsthand. One of my son's best friends lives close to the park and dropping him off or picking him up. I've seen the activity firsthand of drunk drivers driving, hitting the barricades, and it's unsafe. And I think until we can address the root cause of these issues, I'd like to see those gates stay closed. I've also, the ADA issues, you know, if we're not in compliance and something does happen there, the city's going to be held liable for those. And ADA lawsuits, you know, it's a big deal. So I'd like to see us hold off, what's the rush, wait until the recreation assessment's complete, and then take a look at this item again. Thank you.

I have no further speakers.

Thank you very much. I'm going to go first to Council Member Hilton.

Thank you. So thank you all for coming out and speaking tonight and for that petition that you submitted as well. I agree with the Parks and Recreation Commission recommendation. I watched that meeting and keeping the lots closed. I think that depending on what happens tonight, this group needs to play a role in the Parks Master Plan that's coming up. I know you all are active in the Parks and Rec Commission and make sure that you show up and play a real role in that. They're going to be outside the council chambers trying to seek feedback for that as well. I do agree with what the public works director said that waiting for the pickleball activation, we need to be able to see that. I would not like to see us move to a direction of repurposing these parking lots for something else because there may be a good use for it. As we all know, sometimes, you know, GOOD POSITIVE ACTIVATIONS LIKE THAT CAN BRING GOOD TRAFFIC AND KEEP THE BAD TRAFFIC OUT. AND THEN, YOU KNOW, I AGREE WITH WHAT MANY OF THE PEOPLE SAID, THAT THIS IS NOT PREVENTING ANYBODY TO ACCESS THE PARK. SO I WOULD JUST WANT TO PUT A HEAVY EMPHASIS TO STAFF THAT WE ALLOW FOR TENNIS TOURNAMENTS, EVENT PERMITS, AS WE DO WITH OTHER PARKS, IF THEY NEED THE SPACE, TO OPEN UP THAT SPACE DURING THAT TIME. THANK YOU.

So first of all, this is obviously a two-sided issue. And I completely understand those in the neighborhood having an improved experience. Clearly, not having people drive to the park just to begin with, as you said, decreased traffic, is going to be an improved experience. So I can understand how it's definitely gotten better. one particular person said you know what changed what's going to change now i don't know exactly if anything will change in the outcome but i do know that we do have a change in the city we have a different set of electives we have a different city administrator we have a new police chief And I believe Carla was the one who way more succinctly than I could say it Said it the best way I could if I could which is This is a city asset that was set up a certain way where many people moved into the community knowing that this particular parking lot was there. And if there is not the activities that you're talking about, meaning the illegal activities, the traffic or the additional use of those parking lots should not play into it. I think that, you know, If we had six months to take a look at this and see what exactly would happen in the current environment and we get that same kind of activity again, I'm all about closing them down and ultimately finding out if this is something that just needs to be taken out permanently and it's not an asset. But as long as something is an asset for the city to look at, the idea that we're going to Because we can't ensure safety there or what have you, just shut that whole thing down rather than try to figure out how we can solve that problem is not the answer for me. And likewise, if we are going to shut down one or the other or open one or the other, I think that they both come together. It's not one or the other. It definitely is something that should get looked at when we have this master plan looked at. But, you know, for me at this point, I'd like to give the current administration – the current police chief, the new directions, all of what he over there is hearing from all of you in the community, a chance to say, hey, I got some other ideas. Maybe we can put something in there like cameras. Maybe we can really enforce things different. Maybe COVID made this a lot worse in those last couple of years than it will be with those changes. So that's pretty much where I stand on this one.

Thank you. Council Member Ramirez.

