The URL can be used to link to this page

2021-12-13 City Council Special Meeting Agenda Packet December 9, 2021 12:08 PM City Council Special Meeting Agenda Page1 MAYOR Marie Blankley COUNCIL MEMBERS Rebeca Armendariz Dion Bracco Zach Hilton Peter Leroe-Muñoz Carol Marques Fred Tovar CITY COUNCIL AGENDA CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL 7351 ROSANNA STREET GILROY, CA 95020 SPECIAL MEETING MONDAY, DECEMBER 13, 2021 6:00 P.M. CITY COUNCIL PACKET MATERIALS ARE AVAILABLE ONLINE AT www.cityofgilroy.org AGENDA CLOSING TIME IS 5:00 P.M. THE TUESDAY PRIOR TO THE MEETING Due to COVID-19, it is possible that the planned in-person meeting may have to change to a virtual meeting at any time and possibly on short notice. Please check the City of Gilroy website at http://gilroyca.iqm2.com/Citizens/default.aspx for any updates to meeting information. COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC WILL BE TAKEN ON AGENDA ITEMS BEFORE ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested, but not required, to complete a Speaker’s Card located at the entrances. Public testimony is subject to reasonable regulations, including but not limited to time r estrictions for each individual speaker. A minimum of 12 copies of materials should be provided to the City Clerk for distribution to the Council and Staff. Please limit your comments to 3 minutes. The amount of time allowed per speaker may vary at the Mayor’s discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda. Written comments on any agenda item may be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to the Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1 p.m. on the day of a Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and available for public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street prior to the meeting. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items received after the 1 p.m. deadline will be provided to the City Council as soon as practicable. In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, and Governors Order N -29-20, the City will make reasonable arrangements to ensure accessibility to this meeting. If you need special assistance to participate in this meeting, please contact the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the meeting at (408) 846-0204. If you challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure. City Council Special Meeting Agenda 12/13/2021 Page2 A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City. Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available with the agenda packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org subject to Staff’s ability to post the documents before the meeting. KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE GILROY OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE. Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public. Commissions, task forces, councils and other agencies of the City exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review. FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE, TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION STAFF AT (408) 846-0204 I. OPENING A. Call to Order 1. Pledge of Allegiance 2. Invocation 3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda 4. Roll Call B. Orders of the Day C. Employee Introductions II. CEREMONIAL ITEMS A. Proclamations, Awards and Presentations III. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL City Council Special Meeting Agenda 12/13/2021 Page3 PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council on matters within the Gilroy City Council’s jurisdiction but not on the agenda. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested to complete a Speaker’s Card located at th e entrances and handed to the City Clerk. Speakers are limited to 1 minute each. The amount of time allowed per speaker may vary at the Mayor’s discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda. The law does not permit Council action or extended discussion of any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Council action is requested, the Council may place the matter on a future agenda. Written comments to address the Council on matters not on this agenda may be e -mailed to the City Clerk’s Office at cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org or mailed to the Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1:00pm on the day of a Council meeting will be dis tributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and available for public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, prior to the meeting. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items received after the 1:00pm deadline will be provided to the City Council as soon as practicable. Written material provided by public members under this section of the agenda will be limited to 10 pages in hard copy. An unlimited amount of material may be provided electronically. 1. Annual Presentation from the Personnel Commission City Council Special Meeting Agenda 12/13/2021 Page4 IV. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS Council Member Bracco – Gilroy Sister Cities Association (alternate), Santa Clara Co. Library JPA, SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water Resources Committee, South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, South County Youth Task Force Policy Team, Street Naming Committee, URM Task Force Sub-committee Council Member Armendariz – ABAG (Alternate), CalTrain Policy Group, Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board (alternate), Historic Heritage Committee, Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board (Alternate), Street Naming Committee, VTA Committee for Tran sit Accessibility (Alternate) Council Member Marques - Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board, Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors, Historic Heritage Committee (Alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board (alternate), Santa Clara Valle y Habitat Agency Implementation Board (alternate), South County Regional Wastewater Authority (Alternate), URM Task Force Sub-Committee Council Member Hilton – Gilroy Economic Development Partnership, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board, South County United for Health, Visit Gilroy California Welcome Center Board Council Member Tovar – Economic Development Corporation Board, Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission, Santa Clara Co. Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Board, Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission, Santa Clara Co. Library JPA (alternate), SCVWD Water Commission (alternate), South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, Street Naming Committee, VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility Council Member Leroe-Muñoz - ABAG, CalTrain Policy Group (alternate), Cities Association of Santa Clara County Board of Directors (alternate), Economic Development Corporation Board, Gilroy Youth Task Force, SCVWD Water Commission, Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority Board, South County Youth Task Force Policy Team (alternate), VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA South County City Group, VTA Policy Advisory Committee Mayor Blankley - Cities Association of Santa Clara Co. Board of Directors, Gilroy Economic Development Partnership, Gilroy Sister Cities Association, Gilroy Youth Task Force (alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board, SCVWD Joint Council-SCRWA-Board Water Resources Committee, South County Regional Wastewater Authority Board, VTA Board of Directors Alternate, VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA Policy Advisory Committee, VTA South County City Group V. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE) All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to b e routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request is made by a member of the City Council or a member of the public. Any person desiring to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have that item removed from the consent calendar prior to the time the Council votes to approve. If removed, the item will be discussed in the order in which it appears. City Council Special Meeting Agenda 12/13/2021 Page5 1. Appointment of Peter Leroe-Munoz to Position of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022 2. Mayoral Appointments of Council Members to Serve in Regional Representative Seats and Seats on Local Boards and Committees VII. BIDS AND PROPOSALS VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS 1. Streamline Consolidation of the City's Boards and Commissions 1. Staff Report: Bryce Atkins, Senior Management Analyst 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Council: a) Adopt A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Consolidating the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee, Historic Heritage Committee, and the Street Naming Committee, and Placing Their Associated Board Functions Under the Authority of the Planning Commission. b) Motion to read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading. c) Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Consolidating the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Placing Their Associated Board Functions for Infrastructure Planning and Development Review Under the Authority of the Planning Commission, and the Associated Board Functions for Education and Encouragement Activities Under the Authority of the Parks and Recreation Commission. d) Direct all boards and commissions, except the Planning Commission, to meet on a quarterly basis, not to exceed quarterly meetings without compelling reasons as determined by the respective board chair and appointed staff liaison. X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS 1. Update by City Attorney on Recent Housing Legislation (Including SB9) Presentation: Andrew L. Faber, Esq., City Attorney 2. Gilroy Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards Policy City Council Special Meeting Agenda 12/13/2021 Page6 1. Staff Report: Cindy McCormick, Senior Planner 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Staff recommends that the City Council: a) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy adopting the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy; and b) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy adopting the Gilroy SB9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy 3. 1st Quarter Update on the City's Departmental and Legislative Work Plan 1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator 2. Public Comment 3. Possible Action: Council receive the report. XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS 1. Update on Sidewalk Assessment Project 2. Update on Illegal Activity at Unhoused Encampments 3. Presentation of 2021 City Accomplishments XII. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS XIII. CLOSED SESSION ADJOURNMENT MEETING DATES FUTURE MEETING DATES JANUARY 2022 10* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. 24* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. FEBRUARY 2022 7* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. 15* Special Meeting - Council Retreat - 6:00 p.m. 28* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. MARCH 2022 7* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. 21* Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m. * meeting is webstreamed and televised City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Appointment of Peter Leroe-Munoz to Position of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022 Meeting Date: December 13, 2021 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: City Council Submitted By: Marie Blankley Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips LeeAnn McPhillips Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Develop a Financially Resilient Organization ☐ Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services ☐ Promote Economic Development Activities ☐ Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All ☐ Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Receive report. RECOMMENDATION Appointment of Council Member Peter Leroe -Munoz to the position of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS Section 502 of the Charter is entitled “Mayor Pro Tempore,” and describes the following: 6.1 Packet Pg. 7 “At the first meeting of the Council following the election or appointment of a member to the Council, the Council shall elect one of its members as Mayor Pro Tempore who shall act as Mayor during the absence or inability of the Mayor to act. In the case of the temporary absence or disability of both the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tempore, the Council shall elect one of its members to act as Mayor Pro Tempore.” The role of the Mayor Pro Tempore is to serve in a leadership role in the absence of the Mayor. For example, if the Mayor were to be ill on the evening of a Council meeting, the Mayor Pro Tempore would lead and run the meeting. In 2018, then Mayor Roland Velasco, with the assistance of the City Attorney’s Office, researched the Mayor Pro Tempore selection process. It was determined, and reported in the 2018 staff report, that the Council has authority to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore when it desires to do so, and that the Council can determine the length of time the Mayor Pro Tempore will serve in that capacity. It was also determined, if the Council decides to institute a form of rotation for the position, that is allowable under the Charter. As stated above, the only Charter restriction is the requirement to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore following the election or appointment of a new Council Member. A copy of the 2018 staff report is attached for reference. Therefore, at this time, Mayor Blankley is recommending that Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz be selected to serve as the Mayor Pro Tempore for calendar year 2022. Attachments: 1. 