Remarks by Terrence Fugazzi
277 remarks on the record, newest first · Page 3 of 12
- Play at 5:11:16
“That I understand, but as defined in the moratorium, it carves out still, right?”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:11:25
“Right, and what I'm saying is that the moratorium itself should not carve those out, and I would be in support of that.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:11:49
“Unless it's by sheriff's detention center or other detention centers that it that it specifically carves out.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:12:32
“So does that kind of... Well, there is another case and I'd have to look it up here in my notes where not making it broad enough does reduce the capacity for us to enforce that and to support that legally. ESPECIALLY IF THE MOST LIKELY OUTCOME OF THIS IS AN EXTENSION AND IT GOES ON FOR SOME PARTICULAR AMOUNT OF TIME, THAT WE WILL BE UNDER THIS MORATORIUM AND IF WE HAD TO TAKE ACTION, KNOWING THAT WE WERE NOT EXCLUSIVE TO ICE FACILITIES, WOULD CERTAINLY BE BETTER THAN NOT, UNLESS SOMEBODY HAS A DESIRE TO HAVE OTHER FACILITIES HERE IN GILROY.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:13:24
“That wasn't my point. That wasn't my point.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:13:30
“Yeah, but my point is that by broadening the scope of it, then you are much more supported legally than you would otherwise without any negative byproduct. I don't understand why we want to keep that in there at all. If somebody can explain that, then, I mean, it's just as easy as taking it out.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:13:55
“Sorry. Say it specifically. Again, to make the moratorium, not the resulting zoning after the moratorium, to be broad enough to include all types, not just the ones that are specified and with the carve-out. So in there, it carves out the sheriffs, for instance. It carves out other entities. And again, I could look up if I wanted to. When you are being discriminatory against certain organizations, which will be obvious in this, it gives it less support. And on the other side, what do we lose by taking it out? I don't understand. If anybody can make an argument why it should be left in there,…”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:14:54
“I'm not understanding what you're saying.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:15:12
“And you'll have a lot more time to figure out whether or not you want to support it with only having ICE being the target as opposed to having it be more broad.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:15:28
“It's not adding anything. It's actually taking it out.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:15:39
“I'm attempting to make this stronger, y'all.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:16:18
“Sorry, the more broad that you... The more broad that you make it, what are you restricting that we really want to keep in anyway? I mean, are we really anticipating, you know, having these things happen in the next 45 days? So do you want to strike H? Let's see, H is...”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:16:53
“So let's start with H, because it's obvious that those are law enforcement, which is what?”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:17:10
“I'd be fine with just H being struck. H, OK. I'd be fine with just section H struck. All right.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:36:00
“The follow-up to that is... Do you feel this enhances your ability to work with the community and help them feel safer?”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:36:35
“You think it will create enough situations to use more resource time to deal with it than doing it the method you're currently doing? Because of things like the misperception and I think some of the things that were brought up of activism and things of this nature.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:37:31
“It could have a negative perception on Gilroy PD if people believe that you can do something and you end up not doing anything, right?”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:43:37
“I would basically take what we've already done, put it into a newsletter and send it out to everybody and say this is the stance that we took.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:43:47
“Yeah, that's just a reiteration of what we did. There's no other editorial, there's no other anything other than I would just like to remind people that back in this meeting, we passed this and this is what it said.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:44:36
“Yeah, I'm not talking about a viewpoint. I'm talking about, I think it's entirely appropriate if your desire is to educate people that we have already addressed this situation, having a couple of lines saying we already addressed this situation and here it is, is about it, right? I don't know how to”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 5:46:03
“I understand you in principle. I would only be comfortable if I had read it. And I think that if you have, you already have what you need in order to hand over to anybody as to what the position this council took.”
City Council · Oct 5, 2026
- Play at 1:07:01
“I really like the map that you showed. That comes from a website, right? GilroyFireDepartment.org? Yes. Who manages that site? I do. So it is a city resource now?”
City Council · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 1:07:45
“So we have the public data. This is basically similar to citizen rims for the police kind of thing. Yes.”
City Council · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 1:07:54
“Okay. None of us, or I don't know if any of us knew about it. I didn't know about it, and I'm pretty much tied in. I didn't see it linked off of the website from Gilroy either.”
City Council · Sep 16, 2026
- Play at 1:08:39
“It is live. And it doesn't it's hard for me to know that it's actually the city. That's why I asked because there is no real indication on there. Is that an outside company that we had build that?”
City Council · Sep 16, 2026