I'm going to take it a step further than Fugazi and Carla. Again, great job. A couple of things. In addition to the points that Council Member Fugazi made in terms of new leadership all around, we are a council that has placed economic development as a priority. We are also a council that WORKS TOGETHER TO FIND SOLUTIONS. WE'RE A SOLUTIONS-BASED COUNCIL. AND, YOU KNOW, WHEN THIS CAME ON TO THE AGENDA, I TOOK MY GRANDSON OUT TO LAS ANAMAS PARK AND I THOUGHT, MAN, I MISS THIS. MY KIDS USED TO GO TO PARK AND REC PROGRAMS WHEN THEY WERE LITTLE OUT THERE. AND WALKING AROUND IN THAT PARK, IT'S, IN MY OPINION, THE MOST BEAUTIFUL PARK THAT WE HAVE IN GILROY. IT IS TRULY AN ASSET. AND I THINK INVESTING IN THAT ASSET TO MAKE IT AN EVEN BETTER ASSET IS SOMETHING THAT WE CAN ADD TO, YOU KNOW, ONE OF THE SHINING AREAS THAT WE HAVE THAT THE CITY HAS TO OFFER. AND IT TIES INTO THE ECONOMIC DEVELOPMENT, BUT IT ALSO TIES INTO I WOULD RATHER SEE A BUNCH MORE PEOPLE OUT THERE ENJOYING THIS PARK. IT IS A BEAUTIFUL PARK. And I am not opposed if, for whatever reason, we're short-staffed on public safety, that we cannot address the concerns brought forth, shut it back down. I am not opposed to that. But I think that it is an asset that I would love to see some tree trimming and a little bit of money put into it to make it look appealing and Bring the right people there to enjoy it.

That's my thought.

Councilmember Klein.

Yeah, I tend to agree with what Councilmember Hilton talked about. We're not at a point right now of making a decision tonight to open these two parking lots up again. TALK ABOUT THE PARKS AND REC COMMITTEE, THEY RECOMMENDED NOT OPENING IT. I LINE UP WITH THAT AT THIS MOMENT. YES, WE DO HAVE A NEW CITY ADMINISTRATOR. YES, WE DO HAVE A NEW POLICE CHIEF. IT'S GOING TO TAKE TIME FOR THEM TO ACCLIMATE THEMSELVES AND TO LOOK AT THE ISSUES WITH THIS, BOTH FOR THE COMMUNITY'S INTEREST ON BOTH SIDES OF THIS MATTER. SO I'M NOT COMFORTABLE DOING THAT AT THIS TIME, AND I DON'T FEEL LIKE WE HAVE TO DO THAT AT THIS TIME. Gilroy Tennis Club, tap in with the city and see if you can have that open for specific events. Again, that's something that you'd have to work out with the city administrator and with staff on that issue. That's where I kind of fall on this.

Thank you. Council Member Marks.

I cannot argue with any of the residents over what happened. During COVID, it was a mess over there, and the tennis club knew that. Um, back in the early two thousands, we had a serious problem in that parking lot, but the city administrator at that time and the chief of police at that time got together and they cleared that problem up in three weeks. Their presence was there all the time. They were arresting people left and right. The message went out saying, if you're going to have unruly behavior, We're going to arrest you and make your life really miserable. And it worked. And then COVID came along and everything fell apart because we did not have people here that did their jobs. I'm going to reiterate what my two comrades up here have said. We have a new city administrator. We have a new chief of police. And we would really like to see what they can do to help bring things back to order in the park. The bad-behaving person should never win, because if that's how we run our city, we're not going to have anything here. We have to send a message out. And I personally, I would like to see those two parks opened up, or parking lots opened up. But personally, I would want to hear from you immediately if there were issues going on. You call me, you get in touch with me, you email me, because we do not want to tolerate any of this bad behavior. We have to send a message that our citizens have a right to go and enjoy everything in this city. Our residents should enjoy where they live and the peacefulness. Those homes were built before some of you had moved in, and those residents did not have to suffer from some of this bad behavior. It fell apart. five years ago. And it's been a long time in coming back. So I would definitely love to see it as a trial basis. And then when you say trial, I'm not talking six months. I'm saying maybe two or three months. Let's see what happens. And let's do this on a month-to-month. And if nothing improves, first of all, I would hope there would be a lot of arrest over there and send a message to the people that are causing the problems. But definitely, we would want to help you out as citizens.

Council Member Bracco.