2018 Staff Report re Mayor Pro Tempore Selection Process 6.1 Packet Pg. 8 City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Selection of Mayor Pro Tempore Meeting Date: February 5, 2018 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: City Council Submitted By: Roland Velasco Prepared By: Roland Velasco Andy Faber Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Develop a Financially Resilient Organization ☐ Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services ☐ Promote Economic Development Activities ☐ Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All ☐ Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Appointment of Mayor Pro Tempore. REASON FOR RECOMMENDATION The City Charter has outlined the requirement to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore following the “election or appointment of a member to the Council.” Following the recent appointment of Marie Blankley to the City Council, it is my intention to recommend with Council approval, a new Mayor Pro Tempore. Further, this report provides future Mayor’s with the background and knowledge that the Council has authority to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore at times other than following the election or appointment of a new Council Member. BACKGROUND AND ANALYSIS 6.1.a Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: 2018 Staff Report re Mayor Pro Tempore Selection Process (3571 : Appointment of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022) This memorandum discusses the question of what limits and/or requirements, the Charter places upon the election by the Council of the Mayor Pro Tempore. Section 502 of the Charter is entitled “Mayor Pro Tempore,” and provides as follows: “At the first meeting of the Council following the election or appointment of a member to the Council, the Council shall elect one of its members as Mayor Pro Tempore who shall act as Mayor during the absence or inability of the Mayor to act. In the case of the temporary absence or disability of both the Mayor and the Mayor Pro Tempore, the Council shall elect one of its members to act as Mayor Pro Tempore.” Thus, the only time that the Charter requires that a Mayor Pro Tempore be elected by the Council is following the election or appointment of a new Council Member. The Charter is silent on the question of how long a Mayor Pro Tempore serves in that position, and also on the question of whether the Council can elect a Mayor Pro Tempore at other times than following the election or appointment of a new Council Member. Having reviewed the Charter, it is our opinion that the Council has authority to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore when it desires to do so, and that the Council can determine the length of time the Mayor Pro Tempore will serve in that capacity. If the Council decides to institute a form of rotation for the position, that is allowable under the Charter. As stated above, the only Charter restriction is the requirement to elect a Mayor Pro Tempore following the election or appointment of a new Council Member. There are two primary considerations that support our interpretation that a new Mayor Pro Tempore may be elected at the will of the Council. First, the Mayor and Council Members all have fixed terms of office per a specific provision in the Charter (Section 402) governing their term. Since the Charter provides no such limitation on the term of office for a Mayor Pro Tempore, this suggests that the Mayor Pro Tempore’s term of office is not similarly fixed. Given this lack of restriction on term of office, it appears that a Mayor Pro Tempore may be elected on a more frequent schedule than the Mayor or Council Members. Second, there would seem to be several situations that would require the election of a new Mayor Pro Tempore, other than those mentioned in Section 502. Two examples are the following: (1) a Mayor Pro Tempore could resign from the position of Mayor Pro Tempore, but still remain on the Council. In this situation, there would be no new Council member elected, thus no specific triggering event for the election of a Mayor Pro Tempore, yet it would clearly be desirable to elect a replacement; and (2) The 6.1.a Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: 2018 Staff Report re Mayor Pro Tempore Selection Process (3571 : Appointment of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022) Mayor Pro Tempore could resign his or her Council seat. In this situation, the Council would normally appoint a new Council Member to fill the position until the next general municipal election. The Council would also need to elect a new Mayor Pro Tempore, given that this position would also become vacant. As there could be a delay in the election of a new Council Member, the election of a new Mayor Pro Tempore could also be delayed if it were based solely on the schedule provided for in Section 502 of the Charter. 6.1.a Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: 2018 Staff Report re Mayor Pro Tempore Selection Process (3571 : Appointment of Mayor Pro Tempore for 2022) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Mayoral Appointments of Council Members to Serve in Regional Representative Seats and Seats on Local Boards and Committees Meeting Date: December 13, 2021 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: City Clerk Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips Prepared By: LeeAnn McPhillips Marie Blankley Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Develop a Financially Resilient Organization ☐ Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services ☐ Promote Economic Development Activities ☐ Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All ☐ Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Receive report and assignments determined by Mayor Blankley. BACKGROUND As part of the annual update process, Mayor Blankley reviewed the current list of Council appointments to regional and local Boards and Committees. Based on this review, the attached appointments are made for 2022. The list reflects only a few changes from 2021. The changes include: • Cities Association of Santa Clara County – Council Member Leroe-Munoz will go from Alternate to Primary; Mayor Blankley will go from Primary to Alternate. 6.2 Packet Pg. 12 • Santa Clara County Library JPA – Council Member Armendariz will serve as the alternate in place of Council Member Tovar. • South County Youth Task Force Policy Team – Council Member Leroe-Munoz will go from Alternate to Primary, replacing Council Member Bracco; Council Member Tovar will serve as the Alternate. • Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee is added to the list and includes Council Members Armendariz, Marques, and Tovar. Attachments: 1. 2022 Council Member Representative Boards and Sub Committees 12.13.21 6.2 Packet Pg. 13 Key – a comma between names denotes the member, then the alternate; a backslash between names denotes more than one seated member on the respective board/committee. Approved 12/13/2021 CITY OF GILROY CITY COUNCIL REPRESENTATIVES & ADVISORY COMMITTEES Organization/Board Representative & Alternate ABAG (510) 464-7900 Leroe-Muñoz, Armendariz ABAG is the official comprehensive planning agency for the San Francisco Bay area region. ABAG's mission is to strengthen cooperation and coordination among local governments. In doing so, ABAG addresses social, environmental, and economic issues that transcend local borders. (General Assembly meetings are held in the spring and fall each year) CalTrain Policy Group (650) 508-6493 Armendariz, Leroe-Muñoz The Local Policy Maker Group (LPMG) meets every month on the fourth Thursday at 5:30 p.m. in the Edward J. Bacciocco Auditorium located on the second floor at SamTrans Administrative Offices, 1250 San Carlos Ave., San Carlos, two blocks west of the San Carlos Caltrain Station Cities Association Santa Clara Co. Bd. of Directors 730-7770 Leroe-Muñoz, Blankley The Santa Clara County Cities Association was formed to represent the mutual interest s of the diverse 15 cities in Santa Clara County, to present a unified voice for the cities in dealing with agencies, organizations and various levels of government. (Meets the 2nd Thursday of each month at 7:00 p.m., Sunnyvale City Hall) Economic Development Corporation Board 847-7611 Leroe-Muñoz/Tovar (as suggested for EDC Board appointment) The Economic Development Corporation was formed to achieve Gilroy’s long range goal of continuing economic vitality. Economic development services include: site selection assistance, project facilitation, incentive packages, finance referrals, permit coordination/streamlining, technical assistance, market research, and training programs and grants. (Meets the 2nd Wednesday of each month at 7:30 a.m., Gilroy Chamber Board Room) Gilroy Economic Development Partnership 842-6436/842-6437 Blankley/Hilton (as suggested for GEDP Board appointment) The Gilroy Economic Development Partnership consists of representatives from the Gilroy Chamber of Commerce, Gilroy Econo mic Development Corporation, Gilroy Downtown Business Association, Visit Gilroy/California Welcome Center, Gilroy Gardens, Gilroy Garlic Festival, Gavilan College and the City of Gilroy. The group was created to focus on the economic development of three specific recreation/tourism initiatives: Gilroy Sports Park, the city-owned 536 acres at Gilroy Gardens and Downtown Gourmet Alley. (Meets the 4th Wednesday of each month at 8am at Cordevalle). Gilroy Downtown Business Assoc. Board 607-2491 Marques, Armendariz (as suggested for GDBA Board appointment) The purposes of the corporation are to stimulate economic development through organization (encouraging cooperation and building leadership in the business community); promotion (creating a positive image for downtown by promoting the downtown as an exciting place to live, shop and invest); design (improving the appearance of downtown); economic restructuring (strengthening and expanding the economic base of the downtown) and to receive, administer and distribute funds in connection with any activities related to the above purposes. (Meets 1st Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m. at the Gilroy Downtown Business Association Office, 7780 Monterey St.) 6.2.a Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: 2022 Council Member Representative Boards and Sub Committees 12.13.21 (3564 : Mayor Appointments to Regional Committees) Key – a comma between names denotes the member, then the alternate; a backslash between names denotes more than one seated member on the respective board/committee. Approved 12/13/2021 Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors 840-7100 Marques Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors is a non-profit educational institution whose mission is to educate and inspire families, especially children, to appreciate horticulture and the importance of trees in our lives by providing fun and memories in a beautiful garden setting. (Meets the 2nd Thursday of each month from 3-5 p.m., Gilroy Gardens Operations Office Board Room) Gilroy Sister Cities Association 310-8059 Blankley, Bracco The association furthers positive relations under the umbrella of Sister Cities International, funding and arranging student exchanges and tours of dignitaries from Gilroy’s six sister cities from the countries of Japan, France, Italy, Portugal, Mexico and Palau to foster deeper cross-cultural understanding and global cooperation towards sustainable economic and community development. (Meets the 2nd Tuesday of each month at 6:00 p.m., at Brownell School) Gilroy Youth Task Force 846-0310 Leroe-Muñoz, Blankley The specific purpose of this corporation is to eliminate illegal gang activity, graffiti and illegal alcohol and drug sales, distribution, and use within the Gilroy area and to provide the education, the skills and community activities to promote a drug and gang free lifestyle, in order to maintain and enhance the quality of life in Gilroy. (Meets in January at the Senior Center Meeting Room) Historic Heritage Committee 846-0440 Armendariz, Marques The purpose of the Historic Heritage Committee is to act as an advisory board to the City Council and Planning Commission on issues relatin g to the identification, protection, retention and preservation of historic sites and historic neighborhoods in the City of Gilroy. (Meets the 3rd Wednesday of each month at 4:30 p.m., City Council Chambers, City Hall) Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission 282-3180 Tovar The 10 member commission serves as the principal advisory body to City Councils and the Board of Supervisors on countywide solid waste planning issues and meets the 4th Wednesday of every even numbered month at 5:30 p.m. in the Board Chambers at the County Government Center, 70 West Hedding Street, 1st Floor, San Jose. (Morgan Hill serves as Alternate) Santa Clara Co. Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Bd. 573-2438 Tovar The PAB provides an elected officials’ forum for policy input to the Expressway Plan 2040 – a long range plan for the eight county expressways and transportation corridor (Meets 5 times per year at 6:30 p.m., SCC Board of Supervisors Chambers, 70 W. Hedding St. San Jose.) Santa Clara Co. Library Joint Powers Authority 293-2326 x 3090 Bracco, Armendariz Provides policy direction and governance for the Santa Clara County Library District and oversees the County library budget, services and programs for the service areas. (Meets the 4th Thursday of the months of: January, February, April, October, and the 1st Thursday in June at 1:30 p.m., County Library Admin Office, 14600 Winchester Blvd., Los Gatos) SC Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board 779-7261 Blankley/Marques The SC Valley Habitat Agency established a two-tiered governance structure, consisting of a Governing Board and an Implementation Board. The four Local Partners (Santa Clara County, Gilroy, Morgan Hill and San Jose) form the Governing Board for the Implementing Agency. (meets a minimum of twice annually the third Thursday of March and September at 4 p.m. at 535 Alkire Ave Suite 100, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 SC Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board 779-7261 Armendariz/Marques The SC Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board is comprised of the four Governing B oard members, together with two Habitat Plan permittees, the Santa Clara Valley Water District and 6.2.a Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: 2022 Council Member Representative Boards and Sub Committees 12.13.21 (3564 : Mayor Appointments to Regional Committees) Key – a comma between names denotes the member, then the alternate; a backslash between names denotes more than one seated member on the respective board/committee. Approved 12/13/2021 VTA. The Board oversees the majority of the operations of the Habitat Agency . Meets the third Thursday of odd numbered months at 4 pm. at 535 Alkire Ave Suite 100, Morgan Hill, CA 95037 Santa Clara Valley Water Commission 630-2883 Leroe-Muñoz, Tovar The Water Commission assists the Valley Water Board with issues pertaining to water supply and water quality, as well as policy matters that are of interest to the cities and Santa Clara County. (Meets quarterly Jan, April, July, October from 12:00 p.m. – 2:00 p.m., Valley Water Board Room) Valley Water Joint Water Resources Commission 630-2408 Bracco/Blankley This 6 member Committee shall advance common South County water interests and receive input on future needs for groundwater management in the Llagas groundwater sub-basin; facilitate policy discussion and sharing of technical information on water supply planning for South County; identify demand for recycled water and share technical information on its use, and implement the South County Recycled Water Master Plan. (Meets quarterly at SCRWA Treatment Plant) Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority Board Leroe-Muñoz The nine person SVRIA Board of Directors provide strategic guidance to staff and the Working Committee, review and approve the annual budget, hire the Executive Director and General Counsel, and provide oversight to SVRIA activities. The Silicon Valley Regional Interoperability Authority (SVRIA) exists to identify, coordinate and implement communications interoperability solutions to its member agencies to seamlessly integrate voice and data communications between law enforcement, fire and rescue service, emergency medical services and emergency management for routine operations, critical incidents and disaster response and recovery. SVRIA also provides strategic planning support for its members. (Meets quarterly in March, June, September and November) Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board 721-5301 Hilton, Armendariz Twelve communities in Santa Clara County formed a Joint Powers Agency named the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority (SVCE), a local non-profit public agency that will run a Community Choice Energy (CCE) program. (Meetings are held on the second Wednesday of each month at 7:00 pm at the Santa Clara County Board Room located at 70 W Hedding St in San Jose ). South County Regional Wastewater Authority (SCRWA) 848-0480 Bracco/Blankley/Tovar, Marques Serves as the governing body of the Authority which provides the treatment and disposal of wastewater and recycled water for the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. (Meets the 1st Wednesday of each month at 8:00 a.m., SCRWA Treatment Plant) South County Joint Recycled Water Advisory Comm. 630-2883 Blankley/Tovar Comprised of two Council Members from the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill this committee will advise Valley Water on the use of recycled water in So uth Santa Clara County. South County United for Health 299 – 5010 Hilton Comprised of the members of Gilroy and Morgan Hill promotes the health benefits (physical/mental) of existing programs and activities for park users and addresses active & safe Transportation to increase the number of people walking/riding bikes to school/work along with other healthy life choices (Meets 4 times a year at 10 a.m. at the Morgan Hill Community Center) South County Youth Task Force Policy Team Leroe-Muñoz, Tovar Formed to address the influences and impacts of gangs on south county youth and their communities to reduce juvenile delinquent behaviors, reduce recruitment of youth into gangs, and reduce gang violence within the boundaries of Gilroy, Morgan Hill and the unincorporated County areas of San Martin. (Meets the 3rd Wednesday of odd-numbered months 10:00 a.m.-12:00 p.m., alternating between Gilroy and Morgan Hill). 6.2.a Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: 2022 Council Member Representative Boards and Sub Committees 12.13.21 (3564 : Mayor Appointments to Regional Committees) Key – a comma between names denotes the member, then the alternate; a backslash between names denotes more than one seated member on the respective board/committee. Approved 12/13/2021 Street Naming Committee 846-0440 Bracco/Armendariz/Tovar Recommends street names to the City Council for new City of Gilroy general planned collectors, arterials and expressways and recommends proposed changes to existing street names. (Meets Thursdays as needed, 9:30 a.m., Planning Conf. Room, City Hall) Visit Gilroy California Welcome Center Board 842-6436 Hilton (as suggested for Visit Gilroy Board appointment) The Welcome Center is in place to enhance the image and economy of the City by marketing the city and assisting to facilitate a viable business community. (Meets the 3rd Thursday of each month at 8:00 a.m., in various Gilroy locations) VTA Board of Directors 321-5680 Blankley (alternate) (Gilroy-Morgan Hill rotation) VTA Board of Directors sets VTA policy, amends the VTA Administrative Code, supports or opposes state or federal legislation, adopts the annual VTA budget, approves collective bargaining agreements and recommends major capital improvement projects to the appropriate regional, state and federal funding authorities. (Meets the 1st Thursday of each month at 5:30 p.m., SCC Board of Supervisors Chambers, 70 W. Hedding St. San Jose.) VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility, IV Rep. 321-5680 Tovar, Armendariz The Committee for Transit Accessibility advises the Board on bus and rail accessibility issues, paratransit service, public facilities and programs and VTA's efforts to fully comply with the federal Americans with Disabilities Act regulations. (Meets quarterly the 2nd Wednesday of the month at 1 p.m., Bldg A Auditorium, VTA 3331 N. First Street, San Jose) VTA Mobility Partnership 321-5907 Leroe-Muñoz/Blankley Comprised of San Benito Co. Board Members, Gilroy, Hollister and Morgan Hill Council Members and VTA technical staff to jointly look at the highway 152 and 25 corridors. (Meets bi-monthly in Gilroy City Council Chambers) VTA South County City Group 321-5858 Blankley, Leroe-Muñoz The Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill represent the interests of the cities to the VTA Policy Advisory Committee (Meets the 1st Tuesday of the month rotating between Gilroy and Morgan Hill) VTA Policy Advisory Committee 321-5680 Blankley, Leroe-Muñoz The PAC ensures that all jurisdictions within the county have access to the development of VTA's policies. (Meets the 2nd Thursday of each month at 4:00 p.m. in Conference Room B104, VTA River Oaks Campus, San Jose) CITY COUNCIL SUB-COMMITTEES Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee Armendariz/Marques/Tovar 6.2.a Packet Pg. 17 Attachment: 2022 Council Member Representative Boards and Sub Committees 12.13.21 (3564 : Mayor Appointments to Regional Committees) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Streamline Consolidation of the City's Boards and Commissions Meeting Date: December 13, 2021 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Bryce Atkins Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Develop a Financially Resilient Organization ☐ Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services ☐ Promote Economic Development Activities ☐ Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All ☐ Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Council: a) Adopt A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Consolidating the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee, Historic Heritage Committee, and the Street Naming Committee, and Placin g Their Associated Board Functions Under the Authority of the Planning Commission. b) Motion to read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading. c) Introduce an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Consolidating the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and Placing Their Associated Board Functions for Infrastructure Planning and Development Review Under the Authority of the Planning Commission, and the Associated Board Functions for Education and Encouragement Activities Under the Authority of the Parks and Recreation Commission. 9.1 Packet Pg. 18 d) Direct all boards and commissions, except the Planning Commission, to meet on a quarterly basis, not to exceed quarterly meetings without compelling reasons as determined by the respective board chair and appointed staff liaison. BACKGROUND At the September 13, 2021 regular meeting of the Gilroy City Council, Council provided direction – as part of a future agenda item request – for staff to bring back recommendations for a more effective structure to the City’s boards, commissions, and committees (collectively, the “Commissions”). The impetus for the agenda item is the repeated recruitments for new members to the Commissions due to many departures and attendance issues of various Commission members. An example of previous Commission restructuring included the consolidation and elimination of the Public Arts Committee and the Housing Committee as stand-alone committees. That consolidation reduced the total number of Commissions from 15 to 13. There are currently five Commissions that are established in the City Charter. All other Commissions were established either through an ordinance, resolution, or other authorization of the City Council. At the November 15, 2021 regular City Council meeting, Council directed s taff to return with an agenda item for potential approval of the full streamline option. Since the direction, it has been determined that retaining the Youth Commission is desirable for the youth to engage the City through this commission. ANALYSIS Staff has prepared a resolution and an ordinance for adoption that would reduce the City Commissions from thirteen to nine and reduce the frequency of meetings to reduce burden on Commission members and City resources. The only change from the original streamline option is that the Youth Commission would remain intact. As presented previously, modified with the Youth Commission remaining intact, and meetings being held quarterly except for the Planning Commission would be as outlined below. 1. Planning Commission (inherit duties of Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee; Historic Heritage Committee; Bicycle Pedestrian Commission’s infrastructure planning and development review functions, and the Street Naming Committee). The same reports and information th at would be included in the presentation to the former Commissions would be incorporated in the Planning Commission staff reports. 2. Personnel Commission – No change from Charter; meeting quarterly. 3. Library Commission – No change from Charter; meeting quarterly. 9.1 Packet Pg. 19 4. Arts and Culture Commission – No change from Charter; meeting quarterly. 5. Parks and Recreation Commission (inherit the duties of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission’s education and encouragement functions) – meeting quarterly. 6. Youth Commission – No change; meeting quarterly. 7. Open Government Commission – No change. 8. Building Appeals Board – meet as needed. 9. Physically Challenged Appeals Board – meet as needed. It should be noted that numerous opportunities exist for board members/commissioners whose board/committees have been consolidated. Remaining boards and commission typically have numerous vacancies and the number of representatives on certain boards/commissions could potentially be expanded. Implementation The resolution and ordinance, while being adopted and introduced (respectively) this evening, are designed in a manner to allow up to six months for implementation to wind down and subsequently transfer the consolidated duties. Implementation will involve City staff and Commission members coordinating the changes that are proposed, through the staff liaisons. By approaching the implementation individually with each of the Commissions, a smoother transition is likely for each individual Commission. Some Commissions have very detailed workplans and are in-progress on activities to complete one or more items in the workplan. The additional time to continue operating would allow the Commissions to potentially wrap up some of their workplan items before the consolidation is completed. Additionally, the time would allow for the opportunity to see if there are vacant seats on other Commissions that may be of interest to those who are in a Commission being consolidated. Other Commissions may not have pending activities and may be able to consolidate at a faste r rate. The timeframe is to allow flexibility to treat each Commission uniquely in their consolidation. ALTERNATIVES Council may choose to accept, reject, or modify the staff recommendation. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE No cost increases are anticipated from this action. There will be some cost savings, but the amount is not known at this time. There will be more significant staff time and resource savings, as other work can be performed with the staff time and resources saved from the number and frequency of board and commission meetings being reduced. 