2022-01-10 - City Council Regular Meeting Agenda Packet
January 7, 2022 4:35 PM City Council Regular 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 OF GILROY
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
7351 ROSANNA STREET
GILROY, CA 95020
REGULAR MEETING 6:00 P.M.
MONDAY, JANUARY 10, 2022
**AMENDED**
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 restrictions 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 sp eaker 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 meetin g 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 Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 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 Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 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 the
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 C ouncil 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 agend a 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 meeti ng 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 wil l 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.
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 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, Street Naming Committee
Council Member Armendariz – ABAG (Alternate), CalTrain Policy Group, Gilroy
Downtown Business Association Board (alternate), Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee,
Historic Heritage Committee, Santa Clara Co. Library JPA (alternate), Santa Clara
Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority
JPA Board (Alternate), Street Naming Committee, VTA Committee for Transit
Accessibility (Alternate)
Council Member Marques - Gilroy Downtown Business Association Board, Gilroy
Gardens Board of Directors, Gourmet Alley Ad Hoc Committee, Historic Heritage
Committee (Alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board, Santa
Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, South County Regional Wastewater
Authority (Alternate)
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, Gourmet Alley
Ad Hoc Committee, Recycling and Waste Reduction Commission, Santa Clara Co.
Expressway Plan 2040 Policy Advisory Board, SCVWD Water Commission (alternate),
South County Joint Recycled Water Advisory Committee, South County Regional
Wastewater Authority Board, Street Naming Committee, South County Youth Task
Force Policy Team (alternate), VTA Committee for Transit Accessibility
Council Member Leroe-Muñoz - ABAG, CalTrain Policy Group (alternate), Cities
Association of Santa Clara County Board of Directors, Economic Development
Corporation Board, Gilroy Youth Task Force, SCVWD Water Commission, Silicon
Valley Regional Interoperability Authority Board, South County Youth Ta sk Force Policy
Team, VTA Mobility Partnership, VTA South County City Group (alternate), VTA Policy
Advisory Committee (alternate)
Mayor Blankley - Cities Association of Santa Clara Co. Board of Directors (alternate),
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 Joint
Recycled Water Advisory 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 ITEMS
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 Page5 VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be 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.
1. December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
2. December 13, 2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes
3. Claim of Westwood Inv., LLC (The City Administrator recommends a “yes”
vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial of the claim)
VII. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
1. Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application's AS21-13 and
TM 21-02 for 6970 Camino Arroyo Development Project.
1. Staff Report: Kraig Tambornini, Senior Planner
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Award a contract to EMC Planning in the amount of $169,049.00 for preparation
of an initial study/mitigated negative declaration for Planning Application AS 21 -
13 and authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated
documents.
2. Approval of a Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Budget Amendment Increasing
Appropriations in the Amount of $63,502 and Award of a Contract to
Burkett's Pool Plastering Inc. for a Base Bid amount of $280,457, with a
contingency of $28,045 for the Christopher High School Activity Pool Re -
Plaster, Project No. 22-ASD-271.
1. Staff Report: Walter Dunckel, Facilities Superintendent
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
a. Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending the FY
22 budget to transfer $63,502 from Capital Projects Fund (400) to Fa cilities
Fund (651) and appropriate the related expenditure for the Pool Replaster
project.
b. Award a contract to Burkett's Pool Plastering Inc. for the base bid price of
$280,457 for the Christopher High School Activity Pool Re-plaster, Project
No. 22-ASD-271, establish a contingency of up to $28,045 (10%), and
authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated
documents.
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 Page6 IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1. Streamline Consolidation of the City's Boards and Commissions
1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
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 G ilroy 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.
X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
1. Consideration of Authorizing Virtual Meetings Pursuant to Section 54953 of
the Brown Act for Council and all Boards and Commissions
1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Adopt Resolution authorizing virtual meetings pursuant to Section 54953 of the
Brown Act for Council and all Boards and Commissions.
2. Accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for Fiscal Year-Ended
June 30, 2021
1. Staff Report: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Accept and file report.
XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORT
A. Covid-19 Update
B. Status of In-Person Council Meetings
C. City-wide Road Repairs Due to Recent Inclement Weather
XII. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORT
XIII. CLOSED SESSION
ADJOURNMENT
City Council Regular Meeting Agenda
01/10/2022 Page7 MEETING DATES
FUTURE MEETING DATE:
JANUARY 2022
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 I CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC I City Clerk
7351 Rosanna Street I Gilroy, CA 95020-6197
Email: thai.pham@cityofgilroy.org
Phone: (408) 846-0204 I www.cityofgilroy.org
January 10, 2022
TO : Mayor Blankley
City Counciimembers
FROM: Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC
RE: Public Comment — Items Not on Agenda
Attached is email correspondence received in the City Clerk's Office for
items Not on the Agenda on the following topics:
• Reach Codes
• El Camino Real Mission Bell
cc: City Administrator
City Attorney
Thai Pham
From: Maria Aguilar <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 11:04 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Public comment: January 10th city council meeting
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
I recently attended, via zoom,
a presentation by the County of Santa Clara Climate Roadmap 2030. I was taken aback to learn that all the cities in the
county have an all electric Reach code or natural gas ban except for Gilroy. It seems to me that our city needs to do it's
part in attaining the goal of 100% carbon free electricity, thereby protecting the health of our residents from
emissions. Perhaps all new construction should not be approved unless they comply with reach code guidelines.
Thank you
Maria Aguilar
Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
Anne Bybee
From: Mimi S <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:48 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc: amahmutsun2020@gmail.com; Kanyon Sayers -Roods
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please reject a symbolic Mission bill marker on Public land in Gilroy
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Gilroy City Clerk, Mayor and Honorable City Council members,
Hello my name is Michelle Spreadbury. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of San Jose, I am contacting you
to respectfully ask that you kindly consider to be on the right side of history and take action to please prevent the
erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state.
On a personal note, I took part this past year in the Mission bells symposium at Santa Cruz Mission. There was a lot of
shocking information from the Indigenous leaders and scholars about our shared brutal California Mission history.
That symposium and more information is found on the RemoveTheBells.org website. I hope you will have some time to
look at the useful *bipartisan links and resources on this website.
Finally, we should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history of California. Erecting a new mission bell would be a
stain on our entire region.
I respectfully ask you to respect the calls of our Indigenous communities and neighbors.
So please act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Thank you for reading my message.
Sincerely,
Michelle "Mimi" Spreadbury
San Jose, Orchard City Indivisible Environmental Justice working group
1
Anne Bybee
From: Aleksandra Wolska <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 4:05 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Saying NO to the mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Thai Pham,
This letter is in supports the effort to say NO to a new mission bell in Giloryl May it not happen.
May all the mission bells come down in time.
live in Santa Cruz and am a part of conservation efforts on the coastal Cascade Ranch, which
attempts to restore the indigenous habitat of the area. As such, I am also a supporter of Native
American rights and proper representation of indigenous issues in the public arena.The new
mission bell proposal, when viewed in the context of the brutal history of colonization in CA,
glorifies oppression of native people by commemorating the atrocities of
missionary efforts. It is an insult to the contemporary Tribes as well as to
anybody who wishes for justice, equality and living in harmony with all
people.
Please let's not make it happen.
Sincerely,
Dr. Aleksandra Wolska
Founder and Artistic Co -Director of Theater Between
Santa Cruz, CA
1
Anne Bybee
From: Brien Sparling <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 2:41 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Do not install the El Camino Real Mission Bell marker
iCAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links. or
responding to this email.
I am Brien Sparling, an amateur historian, regular shopper in Gilroy and resident of nearby Royal Oaks community.
Tonight's Board motion to erect a new marker commemorating El Camino Real is ill-advised and hurtful to the
descendants of the indigenous tribes. Personally I enjoy the connotations of California's mission era past, but I cannot
ignore the huge cost of our colonization in indigenous lives and culture lost. Since the El Camino Bell marker holds a
specific symbolism to indigenous leaders, and these leaders have asked that the markers not be installed, I believe Gilroy
Council should not allow the installing of the marker.