I came in tonight thinking the parking lot should be open. But I'm not willing to spend any money on fixing these parking lots because we don't have the money to spend. And it's going to take, they need to be totally redone. then you throw in the ada stuff and we're going to be spending a lot of money and i don't believe that our city is out of place that it has really changed since we closed them i remember the pictures that you sent us over and over again the phone calls from you and that was before covid wasn't it no Yeah, so I don't blame the problems on COVID. And the only, I would like to see it opened You know, just during the day, on the weekends. That's it. When the park's being used more and the Little League and soccer and everything's going on, I think that's when we would need a little more parking. And that's the only way I would approve this. Thank you.

Okay, I'll have some comments here, and then I'm going to start asking for some action on this. One thing that comes to mind is about a year ago, we had a group of folks that came in here and that were very, very, very concerned about when we removed the 6th and Prince Valley Island that had been in Gilroy for 40 years. And everyone that came in was absolutely positive that their property values were going to go down and that traffic was going to increase in their neighborhood and there was going to be problems by removing that. And since that we removed that island, here at the city we've never heard from anybody in that neighborhood because those problems didn't happen. Because the city made some changes to make sure that they didn't happen. So not only did they take out the island, but they posted some speed limit signs. They put the speed limit monitor out there, the trailer, to remind the public that as you come through this neighborhood that you have to obey the laws. And so I'm going into this conversation with that lens, is that it's very difficult for me to see, like some of my other council members here said, that we have a public asset and that we are allowing it to be closed based on the bad behavior of a few people. I'M ALSO HEARING AND AGREEING WITH FOLKS IS THAT JUST LIKE WHEN WE MOVED THIS ISLAND, THE CITY HAS TO DO WHATEVER IT NEEDS TO DO TO MAKE SURE THAT THESE PUBLIC PARKING SPACES DO NOT BECOME A PROBLEM. AND IF THEY DO, THEN WE WILL ASK FOR UPDATES AND WE WILL MAKE A CHANGE SO THAT THESE DO NOT BECOME A PROBLEM. SO THAT'S WHERE I STAND ON THIS. SO IT SOUNDS LIKE HERE WE HAVE A PRETTY DIVIDED COUNCIL. SO I'M GOING TO TURN IT OVER TO COUNCIL MEMBER MARKS.

TO ENTERTAIN A MOTION?

HOLD ON ONE SECOND. SORRY, SINCE HE HAS A QUICK COMMENT.

IT'S A QUICK QUESTION FOR STAFF BECAUSE IT WILL COME INTO THE MOTION I MIGHT MAKE IF I CAN. SURE. OPENING AND CLOSING AT DUSK AND DAWN, RIGHT, IS THAT NOT SOMETHING THAT STAFF CAN DO BECAUSE IT'S STILL NEAR STAFF HOURS OR IT WOULD HAVE TO BE DONE BY THE SECURITY COMPANY FOR THOSE TWO LOTS?

Yeah, our operations staff is not around at dusk, especially this time of year. It gets fairly late, so we would contract that work.

And do you have any idea on costs for that?

I'm going to say security for us is in the $50, $60 an hour, so we're probably looking at a four-hour charge for that, so a couple hundred bucks per day to make it happen. Okay, thank you.

FOR THE QUESTIONS, COMMENTS, RIGHT? SO WHAT I'M HEARING HERE, COUNCIL MEMBER MARKS, IS THAT THERE'S SOME SUPPORT, SOME NOT SUPPORT. AND I'M ALSO HEARING ABOUT SOME REDUCED HOURS. SO WHY DON'T YOU... ALL RIGHT.

I'M GOING TO TRY AND DO A MOTION HERE. ON A TRIAL BASIS, LET'S GO AHEAD AND REOPEN THE WAYLAND AND HANNA PARKING LOTS FOR FRIDAY, SATURDAY, AND SUNDAY FROM 7 o'clock in the morning to 9 o'clock at night on a trial basis. If there are any problems that cannot be rectified, then the lots be permanently closed.