9.1 Packet Pg. 20 CONCLUSION With the consolidation of the four Commissions, and the reduction in the frequency of meetings for the remaining Commissions, the demand on Commissioners and staff will be reduced. It is believed that this will help reduce the burden on Commissioners, making service on our Commissions more appealing and sustainable for interested residents. It will also reduce City resource consumption and staff time, which will be made available for other tasks that are assigned to the staff liaisons and board secretaries. NEXT STEPS Depending upon Council’s action(s), staff will bring back the second reading and adoption of the ordinance for the consolidation of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. Staff will also commence collaboration with each of the staff liaisons to the Commissions to start the transition planning process, as well as preparing the remaining Commissions to undertake any new functions assigned to them. PUBLIC OUTREACH Any action undertaken by Council will be relayed in the City’s community engagement messaging, as well as updates as the functions transition from one Commission to another. Attachments: 1. DRAFT Resolution - Committee Consolidation 2. DRAFT Consolidation Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 9.1 Packet Pg. 21 RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY CONSOLIDATING THE HOUSING AND NEIGHBORHOOD REVITALIZATION COMMITTEE, HISTORIC HERITAGE COMMITTEE, AND THE STREET NAMING COMMITTEE, AND PLACING THEIR ASSOCIATED BOARD FUNCTIONS UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION WHEREAS, the Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee, Historic Heritage Committee, and the Street Naming Committee are the three committees in operation out of the combined thirteen (13) boards, commission, and committees for the City; and WHEREAS, the City’s current thirteen (13) boards, commissions and committees, each require extensive staff support, whether or not the body has a full membership, business to conduct, or is able to achieve a quorum for its meetings; and WHEREAS, the City Council initiated a future Council agenda item on September 13, 2021 for an agenda item to staff to create a more efficient and effective structure for the City’s boards and commissions; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 2021, staff presented a report with options that had been developed as of that time. At that meeting, Council directed staff to proceed with the full streamline option of consolidating the City’s boards, committees and commissions, and return to Council on December 13th with an agenda item to adopt the consolidation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to consolidate the City’s Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee, Historic Heritage Committee, and the Street Naming Committee with the Planning Commission. NOW, THEREFORE, IT IS HEREBY RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of Gilroy as follows: 1. The Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee, the Historic Heritage 9.1.a Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Committee Consolidation (3572 : Boards and Commissions Consolidation) RESOLUTION NO. 2021-XX Committee, and the Street Naming Committee are hereby scheduled to be consolidated to the Planning Commission, effective June 30, 2022, or such earlier time as determined by the committees. 2. City staff is to wind down and transfer the activities of these committees in an expeditious manner which shall be completed no later than June 30, 2022, and as of the date of each such transfer, the terms of all sitting members of each respective committee shall come to an end. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 2021 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: APPROVED: ___________________________ ATTEST: Marie Blankley, Mayor _________________________ Thai Pham, City Clerk 9.1.a Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: DRAFT Resolution - Committee Consolidation (3572 : Boards and Commissions Consolidation) -1- 4891-7643-1621v1 JH\00000999 ORDINANCE NO. 2021-XX AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY CONSOLIDATING THE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION AND PLACING ITS ASSOCIATED COMMISSION FUNCTIONS FOR INFRASTRUCTURE PLANNING AND DEVELOPMENT REVIEW UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE PLANNING COMMISSION, AND THE ASSOCIATED COMMISSION FUNCTIONS FOR EDUCATION AND ENCOURAGEMENT ACTIVITIES UNDER THE AUTHORITY OF THE PARKS AND RECREATION COMMISSION. WHEREAS, the City of Gilroy currently has a total of thirteen (13) boards, commissions and committees, each requiring extensive staff support, whether or not the body has a full membership, business to conduct, or is able to achieve a quorum for its meetings; and WHEREAS, the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission is one of the City’s Commissions which are not required pursuant to the Gilroy City Charter; and WHEREAS, City Council initiated a future Council agenda item on September 13, 2021 for an agenda item to staff to create a more efficient and effective structure for the City’s boards and commissions; and WHEREAS, on November 15, 2021, staff presented a report with options that had been developed as of that time. At that meeting, Council directed staff to proceed with the full streamline option of consolidating the City’s boards, committees and commissions, and return to Council on December 13th with an agenda item to adopt the consolidation; and WHEREAS, the City Council desires to consolidate the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission with the duties being consolidated with either the Planning or Parks and Recreation Commissions, based on the subject matter jurisdiction. NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS. SECTION I The Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (Commission) is scheduled to be consolidated. Ordinances Nos. 2009-03 and 2018-14, which established the Commission will be repealed in their entirety and no longer in effect after June 30, 2022, or such earlier time as determined by the Commission. SECTION II 9.1.b Packet Pg. 24 Attachment: DRAFT Consolidation Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (3572 : Boards and Commissions Consolidation) -2- 4891-7643-1621v1 JH\00000999 City staff are to wind down and transfer the activities of this Commission in an expeditious manner which shall be completed no later than June 30, 2022, and as of the date of such transfer, the terms of all sitting Commissioners shall come to an end. The functions and duties shall be transferred to the Planning Commission and Parks and Recreation Commission, in a manner to maximize efficiency and effectiveness within the associated subject matter jurisdiction of each Commission. SECTION III If any section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be invalid or unconstitutional, such decision shall not affect the validity of the remaining portions of this ordinance. The City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby declares that it would have passed and adopted this ordinance, and each section, subsection, sentence, clause or phrase hereof, irrespective of the fact that any one or more sections, subsections, sentences, clauses or phrases may be declared invalid or unconstitutional. SECTION IV This Ordinance shall take effect thirty (30) days after its adoption. The City Clerk is hereby directed to publish this Ordinance or a summary thereof pursuant to Government Code Section 36933. PASSED AND ADOPTED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY this 10th day of January, 2022 by the following vote: AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: APPROVED: _______________________________ Marie Blankley, Mayor ATTEST: LeeAnn McPhillips, City Clerk 9.1.b Packet Pg. 25 Attachment: DRAFT Consolidation Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (3572 : Boards and Commissions Consolidation) Late Correspondence City Council Agenda Item IX.1 - Rebecca Scheel City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: Gilroy Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards Policy Meeting Date: December 13, 2021 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: Community Development Department Submitted By: Karen Garner Prepared By: Cindy McCormick Cindy McCormick Strategic Plan Goals ☐ Develop a Financially Resilient Organization ☐ Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services ☐ Promote Economic Development Activities  Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All ☐ Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Staff recommends that the City Council: a) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy adopting the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy; and b) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy adopting the Gilroy SB9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy EXECUTIVE SUMMARY Pursuant to Senate Bill 9 (SB9), the City shall ministerially approve certain lot splits and housing developments containing two residential units (e.g., duplex) within a single- family residential zone, subject to certain requirements described in the law. Local jurisdictions are permitted to require such developments to comply with adopted 10.2 Packet Pg. 26 objective design standards so long as the regulations do not preclude the minimum allowances per state law. Staff has drafted applicable objective development and design standards that should be adopted by the Council prior to the law taking effect on January 1, 2022. The Policy documents can and likely will be modified as needed to meet the City’s development expectations and to comply with state law which is subject to additional interpretation. POLICY DISCUSSION California Senate Bill 9 (SB9) was signed into law by Governor Newsom on September 16, 2021 and takes effect January 1, 2022. SB9 requires ministerial (staff level building permit) approval of a proposed housing development containing no more than two residential units (e.g., duplex) within a single-family residential zone, subject to certain requirements. The legislation also requires ministerial approval of certain lot splits to allow property owners to construct up to two units each on the newly created lots. Under SB9, the City is permitted, but not required, to adopt an ordinance that is not inconsistent with the new State law. Staff may recommend a future ordinance, but at this time staff is recommending adoption of an objective design standards policy. BACKGROUND On October 18, 2021, the City Council adopted the Gilroy Mixed-Use Residential and Multi-Family Residential Objective Design Standards Policy. The attached draft policy for 2-unit residential projects largely mirrors that policy but more directly addresses the smaller scale of residential duplex design. Separately, the attached draft policy for SB9 lot splits highlights requirements of the law and provides additional objective standards applicable to lot splits, consistent with existing City of Gilroy subdivision standards and best practices. Environmental Assessment: The proposed project is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to implementation of Senate Bi ll No. 9 and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and Section 15308 (Regulatory Actions for the Protection of the Environment) in that: (1) the adoption of objective design standards does not change applicable zoning and is necessary to implement state law, (2) it can be seen with certainty that the adoption of the standard will not have a significant environmental effect, (3) the standards are to protect aesthetic impacts on the physical environment, and (4) none of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies. ANALYSIS Currently, the R1 single-family residential zoning district allows one (1) single-family home, one (1) accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and one (1) junior ADU for a total of thre e (3) dwelling units. The R1 district currently also allows duplexes when located on a 10.2 Packet Pg. 27 corner lot with a minimum lot area of 8,000 square feet and where the duplex would not increase the overall density on the lot beyond 7.25 dwelling units per net acre. Potential SB9 Development Scenarios: SB9 removes the City’s discretion regarding duplex development limitations, effectively permitting two (2) units (attached or detached) on an R1 Single-family residential designated lot in Gilroy, subject to certain limitations (e.g., not on historic properties or in very high fire severity zones). The Santa Clara County Collaborative is working with their legal counsel and seeking guidance from the State Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD) to clarify the total number of units that would be allowed on a site since the SB9 legislation is not explicitly clear on how SB9 intersects with state ADU law. However, many cities in Santa Clara County believe the following scenarios represent what could be allowed on a single-family property with or without a lot split under SB9. SB9 Project with Lot Split Unlike SB9 projects without a lot split (discussed next), SB9 allows, but does not require, the City to permit ADUs/JADUs in addition to the four (4) SB9 units (two units for each lot) that would be allowed when a property owner splits one single -family lot into two developable lots. The City’s current ADU regulations permit a property owner to construct a duplex and two (2) detached accessory dwelling units for a total of four (4) dwelling units on “duplex or multifamily zoned and developed properties”. The City may want to amend Gilroy City Code Section 30.54.50 (Duplex ADU Standards) to clarify that the provision only applies to “R-2” and multi-family zoned properties (R3 and R4) to minimize any interpretation that the provision would apply to an R-1 property that is “developed” with a duplex. SB9 Lot Split Scenario: Lot 1 (1) Duplex or (2) detached Primary Dwelling Units Lot 2 (1) Duplex or (2) detached Primary Dwelling Units (4) Total Dwelling Units SB9 Project 2-unit / Duplex Provisions (NO Lot Split) While the lot split provisions of SB9 (Gov. Code § 66411.7) clearly allow local agencies to limit total development to two (2) units per new lot, including p rimary dwelling units, ADUs, and JADUs, the same language is not present in the two-unit (duplex) development section. As such, most cities have interpreted the law to allow up to four (4) units on a single-family property. 