Thank you,
Brien Sparling
Sent from Mall for Windows
i
Anne Bybee
From: Natalie Olivas <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 2:04 PM
To: Council Member Carol Marques; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member
Zachary Hilton; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Rebeca Armendariz;
Council Member Fred Tovar; Mayor Marie Blankley; City Clerk
Cc: amahmutsun2020@gmail.com
Subject: EXTERNAL - Stop New Mission Bells
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Hello, my name is Natalie Olivas. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Watsonville, I am contacting you to
ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell
marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not
romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Natalie Olivas (she/her/ella)
Regeneracion Community Organizer
Regeneracion Pajaro Valley Climate Action
Regeneracion - Action Climatica del Valle de Pajaro
www. regenerationpajarovalley.orq
1
Anne Bybee
From: Jan Guffey <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:49 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - No on Bell on Monterey
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
I strongly oppose the construction of a Mission Bell on Monterey Street. Mission bells are symbols of enslavement of
indigenous peoples in the California Mission system, and the attempted destruction of indigenous cultures that began
in that time period. We must move into the 21st century by recognizing the wrongs that were done in the past, and
not glorify them. Sincerely, Jan Guffey
i
AMERICAN CIVIL LIBERTIES UNION
FOUNDATION
Northern
California
Transmitted via Electronic Mail
January 10, 2022
Marie Blankley, Mayor
marie.blankley@ci.gilroy.ca.us
Fred Tovar, Mayor Pro Tempore
fred.tovar@cityofgilrey.org
Rebeca Armendariz, Council Member
rebeca.armendariz@cityofgilroy.org
Dion Bracco, Council Member
dion.bracco@cityofgilroy.org
Zach Hilton, Council Member
zachary.hilton@cityofgilroy.org
Peter Leroe-Munoz, Council Member
peter.leroe-munoz@cityofgilroy.org
Carol Marques, Council Member
carol.marques@cityofgilroy.org
Thai Pham, City Clerk
cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org
Re: Installation of El Camino Real Mission Bell Marker
Dear Mayor Blankley and Members of the Gilroy City Council,
The American Civil Liberties Union Foundation of Northern California ("ACLU NorCal") submits
this letter to urge the Gilroy City Council to reconsider the decision to erect a new mission bell
marker along the El Camino Real. The mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement ana attErnpted
genocide of Indigenous people in Califomia that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and
erasure of the first peoples of our state. While it is "fitting and appropriate that the occasion of the
City's 150`h Anniversary be memorialized," we should not romanticize nor celebrate this brutal
history and the ongoing impact it has on Indigenous communities today.) We join the Amah
Mutsun Tribal Band and others to call on the Gilroy 150th Committee, the Gilroy Arts and Culture
Commission, and the Gilroy City Council to bring people together towards healing, celebrate the
Gilroy City Council, Resolution Approving The Installation Of An El .Camino Real
Bell And Plaque In Downtown Gilroy To Commemorate The 150`h
Anniversary Of The Incorporation Of The City Of Gilroy (Sept 21,.2020).
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Abdi Soften' • BOARD CHAIR Farah Brelvl
SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE: 39 Drumm St. San Francisco. CA 94111
FRESNO OFFICE: PO Box 188 Fresno, CA 93707 • SACRAMENTO METRO OFFICE: PO Box 189070 Sacramento, CA 95818
TEL (415) 621-2493 • FAX (415) 255-1478 • TTY (415) 863-7832 • W W W. A C L U N C.O R G
Gilroy City Council
Page 2 of 4
diverse and resilient history of the City of Gilroy, and create a public installation that welcomes
all.
ACLU NorCal acknowledges that we exist on the occupied territory of over one hundred tribes
and that this land has been stewarded by Indigenous people since time immemorial. Further, we
recognize that Indigenous peoples continue to suffer from historic injustices as a result of
colonization and dispossession of lands, people, culture, languages, and resources. ACLU NorCal
supports and defends the rights of all Native American peoples to self-determination and to the
retention of specific and unique cultural and religious traditions and practices.' Through this work,
we aim to support Indigenous communities —and follow their lead —as they strive to uphold their
sovereignty, dignity, and autonomy. We are honored to submit this letter in support of the Amah
Mutsun Tribal Band and take inspiration in their tireless efforts to seek healing for Indigenous and
non -Indigenous peoples in our region.