Okay, so if I understand correctly, I have a motion on a trial basis to open the Hannah and Wayland Street parking lots on Friday, Saturday, Sunday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. Do I have a second?

Can I have specificity on what it means by trial basis and problems?

That doesn't mean the neighbors get to go out there and raise questions. HECK. TO GET THESE CLOSED. BUT ON A TRIAL BASIS. OKAY. PROBLEMS. YOU WANT TO KNOW WHAT PROBLEMS.

I MEAN, ARE WE GOING TO REEVALUATE HERE AT COUNCIL IN THREE MONTHS AND THEN MAKE A DECISION ON OPEN CLOSED PERMANENTLY OR HOW IS THIS, BECAUSE IF I HAVE THAT CLARITY THEN I CAN SUPPORT OR NOT SUPPORT.

WHY DON'T YOU ASK FOR IT TO COME BACK IN THREE MONTHS FROM STAFF.

YES. COMING BACK IN THREE MONTHS TO HEAR ABOUT STAFF, FROM STAFF.

OKAY. So if I hear it right, I have a motion on trial basis to open it on Friday, Saturday, Sunday from 7 a.m. to 9 p.m. with re-evaluation from staff back to council in three months. I'll second that. Okay, roll call, please.

Council Member Bracco?

No.

Council Member Klein?

No.

Council Member Fugazi?

Yes.

Council Member Hilton?

No.

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

Yes. Motion passes 4-3. Thank you very much, everybody. Thank you for all your public input. It was a great discussion. Okay, moving on. Okay, moving on to item number 8.2. Could you guys take the conversation into the foyer, please? Thank you. Thank you, everybody. Moving on to item number 8.2, introduction and first reading of an ordinance amending chapter 30, article 2 and 19. Thank you very much. I need my glasses. OF THE GILROY CITY CODE RELATING TO TOBACCO RETAILERS AND SMOKE SHOPS. TAKE IT AWAY, MICHAEL.