10.2 Packet Pg. 28 NO lot split, 2-Unit/Duplex Scenario: (1) Duplex or (2) detached Primary Dwelling Units (1) Accessory Dwelling Unit (attached or detached) (1) Junior Accessory Dwelling Unit (4) Total Housing Units (subject to verification by HCD) Potential Effect of SB9: A property owner can already develop a single-family property with up to three (3) units including one (1) single-family home, one (1) accessory dwelling unit (ADU), and one (1) junior ADU. SB9 effectively permits one (1) additional dwelling unit. However, while Gilroy has approximately 9,125 R1 single-family residential lots that would be subject to SB9, UC Berkley's Terner Center has published a report that states that “relatively few new single-family parcels are expected to become financially feasible for added units as a direct consequence of this bill”1. The report states that local market prices, development costs, and physical constraints such as small lot sizes can limit the number of new homes built under SB9. ALTERNATIVES Council could modify the draft policies. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE This staff report and the attached draft policies were drafted by City staff. Other than attorney fees, no additional funding is needed at this time. CONCLUSION Pursuant to state law, the City has drafted the Gilroy Duplex Objective Design Standards Policy and the Gilroy SB9 Parcel Map Lot Split Policy. Given state requirements for ministerial approval of lot splits and duplex units in single-family neighborhoods, it is critical to adopt objective development and design standards th at help ensure that such projects conform to the City’s minimum expectations. Explicit development standards also have the benefit of increasing consistency in decision making; minimizing applicant delays; better utilizing limited staff resources; and promoting good design principles that help ensure that Gilroy is an attractive place to live and visit. NEXT STEPS 1 https://ternercenter.berkeley.edu/wp-content/uploads/2021/07/SB-9-Brief-July-2021-Final.pdf 10.2 Packet Pg. 29 Following the City Council’s adoption of the two policies, staff will post the policies and Frequently Asked Questions on the City’s website. PUBLIC OUTREACH Notice of the public meeting to consider the draft objective design standards was published in the Gilroy Dispatch on December 3 rd. The City Council public hearing packets are available through the City's upcoming meetings webpage. Attachments: 1. CC Resolution - 2-Unit Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 2. CC Resolution - Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 3. 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy 4. Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy 5. SB8-9-10 Article 10.2 Packet Pg. 30 Resolution No. 2021-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY ADOPTING THE GILROY SB9 2-UNIT RESIDENTIAL OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS POLICY WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor of the State California signed into law Senate Bill No. 9 (Atkins), an act to amend Section 66452.6 of, and to add Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to, the California Government Code relating to land use, which requires, under certain criteria, ministerial approval of a parcel map for a lot split or a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Senate Bill No. 9 (SB9) shall be in effect on January 1, 2022, and set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving a parcel map for a lot split or a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units (e.g., duplex) within a single-family residential zone; and WHEREAS, a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that do not conflict with the provisions of Senate Bill No. 9; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66300, “Objective design standard” means a design standard that involves no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and is uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal of an application; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy will help ensure that lot splits and housing developments approved through the ministerial provisions of Senate Bill No. 9 conform to the City of Gilroy’s minimum design expectations; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy is intended to promote good design principles that create a sense of place and attractive and safe neighborhoods with human-scaled buildings that are compatible with and enhance the City of Gilroy; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on December 13, 2021, at which time the City Council received and considered the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy, took and considered the written and oral public testimony, the staff report, and all other documentation related to the proposed policy; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to implementation of Senate Bill No. 9 and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and Section 15308 (Regulatory Actions for the Protection of the Environment) in that: (1) the adoption of objective design standards does not change applicable zoning and is necessary to implement state law, (2) it can be seen with certainty that the adoption of the 10.2.a Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: CC Resolution - 2-Unit Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Resolution No. 2021-XX 2 standard will not have a significant environmental effect, (3) the standards are to protect aesthetic impacts on the physical environment, and (4) none of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy implements the Gilroy 2040 General Plan and in particular: Land use Policy LU 3.3 (Residential Building Orientation); Land use Policy LU 7.3 (Compatibility with Adjoining Uses); and Land use Goal LU 8 to support growth and development that preserves and strengthens the City’s historic, small-town character; provides and maintains safe, livable, and affordable neighborhoods; and creates beautiful places; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy adoption is based is the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Gilroy has considered the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy in accordance with the 2040 Gilroy General Plan, State law, and other applicable standards and regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby adopts the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 2021 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: APPROVED: ___________________________________ Marie Blankley, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ LeeAnn McPhillips, Interim City Clerk 10.2.a Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: CC Resolution - 2-Unit Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Resolution No. 2021-XX A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY ADOPTING THE GILROY SB 9 RESIDENTIAL LOT SPLIT OBJECTIVE DESIGN STANDARDS POLICY WHEREAS, on September 16, 2021, the Governor of the State California signed into law Senate Bill No. 9 (Atkins), an act to amend Section 66452.6 of, and to add Sections 65852.21 and 66411.7 to, the California Government Code relating to land use, which requires, under certain criteria, ministerial approval of a parcel map for a lot split or a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone; and WHEREAS, the provisions of Senate Bill No. 9 shall be in effect on January 1, 2022, and set forth what a local agency can and cannot require in approving a parcel map for a lot split or a proposed housing development containing no more than 2 residential units within a single-family residential zone; and WHEREAS, a local agency may impose objective zoning standards, objective subdivision standards, and objective design review standards that do not conflict with the provisions of Senate Bill No. 9; and WHEREAS, pursuant to Government Code section 66300, “Objective design standard” means a design standard that involves no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and is uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official before submittal of an application; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy will help ensure that lot splits and housing developments approved through the ministerial provisions of Senate Bill No. 9 conform to the City of Gilroy’s minimum residential development expectations; and WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on December 13, 2021, at which time the City Council received and considered the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy, took and considered the written and oral public testimony, the staff report, and all other documentation related to the proposed policy; and WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy is exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to California Government Code Section 65852.21(j) and Section 66411.7(n) relating to implementation of Senate Bill No. 9 and pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Sections 15061(b)(3) (Common Sense Exemption) and Section 15308 (Regulatory Actions for the Protection of the Environment) in that: (1) the adoption of objective design standards does not change applicable zoning and is necessary to implement state law, (2) it can be seen with certainty that the adoption of the standard will not have a significant environmental effect, (3) the standards are to protect aesthetic impacts on the physical environment, and (4) none of the circumstances described in CEQA Guidelines Section 15300.2 applies; and 10.2.b Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: CC Resolution - Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Resolution No. 2021-XX 2 WHEREAS, the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy implements the Gilroy 2040 General Plan Land use Goal LU 8 to support growth and development that preserves and strengthens the City’s historic, small-town character and provides and maintains safe, livable, and affordable neighborhoods; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents and other material which constitute the record of proceedings upon which this Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy adoption is based is the office of the City Clerk; and WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Gilroy has considered the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy in accordance with the 2040 Gilroy General Plan, State law, and other applicable standards and regulations; and NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy hereby adopts the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference. PASSED AND ADOPTED this 13th day of December, 2021 by the following roll call vote: AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS: NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS: ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS: APPROVED: ___________________________________ Marie Blankley, Mayor ATTEST: ___________________________ LeeAnn McPhillips, Interim City Clerk 10.2.b Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: CC Resolution - Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy_12-13-21 (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy Draft December 13, 2021 (Effective January 1, 2022) Page 1 of 3 The intent of the Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy is to provide applicants and property owners with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations. This Policy supplements the City’s zoning standards and the Gilroy SB9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy. These standards are also intended to comply with California Senate Bill (SB9). General Applicability: This policy applies to all duplex and 2-unit residential projects (e.g., two detached single-family dwellings) in an R1 zone in Gilroy that utilize any of the exceptions in SB9, including but not limited to reduced setbacks. The Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy does not apply to multi-family developments, which are regulated by the Gilroy Mixed-Use Residential and Multi-Family Residential Objective Design Standards Policy. SB9 Applicability: Ministerial approval under SB9 shall not apply in the case where: development would require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income; the development would demolish more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls of a structure that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three (3) years; or housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. Furthermore, ministerial approval under SB9 shall not apply in the case where the parcel is: located within a historic district or listed as a historic resource on the City of Gilroy’s Historic Resource Inventory; identified as prime agricultural land, wetlands, protected species habitat, or a hazardous waste site; or located within a very high fire hazards zone, earthquake fault zone, floodplain, or floodway. The City may deny an SB9 project if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. MAXIMUM DWELLING UNITS: New Lot: The maximum number of units permitted on a new lot created pursuant to SB9 shall be two (2) units, including but not limited to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior ADUs. Existing Lot: The maximum number of units permitted on an existing lot that is not associated with an SB9 subdivision shall be four (4) units, including but not limited to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior ADUs. OWNER OCCUPANCY: The property owner shall sign an affidavit stating they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of the approval of a new lot created pursuant to SB9. TENANT OCCUPANCY: No dwelling unit shall be rented for a term shorter than 30 days. MINIMUM PARKING: SFR/Duplex Unit: Unless otherwise exempt under SB9, each single-family residence shall be served by two (2) parking stalls and each duplex unit shall be served by one (1) parking stall. In each case, each stall shall be at least ten (10) feet by twenty (20) feet and at least one of the stalls shall be covered (garage or carport). ADU: Each ADU shall be served by one (1) parking stall, subject to the restrictions contained in Gilroy City Code Section 30.54.30(g). MAXIMUM PAVING: Paving in the front yard shall be limited to a maximum of fifty percent (50%) of the front yard area. Greater than fifty percent (50%) may be allowed in circumstances where the driveway is the same width as that of the garage frontage. 