Since the time of contact, powerful local, state, and federal institutions and governments have
endeavored to completely erase Indigenous peoples by' engaging in brutal violence -and erasing
history. California's treatment of its original inhabitants was shockingly violent, and the mission
system was a particularly horrific part of this. Between 1769 and 1834, approximately 150,000
California Indians died as a direct result of the mission system, many of whom were worked to
death building and maintaining the twenty-one missions. Those who fought back were often
beaten, tortured, and killed. Of those children born into the mission at Santa Cruz alone, over 75%
died before the age of five. The ringing of mission bells, used to call Indigenous slaves back to the
missions after a day's work in the fields, is a reminder to indigenous peoples that they were
subjugated to the priests and the missions. In stark contrast, these bells are held up as a celebration
and commemoration —perpetuating the myth that mission life was peaceful, that missions sought
the betterment of the Indigenous population, and that the Native American peoples were cared for.
Culture, heritage, and history are critically important pieces of our identities, how we define
ourselves; and our place in society. Symbols, images, andwords give meaning to everything
around us including how we see ourselves and our own place in the world. Images that glorify
colonial -settler myths and obscure- the realities of our collective history perpetuate
intergenerational trauma and cause real harm to us all. Created in the early 1900s to promote local
tourism, encourage visitation to the missions, and celebrate a distorted- version of history the El
Camino Real bell markers promote the myth of the mission -obfuscating the impact of historical
and intergenerational trauma on Indigenous peoples.; Tellingly, the City' of Gilroy Arts- and
2 ACLU NorCa1 Board of Directors, Res. No, 2021-06-24A, Resolution in Support of Nationwide
ACLU Indigenous Justice Initiative (June 24, 2021),. available
at https./[.www.aclunc org/sitesidefault/files7FOUNDATION%20RESOLUTION%20supporting
e%20indigenous%20jusrice%20FINA4
L%2006.2.21.pdf.
3 Elias Castillo, A Cross of Thomes (Craven Street Books, Apr. 1, 2017).
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Abdl Soltani • BOARD CHAIR Farah Brelvl
SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE: 39 Drumm St. San Francisco. CA 94111
FRESNO OFFICE: PO Box 188 Fresno. CA 93707 • SACRAMENTO METRO OFFICE: PO Box 189070 Sacramento. CA 95818
TEL (415) 621-2493 • FAX (415) 255-1478 • TTY (415) 863-7832 • W W W.AC LU N C.O R G
Gilroy City Council
Page 3 of 4
Culture Commission Staff Report proposing the installation of a mission bell makes no mention
of the Indigenous people of Gilroy or the treatment of those people at the missions.4
Today, local governments, governmental agencies, private businesses, landowners, schools, and
sports teams throughout the state of California are reckoning with our long -obscured past and
taking the necessary steps to end ongoing harm of symbols like the mission bell. Localities are
taking meaningful steps to rectify those harms by building relationships with Tribes and
'Indigenous, communities, acknowledging and rematriating the land, and acting as partners in
illuminating the history and resilience of Indigenous peoples in California.
In 2019, Governor Newsom issued an apology to California Native American Peoples "for the
many instances of violence, mistreatment and neglect California inflicted." As a part of that
apology, the Governor announced the creation of a Truth and Healing Council to document the
testimonies and experiences of California's Indigenous peoples and work with the state to
recommend steps towards healing.5 Statues that glorify Junipero Serra, Christopher Columbus,6
and the Missions have been removed. Public lands and privately -owned places —like Palisades
Tahoe and Sue -Meg State Park —are being re -named to wipe derogatory and racist names from
our map or to return to the names they were once called by ancestral inhabitants! And cities and
universities are reinoving mission bells, recognizing the ongoing harm they cause to our
communities.9
4 City of Gilroy Arts And Culture Commission, Staff Report re Gilroy 150th Committee El Camino
Real Bell Project (Sept. 8, 2020).
5 Exec. Dep't State of Cal., Exec. Order N-15-19 (June 18, 2019), available at:
https://www.gov.ca.gov/wp-content/uploads/2019/06/6.18.19-Executive-Order.pdf.
6 Kim Bojorquez, Gavin Newson signs law to replace Sacramento Junipero Serra statue with
monument for tribes, THE SACRAMENTO BEE (Sept. 24, 2021), available at:
https://www.sacbee. com/news/p olitics=government/capitol-alert/artic1e254079163.html.