THANK YOU, MAYOR, AND GOOD EVENING, COUNCIL, GILROY RESIDENTS. MY NAME IS MICHAEL FASADE. I'M THE PLANNING MANAGER FOR THE CITY OF GILROY. I WANT TO REMIND THE COUNCIL THAT THIS IS A DISCUSSION ABOUT AMENDING THE ZONING CODE REGARDING SMOKE SHOPS AND TOBACCO RETAILERS. WE WON'T BE DISCUSSING TOBACCO RETAILER PERMITS. THAT WILL HAPPEN LATER ON THIS EVENING. JUST WANT TO MAKE SURE EVERYONE IS CLEAR. I'd love to give a little bit of a background. In recent years, the city has seen a significant rise in smoke shops in our commercial corridors. And in response to those community concerns, the city council directed staff to identify ways to control that growth. Staff recommended an urgency interim ordinance prohibiting new tobacco retailers, as allowed in other California cities, to protect health, welfare, and safety. City council directed staff's recommendation and approved four urgency ordinances between late 2025 EARLY 2026. BECAUSE THOSE ORDINANCES WERE TEMPORARY, COUNCIL DIRECTED STAFF TO PROPOSE A MORE PERMANENT REGULATION, WHICH BRINGS US TO TODAY'S DISCUSSION. SO STAFF CAME WITH A NUMBER OF PROPOSED CODE UPDATES. THE INITIAL, THE TWO UPDATES SPECIFICALLY WAS TO ADD A DEFINITION. PREVIOUSLY OR AS OF NOW, THE CITY DOES NOT HAVE A DEFINITION FOR THE WORD SMOKE SHOP OR THE USE ITSELF. And if the council does approve that smoke shop use, we would add that to our commercial use tables and regulate or restrict smoke shops in our commercial corridors as well as our other zoning districts. Let me see if I can explain it to you really fast. First, the definition of smoke shop, we followed criteria from a number of other different cities and found that this establishment structure and facility definition was most appropriate. IT PRETTY MUCH DEFINES WHAT SMOKE SHOTS ARE AND AT LEAST STAFF'S BELIEF. IT'S CONSISTENT WITH OTHER CITIES IN THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA. WE ALSO ADDED THAT USE INTO OUR COMMERCIAL TABLES. AND JUST FOR CLARIFICATION, IF PEOPLE WERE TO WONDER The way the city uses commercial tables is if you ever want to open up a business, you can ask the city, hey, I'd like to open up a restaurant. Where am I allowed to put it? This table shows where you can put that restaurant in a number of different commercial areas. You'll see the smoke shop would be added to that table, and it would not be allowed in any commercial zoning districts. Furthermore, the smoke shop... The smoke shop definition would have a footnote. If you follow that footnote down, it would also state that smoke shops are not allowed in any other commercial zoning districts as well as any other zoning districts, prohibiting it from industrial, residential, or any other mixed-use zoning districts. The proposal does meet as general plan consistency. It is consistent with many of the land use goals of the 2040 general plan. And the Planning Commission reviewed the proposed ordinance and approved it, recommending City Council adopt this ordinance. As with any zoning ordinance, we had to do public outreach. As of creating this presentation, I had one notice from a group in support of the ordinance. As of today, we had four other comments. We have two... We have two... COMMENTS, I HAVE IT HERE. TWO MEMBERS FROM THE CALIFORNIA FUELS AND CONVENIENCE ALLIANCE WERE ASKING FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE DEFINITION INCREASING THE SIZE OF PERCENTAGE FROM 15% TO 25% AND WE HAD ANOTHER COMMENT IN SUPPORT OF THE ORDINANCE. WITH THAT STATED, STAFF IS ASKING THE CITY COUNCIL TO MAKE, RECOMMEND THE FOLLOWING, DETERMINE THE PROPOSED ORDINANCE AS SATUTORILY EXEMPT FROM CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL EQUALITY ACT, A MOTION TO READ THE ORDINANCE BY TITLE ONLY AND WAIVE FURTHER READING OF THE ORDINANCE, AND INTRODUCE THE ORDINANCE AMENDING CHAPTER 30, ARTICLE 2, AND ARTICLE 19 OF THE GILROY CITY CODE. I'D BE HAPPY TO ANSWER ANY QUESTIONS. THANK YOU FOR YOUR TIME.

So would a high-end cigar shop near a high-end hotel be considered a smoke shop? Could you define high-end? Okay, so you're selling $25 cigars, you're selling cigarillos, you're selling pipe tobacco, and you're 600 square feet and 80% of it is used with humidors and cigars and nice little seats to sit in and whatnot.

Okay, well, thank you for that. Per the definition... It says any establishment, structure, facility, or stand that devotes more than 15% of either gross floor area or display area to retail sales, display marketing, bartering, trading, or exchange of any combination of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco paraphernalia, stating that cigars are a tobacco-related product. So if I had a 1,500-foot storefront,

Right? And I committed the front 225 square feet of it to all sorts of vaping and beautiful tobacco products and everything and put, I don't know, pinatas in the back.

It wouldn't qualify 224 sorry square feet under that 15% rule.

Yeah It would not be defined as a smoke shop, right? So we could still have Quote-unquote smoke shops right downtown and other places.

They just wouldn't exactly fit your definition of a smoke shop Well, it's your definition of the smoke shops the council's definition and if the council would like to see that definition be changed Well, you recommended it.

That's why I I mean, staff recommended this, so that's why it's not mine yet.

That was based on feedback that we gave them, correct? That's based on feedback we gave them. But your points are well taken.

Yeah. So part of the support that I saw in this was for the 2040 master plan, right, that you had a bunch of points such as there's – We want to do this because we don't want a lot of unregulated smoke shops in town, crazy signage, various things of this nature that's some of the supporting INFORMATION, RIGHT?

RIGHT, THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN. IN ORDER TO DO A ZONING AMENDMENT, STAFF HAS TO FIND POLICIES FROM THE 2040 GENERAL PLAN THAT ARE CONSISTENT WITH THE PROPOSED AMENDMENT. SO, YES.