10.2.c Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy Draft December 13, 2021 (Effective January 1, 2022) Page 2 of 3 MINIMUM SETBACKS ▪ Front: 26-feet from face of curb ▪ Interior Side: 4-feet ▪ Exterior/Street Side: 4-feet ▪ Rear: 4-feet Setback Exception: No additional setback shall be required for an existing structure or a structure constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure. MAXIMUM HEIGHT / STORIES: 35-feet / 2 stories BUILDING ENTRIES, STAIRWELLS, AND GARAGES Intent: To create an attractive, welcoming, safe, and active interface between private development and the public realm, building and site design shall meet the following objective criteria: ▪ Exterior Stairwells. Exterior stairwells shall not be oriented to the street. ▪ Front Entries. The main entrance to each dwelling unit shall directly face the public street and shall not be oriented inward. Entries shall not face an alley. ▪ Front Entry Design. Front entries for each dwelling unit shall be accentuated by a minimum of one (1) of the following: • a change in roof pitch or form, such as a gable, that extends a minimum of one foot past the sides of the door jamb. • an increase in roof height of at least one (1) foot to accentuate the entry. • wood, stone, tile, or brick accent materials covering a minimum of 30 percent of the entryway wall surface area, inclusive of windows and doors. ▪ Patio/Porches. Each dwelling unit shall include a balcony, patio, porch, or stoop, and this feature shall be a minimum 48 square feet in area. ▪ Garage Doors • All garage doors shall be recessed a minimum of six (6) inches from the surrounding building wall and shall include trim of at least one and a half (1.5) inches in depth. • Garage doors shall not occupy more than 50% of the building façade. • Garage vehicular entrance(s) shall be set back from the property line with a minimum eighteen (18) foot long driveway, measured from the back of the sidewalk. MASSING, ARTICULATION. AND ARCHITECTURAL FEATURES Intent: To create a human-scale environment and buildings that are compatible with and enhance the surrounding area, building design shall meet the following objective criteria: ▪ Exterior Side Elevations. Exterior side elevations shall include a minimum of 15 percent fenestration area, and a change in wall plane by a minimum depth of two (2) feet. 10.2.c Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Gilroy SB9 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy Draft December 13, 2021 (Effective January 1, 2022) Page 3 of 3 ▪ Massing Breaks. In addition to the front entry requirements, residential buildings shall have massing breaks at least every 24 feet along any elevation, by incorporating at least one (1) of the following features: • doors and windows recessed by a minimum of four (4) inches; • variations in wall plane (projection or recess) by a minimum of two (2) feet in depth for at least 30% of the facade; or • vertical elements, such as pilasters, that protrude a minimum of one (1) foot from the wall surface and extend the full height of the structure. ▪ Primary Wall Finish Material. The primary wall finish material1 shall be wood, stone, brick, stucco, fiber cement or other cementitious material, or stone. T1-11 siding and all grooved or patterned wood panel or composite wood panel siding are prohibited. ▪ Colors and Materials: A change in colors or materials shall occur with a change in the wall plane. ▪ Windows and Doors. Windows and doors shall either be trimmed or recessed. When trimmed, the trim material shall not be less than 3.5” in width by ¾” in depth when protruding from the wall. Foam trim molding is prohibited on the ground floor. When recessed, the building primary siding material (masonry or stucco) shall cover the recessed edge faces and wrap toward the interior face of the window glazing or door face by not less than 3" in depth. 1 Primary wall finish material: the material covering the largest percentage of surface area of any building face or elevation. 10.2.c Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Policy Draft Adopted December 13, 2021 (Effective January 1, 2022) Page 1 of 1 The intent of the Gilroy SB 9 Residential Lot Split Policy is to provide applicants and property owners with a clear understanding of the City’s expectations for a lot split under California Senate Bill (SB) 9. This Policy supplements Gilroy City Code Chapter 21 (Subdivisions and Land Development), the City’s Zoning Ordinance, and the Gilroy 2-Unit Residential Objective Design Standards Policy. SB 9 Applicability: This policy applies to any parcel located within the City’s R1 Single-Family Residential District, subject to certain limitations. Ministerial approval under SB 9 shall not apply in the case where: development would require the demolition or alteration of housing that is subject to a recorded covenant, ordinance, or law that restricts rents to levels affordable to persons and families of moderate, low, or very low income; the development would demolish more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls of a structure that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three (3) years; or housing that is subject to any form of rent or price control through a public entity’s valid exercise of its police power. Furthermore, ministerial approval under SB 9 shall not apply in the case where the parcel is: located within a historic district or listed as a historic resource on the City of Gilroy’s Historic Resource Inventory; identified as prime agricultural land, wetlands, protected species habitat, or a hazardous waste site; or located within a very high fire hazards zone, earthquake fault zone, floodplain, or floodway. The City may deny a proposed housing development project if the building official makes a written finding, based upon a preponderance of the evidence, that the proposed housing development project would have a specific, adverse impact, as defined and determined in paragraph (2) of subdivision (d) of Section 65589.5, upon public health and safety or the physical environment and for which there is no feasible method to satisfactorily mitigate or avoid the specific, adverse impact. ADJACENT SUBDIVISIONS: No lot split shall be approved where the property owner or any person acting in concert with the owner, has subdivided an adjacent parcel through the provisions of SB 9. MAXIMUM LOTS: No more than two (2) parcels shall be permitted through the provisions of an SB 9 lot split, and the lot to be split shall not have been previously established through an SB 9 lot split. LOT AREA MINIMUM: Each parcel shall be approximately equal in area and shall not be smaller than 40 percent of the lot area of the original parcel proposed for subdivision. MINIMUM FRONTAGE: The minimum frontage of any new lot created pursuant to SB 9 shall be forty (40) feet, unless such requirement would preclude the creation of a lot with a maximum area of 1,200 square feet. FLAG LOT ACCESS: The access corridor from the street to a flag lot shall be a minimum 18-feet wide. ROW ACCESS: The City may require that a parcel(s) has access to, provides access to, or adjoins the public right-of-way. EASEMENTS: The City may require easements for the provision of public services and facilities. MAXIMUM UNITS: The maximum number of units on a lot that is associated with an SB 9 subdivision shall be two (2) units, including but not limited to accessory dwelling units (ADUs) and junior ADUs. OWNER-OCCUPANCY: The property owner shall sign an affidavit stating they intend to occupy one of the housing units as their principal residence for a minimum of three (3) years from the date of the approval of a new lot created pursuant to SB 9. 10.2.d Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 SB 8, 9, 10 New Housing Legislation: FAQ for Owners, Developers and Public Entities By Andrew L. Faber, Esq. For further information, please contact Andrew L. Faber, Esq. – andy.faber@berliner.com Jolie Houston, Esq. – jolie.houston@berliner.com Erik Ramakrishnan, Esq. – erik.ramakrishnan@berliner.com BERLINER COHEN, LLP 10 Almaden Boulevard, Eleventh Floor San Jose, California 95113 (408) 286-5800 10.2.e Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 1 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 SB 8, 9, 10 – New Housing Legislation: FAQ for Owners, Developers and Public Entities By Andrew L. Faber, Esq. Berliner Cohen, LLP Rev. October 8, 2021 It is rare that State legislation regarding city planning creates such a public furor as the Governor’s recent signing of three related bills, SB 8, 9, and 10, has caused. SB 9 has received the bulk of the attention, with some calling it the death of single-family zoning in California. While that may be an exaggeration, SB 9 does have the potential to enable the development of a great many additional dwelling units in single-family zones. We have been deluged with questions about these bills. Here are some of the most common questions and our answers. Some of the answers are by nature tentative, as the bills bear all of the earmarks of compromise legislation with many issues left to be worked out by cities/counties,1 the California Department of Housing and Community Development (“HCD”), and the courts in the future. For example, SB 9 itself amends or adds three sections to the Government Code, and among them contains some 78 subparts, no fewer than 14 of which begin with the phrase “notwithstanding [some other section in the new law].” QUESTION: This legislation is a surprise. Did it come out of the blue? ANSWER: Not really. The State first declared a housing crisis in 1975 and shortly thereafter passed the Housing Accountability Act (Sec. 65589.5), limiting the grounds to deny housing projects. The State also started to stiffen requirements for cities to plan for adequate housing in the housing element of their general plan, including by the adoption of RHNA numbers (Regional Housing Needs Allocation), and through the Density Bonus Law (Sec. 65915) required cities to give density bonuses and other incentives to affordable housing developers. More recently, highly publicized laws have included SB 330 (restricting growth controls, delays in completeness determinations, subjective design review, etc.), SB 35 (ministerial approvals for certain affordable projects), and the legislation mandating the availability of accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”). Some state legislators have been trying for years to eliminate single-family zoning. Minneapolis and Portland, Oregon have done so, and pressure has been put on cities in the Bay Area to follow suit. Earlier this year Berkeley voted to follow their lead, which is interesting considering that Berkeley is credited as having adopted the very first single-family zoning ordinance in the country (in 1916). The rationale to eliminate single-family zoning has been both to increase the supply of housing and to try to erase the legacy of such zoning having been used as an exclusionary tactic to promote racial segregation. 1 These laws generally apply to urban areas, whether they be in the jurisdiction of a county or a city. In our home county of Santa Clara, most development occurs in cities, but other counties have a larger share of urban development. To avoid using the clumsy term “cities/counties” in this article I will use the term “cities” alone, with the understanding that the laws apply to counties as well. As an additional housekeeping matter, all references to a section of State law refer to a section of the Government Code. 10.2.e Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 2 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 QUESTION: Why three bills? How are they related? ANSWER: Actually, there are more housing bills, including an additional 27 (!) that the Governor signed the following week. These additional bills are more narrowly focused on specific issues than those discussed in this article. SB 8, 9, and 10 each attack a different aspect of the perceived housing problem. In overview (with more details below) SB 8 makes a number of technical changes to various housing laws, including the definition of a housing development project in certain circumstances to include a single dwelling. It also extends the state-declared emergency from 2025 to January 1, 2030, which should allow for additional certainty in planning large projects. SB 10 is different from the other two in that it allows cities to adopt an ordinance to zone a parcel for up to 10 residential units (plus two ADUs and two junior ADUs per parcel) on a site that is either in a “transit-rich area” or is an “urban infill” site, as these terms are defined in the statute. The adoption of such a zoning ordinance is exempt from analysis under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”). The ordinance would override a restriction imposed by initiative if passed by a 2/3 vote of the city council. But SB 9 is the key player among the three bills. As will be discussed more fully below, it essentially requires cities to approve two residences on one parcel and to allow lot splits in all single-family residential zones in the State. With prior laws, this potentially allows an existing single-family lot with one dwelling now to be split in two, and for each of the new lots to have a duplex or a new house (potentially along with an ADU and a Junior ADU). There are many restrictions and caveats, which we will get into below. QUESTION: Do the state housing laws now apply to applications to build only one house? ANSWER: Partly. The ancestor of these laws, the Housing Accountability Act, defines a “housing development project” as a use consisting of either a mixed-use development or of “[r]esidential units only” (Sec. 65589.5(h)(A)). Because of the plural term “units,” that definition has been interpreted by most practitioners and by HCD to apply only to projects consisting of two or more residences, including a single-family residence with an accessory dwelling unit. SB 8, however, contains a new definition of “housing development project” which includes “a proposal to construct a single dwelling unit.” (Sec. 65905.5(b)(3)(C)). The statute goes on to say, however, that the new definition does not apply to the Housing Accountability Act. Nonetheless, SB 8 amends other housing laws to include the new definition within their scope. This includes various provisions of SB 330, which, for example, limit the number of hearings a city may hold on a project and the ability of a city to declare projects incomplete. In other words, there are now two different of definitions of “housing development project” applicable to different laws offering different protections to developers and different restrictions upon the discretion of approving entities. (Sec. 65905.5, 65913.10, 65940). 