7 Daniela Blei, San Francisco's 'Early Days' Statue Is Gone. Now Comes the Work of Activating
Real History, SMITHSONIAN MAGAZINE (Oct. 4, 2018), available at:
https://www.smithsonianmag.com/smithsonian-institution/san-francisco-early-days-statue-gone-
now-comes-work-activating-real-history-180970462/.
$ CAL. DEP'T OF PARKS AND RECREATION, Sue-meg State Park, available at:
https://www.parks.ca.gov/?page_id=417 (last accessed Jan. 10, 2022); Palisades Tahoe, The name
is new. The legend continues. Welcome to Palisades Tahoe:, available at:
https://www.palisadestahoe.corn/new-name (last accessed Jan. 10, 2022).
9 REMOVE THE EL CAMINO REAL BELLS, available at: https://removethebells.org/; Letter from
Valentin Lopez, Amah Mutsun Tribal Band Chair, to the Gilroy City Council (Jan. 10, 2022),
availableat:
https://drive.google.com/file/d/1 ELIXdTBeMIPR9IDHg14CI8wXufMikd_g/view?fbclid=IwAR3
Fbx-FWYdP-rwB_ProJUakyvcKf-oVQzPhG9gbkBj-M6LeMOJSuOPocFo
American Civil Liberties Union of Northern California
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Abell Solteni • BOARD CHAIR Farah Brelvi
SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE: 39 Drumm St. San Francisco. CA 94111
FRESNO OFFICE: PO Box 188 Fresno. CA 93707 • SACRAMENTO METRO OFFICE: PO Boa 189070 Sacramento. CA 95818
TE L (415) 671-2493 • FAX (415) 255-1478 • TTY (415) 863-7832 • W W W. A C LU N C.0 R G
Gilroy City Council
Page 4 of 4
Symbols like the mission bellimmunize us to violence and genocide and continue the erasure and
invisibility of our Indigenous communities. Instead of contributing to a false narrative that glorifies
violence and obscures the truth of our shared history, the City of Gilroy has an opportunity towork
alongside Indigenous communities to contribute to the creation of a new narrative —one that
speaks to the strength, resiliency, diversity, and leadership of Native American communities in the
region. We urge the Gilroy City Council to heed the call of your constituents, the call of history,
and the call to live up to your own values and reconsider your decision to erect a mission bell at
its January 10, 2022 meeting.
Sincerely,
Tedde Simon
Indigenous Justice Advocate
ACLU Foundation of Northern Califomia
tsimon@aclunc.org
�
Valentin Lopez
vjltestingcenter@aol.com.
Liberties Union of Northern California
EXECUTIVE DIRECTOR Abdi Soltent • BOARD CHAIR Farah Bralvi
SAN FRANCISCO OFFICE:39 Drumm St. San Francisco, CA 94111
FRESNO OFFICE: PO Box 188 Fresno. CA 93707 • SACRAMENTO METRO OFFICE: PO Box 189070 Sacramento, CA 95818
TEL (415) 621-2493 • FAX (415) 255-1478 • TTY (415) 863-7832 • W WW.A CLUNC.ORG
Anne Bybee
From: Moria Merriweather <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:55 PM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please do not put up a new mission bell in Gilroy
I
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links. or
responding to this email.
Dear Gilroy City Council members,
As a long-time resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of San Jose, I am deeply concerned to learn you are
considering erecting a new mission bell in Gilroy.
I have only a shallow, from -a -distance, knowledge to California's long history of enslaving, displacing, and killing the
native people who lived here prior to European settlers taking over, And yet, I know that this history of genocide and
cultural destruction is enshrined and symbolized by he Mission Bells.
Further, I know that the Amah Mutsun people are opposed to this plan.
I know that the Amah Mutsun people know the history of abuse toward them and other native people in deep and
personal detail.
Please do not create any new mission bell. Please vote swiftly and decisively against any such plan.
The native people who lived for so many generations on this land hold the land and all its inhabitants as sacred, and I
hold them as sacred.
I pray that we can bring the communities of Gilroy and the South Bay into harmony with the Amah Mutshn and with all
the native people of Californa.
Thank you
Moria
"The times are urgent. Let us slow down" — West African elders (as told here http://deeep.org/wp-
content/uploads/2014/11/GlobalConference2014 BayosSpeech.pdf)
"The Biggest Pandemic: Twice as many people died in 2020 of heart disease (690,882) as from COVID-19 (345,323).