SO THAT KIND OF IS LIKE THE SNAKE CHASING ITS OWN TAIL A LITTLE BIT. IF YOU DON'T REGULATE SMOKE SHOPS IN TOWN CORRECTLY, THEN THEY BECOME UNREGULATED SMOKE SHOPS AND THEN YOU'RE SAYING THAT'S WHY WE CAN'T HAVE SMOKE SHOPS BECAUSE THEY'RE UNREGULATED.

That was part of the reasoning that was in there.

That's a rhetorical question. No, but I'm saying that that is your reasoning, is that you guys can't regulate the smoke shops well, so there will be a lot of unregulated smoke shops, so therefore we shouldn't have smoke shops in town?

You have to ask a real question. That is a question. I know, but he's having – I think he sort of answered it.

So the answer could be yes. If I could interject a little bit and provide maybe a little bit of help. So I think what you're asking is have we adequately managed the smoke shops in the past? And I think that the clear answer is there's plenty of room for us to have done better in the past and we're committed to doing better in the future. The question before the council today is, one, do we provide a definition of smoke shop? Does that resonate with the council? Is that a good definition of smoke shop? Over and above any other question that we've asked. Following up with that, we asked, do we want to prohibit smoke shops in Gilroy by not including them in any land use? And that's that chart with the checkboxes that has no checkbox for smoke shops. The council could decide that they do indeed want to allow them, and they could choose one of these boxes that are on the screen right now and tell us that you would like to permit them in this particular area, and you would like us to regulate them appropriately. And we would take that direction and move forward with it.

OK. So signage was one of them that was on there, that garish signage is one of the reasons why. And so therefore we can't regulate garish signage on buildings, so smoke shops have garish signage, so therefore we don't want smoke shops in town. Neon signs are on smoke shops, and so we don't want smoke shops in town. So we're going to, anyway, sorry, it is rhetorical. You can cut me off for now, and I'll let you go on.

I'm going to see if I have any other questions before we get back to your rhetorical questions.

I have a question. So speaking of what he was talking about, are we allowed to regulate where the 15% can go inside the store?

Yes, you're allowed to regulate the percentage, the definition.

Not the percentage, the location of the percentage. Can we not allow the 15% smoke shop to be in the storefront? Can we regulate it that it not just not be prohibited in the front? Can we do that as a city?

So there's a lot of things that you could put in the code, whether they're easily enforceable or easy to manage. I mean, you run the risk of creating a bar that we can't keep up with. Thank you.

Further questions? All right, let's go to public comment.

Brian, followed by Maya and Ezra.

Oh, sorry, sorry. Instead of saying public comment, I should say open the public hearing. Thank you and thank you. Go ahead.

Sure, three minutes. Hi, good evening, Mayor and council members and city staff. My name is Brian Lamb, and I'm here on behalf of the California Fuels and Convenience Alliance. We represent independent gas station and convenience store operators throughout the state, including here in Gilroy. And I'm just here tonight to express some concerns with the definition as stated in the draft ordinance. As you've seen in the definition, it states that 15% of either gross floor space or display area, any business that devotes such to retail sale, display, marketing, bartering, trading, or exchange of any combination of tobacco, tobacco products, or tobacco paraphernalia, will be considered a smoke shop. And we just have some concerns, three mainly with this definition. And I would like to just open up by saying, you know, we support the, you know, you tackling the issue of smoke shops, because it is a proliferation of unregulated smoke shops that does harm the youth today. And we do support the, THE COUNCIL'S DIRECTION TO TAKE ACTION ON THE SUBJECT. AND THAT'S NOT UP FOR DEBATE HERE. IT'S JUST THE DEFINITION IS WHAT WE'RE TRYING TO GO AFTER HERE. FIRST ONE IS, AS WAS MENTIONED, 15% OF DISPLAY AREA IS ENOUGH TO EXEMPT MANY STORES, BUT UNFORTUNATELY IT DOES NOT it gets a little too close for comfort for some of them. So that is our first concern. Second one is the use of the either gross floor space. That kind of leaves ambiguity, kind of, you know, as was mentioned, it's like, do you... do you include back stock areas hallways like the gross floor space just leaves ambiguity there and kind of leaves subjectivity up to enforcement um and the third concern is while like i said um 20 20 25 will be enough to exempt um most convenience stores some retailers do opt for a kiosk style service station that is super small And that would be classified as a smoke shop under this ordinance. We're just asking that kiosk service stations be exempt from the ordinance because they're very obviously not smoke shops. They have other products as well. Tobacco is part of that inventory, but it is not the entire picture so our three asks are to increase the threshold to 20 to 25 percent and explicitly exclude any non-customer accessible areas such as back stock areas hallways offices the forecourt of stores exclude all of that from the calculation and lastly to exempt kiosk service stations thank you for your time and consideration and if you have any questions My email is on the speaker's card, and I'm happy to provide guidance and comment. Thank you. Thank you.