10.2.e Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 3 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 QUESTION: Does SB 9 really eliminate single-family zoning in California? ANSWER: Not technically, but in most urban areas, it does allow development inconsistent with traditional concepts of single-family zones. SB 9 adds to the Government Code a new Section 65852.21, which requires that a housing development proposal containing no more than two residential units within a single-family residential zone must be considered ministerially by a city – even if both are on the same parcel. In other words, the city cannot apply discretionary review or require a hearing if the proposal satisfies certain requirements that are laid out in that code section. SB 9 also adds Section 66411.7 as part of the Subdivision Map Act; this provides that most urban single-family lots can be split in two, again with certain qualifications. Finally, it makes minor amendments to another provision of the Subdivision Map Act (Sec. 66452.6) to allow additional time for tentative maps to remain in force before they are finaled. QUESTION: Does SB 9 apply everywhere in the state? ANSWER: Yes, it applies in all urbanized areas. Furthermore, it is expressly made applicable to all cities, including charter cities. We note that although practitioners generally felt that the Housing Accountability Act always applied to charter cities, a trial court decision in the county of San Mateo had determined that not to be the case. However, that result was just overturned on appeal, Cal. Renters Legal Advocacy & Educ. Fund v. City of San Mateo, 68 Cal. App. 5th 820 (2021), with the appellate court holding explicitly that the Housing Accountability Act did apply to charter cities. We expect future housing legislation also to be applicable to charter cities. QUESTION: Are all single-family zoned parcels eligible for SB 9 treatment? ANSWER: No. Under SB 9, a parcel must meet certain specific criteria to be eligible for ministerial approval of dwellings or to be split in two, including: 1) It must be in an urban area (city or county). 2) It must meet the same restrictions as contained in SB 35, Sec. 65913.4(a)(6)(B)-(K). These are primarily environmental, including that it not be located on a site that is: prime farmland, habitat for special status species, wetlands, in a high fire hazard severity zone, a hazardous waste site, in a delineated earthquake fault zone, in a flood hazard zone, or included in an adopted natural community conservation plan or under a conservation easement. 3) It cannot be in a historic district nor be a designated historic landmark. 4) The new project cannot demolish more than 25% of the existing exterior structural walls unless a local ordinance so allows, or unless the site has not been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. 5) It cannot require demolition of affordable housing, or housing that is subject to rent or price control, or that has been occupied by a tenant in the last three years. 10.2.e Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 4 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 QUESTION: Can a city deny residential permits or a lot split under SB 9? ANSWER: As with the Housing Accountability Act and other housing laws, a city can deny an SB 9 project only if it can find that the project would have a specific, adverse impact that cannot be mitigated on public health and safety or the physical environment. The city can apply objective zoning, subdivision, and design standards, but not if they would physically preclude the construction of two units on either of the resulting parcels or would result in a unit size less than 800 square feet. (Sec. 66411.7(c), (d); 65852.21(b)(1), (2)(A)). Thus, local ordinances concerning neighborhood compatibility or preservation of views that would otherwise prevent new structures from being built so close to property lines cannot be applied. QUESTION: What limits can a city put on the lot split? ANSWER: As stated above, a city must apply objective zoning, subdivision, and design review standards to the lot split, provided they are not in conflict with SB 9. However, they must allow for division into two almost equal size lots. More precisely, the smaller lot must be at least 40% of the size of the original lot. (Sec. 66411.7((a)). The lots may be as small as 1200 square feet! The only rear or side setbacks that the city can require are limited to four feet, similar to the setback allowed for ADUs. No offsite improvements or dedications can be required other than public service easements (Sec. 66411.7(b), (c), (e)). Note that parcels in a Coastal Zone remain subject to the Coastal Act. QUESTION: Can parking be required? ANSWER: No more than one parking space can be required for each residence on one parcel or on newly split lots. If the residences are within one-half mile of a high-quality transit corridor or a major transit stop, or even have a ride share vehicle within one block, then no parking spaces can be required. (Sec. 65852.21(c)). The city can require that each lot have access to the street (Sec. 66411.7(e)(2)). QUESTION: Can the resulting residences also have ADUs? ANSWER: This is a tricky area, and unfortunately the best answer is “yes and no.” If an owner seeks to build two houses on one parcel, without a ministerial lot split, then the parcel can presumably have at least one ADU and one junior ADU under normal ADU laws. Under SB 9, if a ministerial lot split is sought, however, the city cannot be required to permit more than two total units per new parcel, including ADUs (Sec. 66411.7(j)). And if an owner uses both features of SB 9 by splitting the lot and then applying for a ministerial residential permit on each new lot, the city is not required to allow either an ADU or a junior ADU on either parcel. (Sec. 65852.21(f)). 10.2.e Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) 5 4826-5712-9212v5 ALF\04706089 QUESTION: Are there other restrictions on the use of the split lots? ANSWER: Yes, including the requirement that the applicant for a lot split sign an affidavit stating that the applicant intends to occupy one of the units as their principal residence for a minimum of three years. (Sec. 66411.7(g)). Furthermore, the city must restrict the rentals of units on the split lots to periods longer than 30 days (in other words, no short-term vacation rentals). (Sec. 66411.7(h)). QUESTION: What CEQA review is required, if any? ANSWER: The lot splits and the housing approvals contemplated by SB 9 are explicitly stated to be “ministerial” in nature. A ministerial approval is not subject to CEQA, since CEQA only applies to discretionary approvals. Therefore, no CEQA analysis will be done of individual lot splits or housing permits. Similarly, SB 10 specifically states that the upzonings that a city may make are not projects under CEQA, though approval of a project with more than 10 units is specifically made subject to CEQA. (Sec. 65913.5(c)(1)). QUESTION: Are there still unanswered questions about these bills? ANSWER: Yes, very many, as some of the equivocation in the preceding analysis evidences. The legislation has many gaps and loopholes. We look forward to exploring them with interested readers, who should feel free to contact the author or his firm for further discussion. ****************************************************************************** Andrew Faber practices in the areas of Land Use and Municipal Law. He has over forty years of experience in representing private and public clients in a wide range of land use, environmental and public law matters, and in real estate, environmental and eminent domain litigation. If you have any questions, please contact Andrew Faber at andrew.faber@berliner.com or (408) 286-5800, or other members of the team: Jolie Houston, jolie.houston@berliner.com and Erik Ramakrishnan, erik.ramakrishnan@berliner.com Berliner Cohen is one of the largest and oldest law firms in San Jose serving the business and regulatory needs of private business and public agencies. Berliner Cohen also meets the growing demands of the Northern San Joaquin Valley with its expanding offices in Modesto and Merced. For more information, visit www.berliner.com. This article is intended for informational purposes only and not for the purpose of providing legal advice. Please contact your attorney to obtain advice with respect to any particular legal issue. The analysis and opinions expressed are solely those of the author. 10.2.e Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: SB8-9-10 Article (3561 : Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards) City of Gilroy STAFF REPORT Agenda Item Title: 1st Quarter Update on the City's Departmental and Legislative Work Plan Meeting Date: December 13, 2021 From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator Department: Administration Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis Strategic Plan Goals  Develop a Financially Resilient Organization  Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services  Promote Economic Development Activities  Promote Safe, Affordable Housing for All  Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure RECOMMENDATION Council receive the report. BACKGROUND During the budget development and adoption process for Fiscal Years 2021 -22 and 2022-23, the City’s legislative agenda and departmental workplans were presented and incorporated into the City’s strategic plans for the two fiscal years. Staff has been advancing the workplans and legislative agenda since the adoption of the budget, and is presenting a report on accomplishments over the first quarter, with inclusion of some items worthy of note that happened shortly after the end of the first quarter. ANALYSIS 10.3 Packet Pg. 45 Attached is the report for the 1st Quarter of FY22. Each department has included accomplishments and progress on various work items. The report has accomplishments grouped under each department by heading. ALTERNATIVES None, this is a report of activities – no action is proposed to offer alternatives. FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE None. CONCLUSION The departments have been active in pursuing attainment of the goals of the Council and each department’s workplan. Work will continue throughout the year, and staff will be returning with further updates for Council. NEXT STEPS Staff will continue to advance the workplans and legislative agenda, alongside other projects and tasks of the City. Attachments: 1. Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 10.3 Packet Pg. 46 Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) Administration • Renter Protection Policies (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o Presented draft ordinance to Council; rejected. Direction agenda item returning to Council in December. • Grant Writing (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o California Consulting contracted - grant writing/coordination/grant management/reporting services. • Unhoused Community/Safe Parking Policy/Implementation of Homeless Ad Hoc Committee Recommendations (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o Committee work completed. Work on recommendations proceeding – two completed, the rest underway. • Create Gourmet Alley Stakeholder Working Group (Department Workplan) o Created November 1, 2021. First meeting of this Committee will be in January. • Hire Economic Development Manager (Department Workplan) o Completed. • Pursue Opportunities for Sports Park (Department Workplan) o Work with the Sharks, including the first community meeting regarding the project, continues. • Downtown Façade Program (Department Workplan) o The City has received one application during 22Q1, which has been approved. • Pursue Opportunities for City‐Owned 536 Acres at Hecker Pass (Department Workplan) o Underway with continuation of Surplus Land Act process requirements. • Enhancing the Economic Development Website (non-plan update) o Underway, expected to be completed by November 30th. • Develop a Social Media Policy o Draft policy created and is in legal review; will be presented to Council for review in January/February. • Enhance the Current Social Media Strategy o Social media calendar created; seeking opportunities to develop more extensive messaging campaigns . • Develop a Process for Film Permits o Research commenced; engaging other departments. Anticipated completion December 2022. 