This doesn't even include another 159,150 who died from stroke and another 106,106 from diabetes (mostly type 2),
which have the same risk factors as heart disease. While Covid-19 is an airborne disease, and cardiovascular disease and
type 2 diabetes are predominantly lifestyle and food -borne diseases, it would be wise for the CDC and HHS to put at
least as much effort into preventing these chronic conditions as Covid-19." --Dean Ornish, M.D. I Founder &
President, Preventive Medicine Research Institute; Clinical Professor of Medicine, UCSF, quoted
from https://jamanetwork.com/journals/jama/fullarticle/2778234
1
Anne Bybee
From: Ana Victoria Fortes <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 1:11 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - No El Camino Real Mission Bell Markers In Respect of Indigenous
Communities
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Elected Officials of Gilroy:
Hello my name is Ana Victoria Fortes. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Oakland, on the unceded
territory of the Ohlone peoples, I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to
prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy. Simply put, the mission bell is
a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a symbol that glorifies the
dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not romanticize or celebrate
this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you to respect the calls of
Indigenous communities, especially the Amah Mutun peoples, and act to prevent this mission bell from being
installed.
Respectfully,
Ana Victoria Fortes
1
Anne Bybee
From: Jenny <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:58 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar, Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc: Jenny Redfern
Subject: - EXTERNAL - Please do not erect another mission bell marker
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
To the Gilroy City Council,
As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community, Morgan Hill, I'm joining our indigenous local communities to ask you to
stand on the right side of history and prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown
Gilroy.
A marker with the history of our native peoples, such as the Amah Mutsun, would be more appropriate. The mission bell
symbolizes only the conquerors, who enslaved and dehumanized the native peoples they encountered. We should not
romanticize this brutal history with mission bells symbolizing the structures the natives were forced to build.
Please respect the calls of indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell replica from being installed.
Best wishes,
Jenny R. Redfern
t
Anne Bybee
From: Nassim Nouri <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:35 PM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques; City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please prevent the installation of a new mission bell
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear honorable Gilroy Mayor and Councilmembers,
My name is Nassim Nouri and I am contacting you to urge you to stand on the right side of history and take action to
prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state.
We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire
region.
I ask you to please respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Thank you,
Best regards,
Nassim Nouri
Councilmember, the Green Party of Santa Clara County
1
Anne Bybee
From: Penelope Hughes <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 12:19 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Opposition to the installation of Catholic mission bells in Gilroy
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
My name is Penelope Anne Hughes, my husband and two adult sons have Cherokee and Choctaw
heritage and are enrolled in the Cherokee Nation.
We live in neighboring Castro Valley.
I am contacting you to ask you to take the necessary action to prevent a new El Camino Real mission
bell marker in downtown Gilroy and any other symbols of genocide and racism from being installed in
Gilroy.
The mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and the nearly successful genocide of Indigenous
people in California; a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first
peoples of our state. The installment of a new mission bell would continue the romanticism and
celebration of this dark, brutal side of our history.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and their supporters and act to prevent this
mission bell from being installed in Gilroy. Please stand on the side of truth and justice.
Respectfully,
Penelope Anne Hughes
i
Anne Bybee
From: Greg SeaLion Cotten <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:57 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Carol Marques; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz
Cr amahmutsun2020@gmail.com
Subject: EXTERNAL - What were the Missions really like? Read Vatican quotes - No more bells,
please
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Leaders of Gilroy,
The days of romanticizing the California Mission system are over. Don't take my word for it, please read the
below quotes from the Vatican Archives - otherwise the source is cited.
"My motive for fleeing [Mission San Francisco] was that my brother died on the other shore, and when I cried
for him at the mission they whipped me. Also the alcade Valeriano hit me with a heavy cane for having gone to
look for mussels at the beach without Raymundo's permission." - Homobono
A Spanish inquiry directed by California Governor, Don Diego. July 21, 1797.
"...I would like to inform you of the many abuses that are commonplace [in the California missions]. The
manner in which the Indians are treated is by far more cruel than anything I have ever read about. For any
reason, however insignificant it may be, they are severely and cruelly whipped, placed in shackles, or put in
stocks for days on end without even a drop of water."