Maya, followed by Ezra, and then Jay.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Maya. I'm 13 years old and I attend Solarzano Middle School. I am speaking on agenda items 8.2 and 9.1 regarding tobacco retailers and smoke shops. I support stronger restrictions on flavored tobacco products because these products are specifically appealing to young people. In Santa Clara County, the average age that students first try tobacco products is just 14 years old, and more than 83% report that the first product they used was a vape. Flavors like candy, fruit, and mint make these products seem less harmful and make it easier for young people to start using them. The reality is that all tobacco products contain nicotine, which is highly addictive and can harm adolescent brain development. As a young person in this community, I ask you to support stronger protections that prevent the tobacco industry from attacking the next generation of users. Thank you.

Thank you.

Ezra and Jay.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Ezra. I'm 16 years old and I attend Christopher High. I'm speaking on agenda items 8.2 and 9.1 regarding tobacco retailers and smoke shops. I support these proposed changes because prevention matters. According to the CDC, nearly 9 out of 10 adults who smoke started before the age of 18. That means if you want to reduce tobacco use, we need to focus on predicting young people before the addiction begins. I support buffer zones around youth-sensitive areas and community centers because young people should not constantly be exposed to tobacco and vaping products where we spend our time. I believe these changes can help create a healthier future for youth in Go Ahead. Thank you for your time.

Thank you. J.R. followed by Leo. J.R. is no longer here, but Leo lives.

Good evening, Mayor. Good evening, council members. My name is Leo, and I'm a student here in Gilroy. I want to bring together the key facts and make a direct ask of this council. The evidence is clear. The average Santa Clara County student first tries tobacco at the age of 14. 83.8% start with the vape, 98%. 89.1% of youth tobacco use in California involves flavored products. Nicotine is toxic to developing brains. Tobacco is the leading cause of preventable death in this country, and smoking costs California over $43 billion a year. Gilroy has a real opportunity. The state's flavored tobacco law has exemptions for hookah lounges and cigar bars, but there are none in Gilroy. That means a local ban here would have zero loopholes. Add to that a strong smoke shop definition at 15% floor space, stronger than the state's 20% plus real buffer zones around schools plus in Fort... plus enforcement fees that actually fund inspections under item 9.1. Together, these measures in item 8.2 and 9.1 can keep Gilroy's youth protected. Please vote yes. We're counting on you. Thank you. Thank you.

I have no further speakers. All right.

Okay, I'll bring it back to council.

Councilmember Hilton? I would love to go back and forth with you a little bit, Councilmember Fugazi, because I know you wrote down what he talked about, and I don't think we got a letter, so I'm not very familiar with the language, but I'll start with this. I think that we've sent a clear message that we don't tolerate those illegal smoke shops anymore. This council has. We've been repeating and repeating it. We had someone who tried to come before us and say, you know, that... I won't even go into that, but we gave them a one-year suspension. That was huge. And, you know, the police department's funded now specifically for to do stings and buys and all those other terms that they have. So what I don't want to do with this that I am concerned right now is that, you know, we're going to start closing off businesses that we would want here, like Circle K got caught up in it. So I am willing to try to see if we can try this out for a certain period, maybe increase the percentages, include some of the stuff that he talks about, or whatever else you say. But I think we definitely need to walk out of here defining a smoke shop. I think that that would be helpful. So I'm interested to hear more of your feedback. And like I said, if we want to go up to 25% or 30%, I think that I think that we can do that and take a look at this. And if for some reason it doesn't work, we can always bring it back and change it.