10.3.a Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) Administrative Services • Facilities – Phase I Assessment of Environmental Remediation Work at Police Shooting Range (Department Workplan) o In process, quote for work obtained. • Facilities – Oversee Solar Power Project Installation on City Facilities (Department Workplan) o In process, recently completed walk through with vendor. • Fleet – Training of New Equipment Mechanic (Department Workplan) o In process; new mechanic assisting with workload. • Fleet – Initiate Lease Purchase of a Type I Fire Engine (Department Workplan) o Completed and under construction (2nd Type I currently under construction) • Human Resources – Implementation of Human Capital Management Module of ERP (Department Workplan) o Underway, expect to go live April 1, 2022. • Human Resources – C19 Response for Employees and Reopening of City Offices and Return to Onsite Work (Department Workplan) o City offices have reopened to the public and employees have returned to onsite work; continue to work on C19 employee impacts/issues. • Human Resources - Implementation of AFSCME MOU for FY 22 (Department Workplan) o Completed • Human Resources – Health Insurance Open Enrollment (Department Workplan) o Completed with items to be processed with December and January payroll ; enhanced employee benefits statement provided to each employee. • Human Resources – Employee Ergonomics (Department Workplan) o Ergonomics training provided for office employees and individual assessments completed. • Information Technology – ERP Implementation (Department Workplan) o Finance module live as of October 2021; HCM, UB and other modules in process. • Information Technology – Land Management Implementation (Department Workplan) o In process and on track for March 1, 2022 go live date. • Information Technology – Citywide Desk Top Replacement (Department Workplan) o In process – project is approximately 65% complete. 10.3.a Packet Pg. 48 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) • Information Technology – Cybersecurity Assessment (Department Workplan) o RFP process completed; assessment to begin January 2022 • Information Technology – Council Chambers Audio/Visual Modernization (Department Workplan) o In process with majority of work completed; final phase underway and will be completed by 12/31/21. Community Development • Develop Inclusionary Housing/Affordable Housing Incentive (in-lieu fee) Policy (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o Council presentation and initial feedback on October 25, 2021; policy development will be integrated with Housing Element Update • Downtown Specific Plan (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o Grant Funding for update not awarded, however opportunity to update some elements through updates of Housing Element and Zoning Code • Reach Codes (Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan) o Council presentation and initial feedback on September 13, 2021; staff will present recommendations along with update of Building Code effective 1/1/2023 • Update General Plan Housing Element o Consultant contract approved by Council October 18, 2021 with work to be completed by January 31, 2023 (Statutory deadline) • Implement EnerGov Land Management System (LMS) o Implementation in progress • Update Zoning Code & Zoning Map o Update to Council on December 6, 2021 with work to be completed by fall 2022 • Adopt Objective Design Criteria o Multifamily criteria adopted by Council on September 2, 2021 • Implement Customer Bill of Rights/Customer Service Initiatives 10.3.a Packet Pg. 49 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) o Presentations to Council on Customer Service Strategy on March 15, 2021 and Customer Service Strategy Metrics, Implementation Measures, and Timelines on August 16, 2021; Customer Service Manager position refilled on December 1, 2021 • Present CDBG & Housing Trust Fund Policy Discussion and Recommendations o Housing Trust Fund's Fiscal Health discussion to Council on October 18, 2021; policy recommendations to Council in first quarter of 2022 o CDBG 2022-2023 Funding Cycle presentation to Council on December 6, 2021; two-year cycle recommended Finance • Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) System Implementation (Department Workplan) o Went LIVE with Phase 1 (Finance) of the ERP project o Conducted End-User Trainings regarding use of new financial software • Refinancing Pension Obligations (Department Workplan) o Conducted introductory Council workshop on refinancing pension obligations • Department Relocation o Relocated the Finance Department to the North Wing (previously Recreation) of the City Hall facility Fire • Station Alert Package (Department Workplan) o Hardware/software installed at all 3 Fire Stations; final testing & go live in January 2022. • OES Type 6 Deployment (Department Workplan) o Signed Agreement with CalOES for Type 6 Engine; deployed to major wildfires for 81 days in 2021. • TEEC Remodel (Department Workplan) o Soliciting quotes for remodel to include dorms, kitchen, & shower. • Temporary Fire Station (Department Workplan) o Soliciting quotes and contract agreement s for building temporary fire station at Glen Loma development site. 10.3.a Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) • LifePack 15 Defibrillator/Monitors (Department Workplan) o Received Council approval for replacement purchase of 7 LP15 Defibrillator/Monitors. Purchase complete and replacement exchanged with all front line and reserve apparatus. • 3 FF/PM Personnel – Released to Independent Duty (Department Workplan) o Hired 3 new FF/PM personnel and placed in Joint Fire Academy. Upon graduation, successfully trained and evaluated for release to independent duty as accredited firefighter/paramedics. • Public Safety Drone Program (Department Workplan) o Partnered with GPD for the deployment and piloting of drones for safety & reconnaissance during large fires or SWAT Team high-risk warrant/arrests. Successfully deployed to 6 incidents this year. • LUCAS Device (Department Workplan) o Solicited and awarded grant funding for 2 LUCAS devices (mechanical CPR compression device) to allow state-of-the-art cardiac compressions during cardiac arrest. • Public Access Nasal Narcan Program (Department Workplan) o Obtained nasal Narcan medication from County Behavioral Health for placement on all City -controlled Public Access AEDs (18 total) for emergency treatment reversal opioid overdoses by members of the public before arrival of GFD or GPD. Police • Initiate “Stop” Data Collection (Racial Identity and Profiling Act) Plan o Underway- “Veritone” mobile application was purchased to captured data. Data collection started during the month of November 2021, with a full rollout scheduled for January 1, 2022. • Implement Department Legitimacy Training Program (Principled Policing, Implicit Bias, Procedural Justice) o Completed- The last training session for Procedural Justice was completed on Monday 12/06/2021. The entire department also completed LGTBQ+ Awareness Training. • Increase De-escalation Training-CIT (Crisis Intervention Training) o Completed- Department members completed de-escalation/CIT Training during the month of 12/2020. • Implement Employee Wellness & Resiliency Program 10.3.a Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) o Underway-budget amendment was requested and authorized for the purchase of a wellness application to avail wellness resources to all personnel. • Conduct an Internal Departmental Survey/Focus Group led by supervisors o Completed during the month of April 2021. The data and input were used during the team building workshop facilitation and will eventually be included in our strategic plan . • Implement Youth Engagement/South County Youth Diversion Program o Underway- the partnership with South County Youth Task Force, allied CBOs, public safety, and stakeholders has been established. Informational presentations have taken place. The screening for applicable/eligible diversion cases will start Monday 12/06/2021. Public Works • Explore operations for service delivery mechanisms to reduce cost – Closed Circuit TV (CCTV) Mainline o Completed SSMP • Explore operations for service delivery mechanisms to reduce cost – Computer Maintenance Management System (CMMS) o Implemented CityWorks and provided training to crews • Support Emergency Preparedness Throughout the Community – PG&E Power Outages o Applied for and received funding for City Hall Back-up Generator Project o Bid opening scheduled for January 4 • Monitor Treatment, Storage and Delivery Systems to Ensure Safe, Reliable Delivery of Water o Completed 30 Steel Service Water Line Replacements • Provide Consistent and Equitable Street Maintenance City-wide o Completed the Annual Citywide Pavement Maintenance Project • Develop 5-Year Street Repair Program o 5-year program adopted by City Council 10.3.a Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st Legislative Agenda and Department Workplan Updates Quarterly Update – Fiscal Year 2022 Quarter 1 (22Q1) Recreation • Explore issuing RFP for Independent Pool Operator at Christopher High School Aquatic Center o Award of contract scheduled to go to Council on January 10. • Explore Needs Assessment recommendation to transform Senior Center into Multi-Generational Community Center o Proposal was supported by Parks and Recreation Commission, but not passed by Council (July 2020). • Publish entire seasonal recreation activity guide in English and Spanish o The 2022 Winter/Spring Activity Guide was the first to be published in English and Spanish. • Implement Family Resource Center (FRC) at San Ysidro Cultural Center o Award of lease for a FRC scheduled to go before Council on January 10. 10.3.a Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: Legislative Agenda and Department Workplans Update Fiscal Year 22 - Quarter 1 (3592 : 1st CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Indiv it.i ·"} public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEA~¥. PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME: \--5f¾C\ ,.,--Y-e-r~~ Email/Mailing Address: 1.er-11.------SV). ✓Vwe,,z .. G < ~?,;. ~~o ✓-u13 ~ -- (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) ~ AGENDA ITEM(s): NUMBER f\w on M~4\, -V~lrcW;f'f\,_~(lt-__ TITLE '\ etlt At)\ OOJv\ £Q.,\M-(.) rn, Cf\-t-' (¥V h 1 bv1 d ~ ~ <; ~ NUMBER TITLE ----------------- Please compl ete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary. All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not. When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone. NAME: CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Indivici ..t &Lp ublic comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) --S-~-c~G 7 ~rc-z,,, Email/Mailing Address: 7.eJ<&~""-, YIVfC?.,,,{2_.SS 0 . '$Ct'--~\\.-V ·, ·DYZA -- (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to yo~) '• AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER {\00. 0-5-e,(ldS'.<, I fvrf\,, TITLE __. ~\')~ &=~~ ~~- NUMBER TITLE ________________ _ Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary, All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) -ITL 1 -.. I /) (""-, NAME: &~ Wh-ro-l\ ~ Email/Mailing Address : 2-Z 1'-,J/l12-nr, 5 r - (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) I, AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER _______________ _ TITLE ,5 h.d 14--~ ~ ~ ~/vl 5;,✓,' L R..-h ~'--. g /;t,"W/;,0(-- NUMBER ----------------- TITLE ----------------- Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary , All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not. When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone. NAME: CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual p ,.:1:>lic comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item P~:_ASE PR~NT NEA Vijto be ".J; t~ call you to the podium) . PcinCJ/A, ~"--~ Email/Mailing Address: A_ r-( L . L-k (Optional, to be used if requdt is made that st AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER \f ( I I T 0-v'Y\ __ .. TITLE 2, tr ,u__""' L L ·v"-s C 1/'N--W--' C,5, I N NUMBER TITLE --------------- Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary, All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not. When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual public comme nt i s limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) , .. ) ,, I ' ,,,, . r> . _,) "-I 1 : NAME: ' _.:f-J ,,,' ,I' ) / /''\ l l'\rs.. .•' ,,, ' :---' VliT~ Email/Mai il j;X~&~s: __ .:_~-;_=_}·_"·_t,_,_n_,·_,(._i _t(_~ .. __ 1 ______________ _ (Optional, to be used ifrequest is made tha t staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER _______________ _ TITLE ----------------- NUMBER. ________________ _ TITLE ----------------- Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker 's card is volunt ary. All persons may attend this meeting and speak reg ardless if a card is completed or not. When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone. NAME: CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item ~ /I ,\}(II , . .J-. PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) \(QD /Jc <:::,_ ~ /.\c. J.~' ~ ·~ ~.._J \,._){ ~~'; ,C-~.:....,y Email/Mailing Address: ______________________ _ (Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER TITLE C-1)m-n1-----,1·Ue:i----·----,Co-(\s-o-r-lc(-C(-.f\-o_Q_ NUMBER ----------------- TITLE ------------------ Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary. All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphoil i. CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD .. ,,· \ .. ··,,._ Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME 0?M2 /;(/r)r.,T/Jl-7 Email/Mailing Ad ~ss: & fvJ~ ,c} ( Optional , to be used i frequest is mad e that staff r espond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER 1 TITLE -6-~--~;c::::.__c,_n_;,,_--c_)k_._,_5J_i-:z-. )-1 -⇒--J;--+ ___ -n_tl_a_✓d--,J- NUMBER. _____________ _ T ITLE ------------------ Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Compl e tion of thi s speaker's card is voluntary . All persons may att e nd thi s mee tin g a nd sp ea k r ega rdl ess if a c a rd is c ompl ete d o r n ot. When your name is called, please appro a ch th e podium, a nd after receiving recognition from th e pres iding officer, s p ea k dire ctly into th e microphone. ' /1 L,; / CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME: \JMWi-MJ-fu< d -~i .. ~ n \. -_ . .,,, Email/Mailing Address: _____________________ _ (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER_\-'-\ _____________ _ TITLE'-c.,L:::,__ ______________ _ NUMBER ----------------- TITLE ------------------ Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to the agenda item discussion. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary. All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is completed or not. When your name is called, please approach the podium, and after receiving recognition from the presiding officer, speak directly into the microphone .. .