So I think, you know, more – oh, sorry. Go ahead. I didn't see you.

Go ahead. I don't – consider, you know, the local mini-mart gas station that also sells cigarettes. I don't consider that a smoke shop. So I would like to see us define it better. Maybe go by gross sales, you know, a percentage of their sales THAT'S TOBACCO RELATED, MAYBE USE THAT AS A GUIDE, RATHER THAN SIZE, BECAUSE SOME OF THE GAS STATIONS HAVE A LITTLE CUBICLE OUT THERE THAT THE ATTENDANT SITS IN.

THANK YOU.

I THINK THIS IS A a common problem that happens in government, which is where you're trying to dig in and find a way and regulate things that already have a way to be regulated and the market regulates them for you. Okay? And so first and foremost, you have how many smoke shops did we have a year and a half ago? Eight, you said, I think? And we have how many now? One? Okay, so what changed in that time frame? I think it's because we started to take a look at what it is to run a smoke shop. And right now, when you look at the numbers for youth, I just actually looked it up again, and any number is a concern. But 1.2% currently use tobacco products. If you include vape, it's 7%. It's the lowest it's ever been. It's not the same thing it used to be as a public health issue. It needs to be addressed. There's no doubt that it's an issue. But if you regulate these businesses the way that they're supposed to, there's only going to be like 5,000 smokers in all of Gilroy. If all they're selling is tobacco products, it's going to be very hard for them to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would just like to say at this point, let's work on the next thing that we have, which is all of the TRP changes that we have, get them to work on it, punt this to another time, and see whether or not we still have a problem. That's what I would propose.

Additional comments?

You okay with that? This part? YEAH, I MEAN, THAT SOUNDS FINE TO ME. DOES MY QUESTION BACK TO STAFF IS, BESIDES GOING DOWN THE ROAD OF WHAT WE WERE GOING DOWN AND THE WANTING TO IDENTIFY THIS, RIGHT, TO PUT A NAME TO IT, YOU GUYS LOVE THAT, RIGHT? PLANNERS WANT THAT. WE DON'T NEED THAT TO OPERATE TODAY, RIGHT? Yeah.

Correct. It really is the council's decision as a whole. We don't need that.

So this does fall back on us. And I mean, I would love to come to a, I agree with what you said, and I would love to come to a place to at least acknowledge that if this does start getting out of hand again or whatever, that obviously we tackle it. Staff report's already done. A recommendation's already been provided. But that we move on. Yeah, let's basically table this.

If I may, through the chair, there was expediency from the council directly. We were proposing a year-long ordinance, and it got pushed to August 24th. So technically, as of today, we won't issue any tobacco retailer permits until August 24th. I just want to make sure that we're clear with that.

Yeah, that's fine. And we're already addressing that in the next item anyways, right? I mean, we're regulating the actual permit, not the land use part. That is correct. Yes. Thank you.

Is there any other that you can think of? Is there any other potential landmines, if you will, that you just, can you think of any? Or anybody else thinking of any?

It is, right?

Yeah, in my opinion, we have all this coverage already in our code, and the new changes that you have will get into this are really good and really cover many of the concerns I had for smoke shops. Of those eight that we had, we now have one. them being able to try to get back into business and transfer it to other people and all these other end arounds that they have, those are amazing additions to this. And it's just about keeping people honest to what they're supposed to follow. It's a real simple thing with a lot of this stuff, for me at least. Thank you.

I'd like to pose that same question to our city attorney about any challenges with tabling this.

No, tabling it means we're not going to consider it further. It is taken off the table, and presumably probably when it gets taken off the table, it will be because there are some changes thought of in the definition, in which case it will probably end up being in the ordinance anyway.

Okay.

So a motion to table it would not be harmful. It would be a...