- Father Antonio De la Concepcion Horra assigned to head Mission San Miguel wrote almost upon
arrival in 1798
Saint Junipero Serra: "Father of the California Missions"
The utmost goal of the Missions (and leader Junipero Serra) was to baptise and to ensure that upon death
those souls, if kept from sin, ascended to heaven. Joy, pain, and suffering were simple artifacts of earthly
existence, the thing that mattered more than anything, was that Indians ascended to heaven upon death.
The words of Saint Junipero Serra:
"...the spiritual side of the missions is developing most happily. In [Mission]San Antonio there are
p� P 9 PP� Y•
simultaneously two harvests at one time, one for wheat, and one of a plague among the children who are
dying."
- Junipero Serra's letter to superior Fr. Pangua in Mexico City, July 24, 1775
1
"... two or three whippings which Your Lordship may order applied to them... "If your lordship does not have
shackles, with your permission they may be sent from here (Carmel Mission). I think the punishment should
last one month."
—Junipero Serra's letter to Spanish commander Moncada to punish a group of 4 Indians who tried to
escape Carmel Mission several times, dated July 31st, 1775
We can not free the Indians, relinquish directing their future, or give up the authority to use punishment.
"...spiritual fathers should punish their sons, the Indians, by blows... Saints don't seem to be any exception to
the rule... Saint Solano gave directions for his Indians to be whipped...I do not see by what law or reasoning
(my Indians) should be exempt [from being whipped]."
• Junipero.:Serra's response to
• Spanish Governor Neve's request: free the Indians, give them legal representation, and stop
• whipping them, dated January 7, 1780
San Francisco Mission (Dolores) in 1797 a red hot iron to burn crosses into the faces of a group of men,
women, and children who tried to escape the mission. (Changing Image Norman: University of Oklahoma,
1984)
Native responses to an inquiry directed by California Governor Don Diego. The below native statements were
given to Spanish soldiers who answered the question "why did you leave Mission San Francisco?"
"My wife and daughter died, and on five separate occasions Father Danti ordered me whipped because I
was crying. For this reason I fled." - Tibucio
-- "My motive for fleeing was that my brother died on the other shore, and when I cried for him at the mission
they whipped me. Also the alcade Valeriano hit me with a heavy cane for having gone to look for mussels at
the beach without Raymundo's permission." - Homobono
-- "My mother, two brothers, and three, nephews died, all of hunger. I left so I would not die also." - Liborato
Carmel Mission 1786 French Admiral Jean -Francois Laperouse describes the scene : some natives in
shackles and stocks, fetid squalor, and wrote it was no different than the slave plantations he visited in the
Caribbean where the Franciscan policies toward the Indians was "reprehensible' adding they beat Indians for
violations that in Europe would be considered insignificant.
Mission Indians fate was "worse than that of slaves."
— Spanish Governor Neve 1779 (San Francisco Historical Society, 1971)
Mission San Fernando 1815
The captured leader of a group of Indians that escaped the mission had his feet and legs bound, then the skin
of newly slaughtered calf tightly wrapped around him and sewn shut. He was tied to a post and left to suffocate
under a hot sun that slowly shrank the calf skin.
2
—as witnessed and reported by Russian Seal Hunter Vassili Tarakanoff held in Mission San Femando
for several years interviewed for Hubert Bancroft's History of California.
Mission Santa Cruz 1812
Father Quintana was hated by Indians because of his penchant for flogging them freely. He fashioned a
horsewhip tipped with iron barbs to use against the Indians. He was soon assassinated. Those responsible
were sentenced to 50 daily lashes for 9 days and life sentence of hard labor.
— Noted in "The Assassination of Padre Andres Quintana by the Indians of Mission Santa Cruz in
1812." Lorenzo Asisara
By 10 years old mission children were considered laborers and assigned daily work. It's noted that many of the
children were suffering from hernias.
— French Navy Captain Jean Laperouse, leader of a major scientific expedition and his doctors. as
noted in Population of the California Indians; Cook
The El Camino Bells are the Confederate Statues of California - and are coming down. They are an artifact of selling
California to those in the East. Please do not raise thisbell and perpetuate the glorification and the rornanization of this
oppressive and brutal enslavement system. Cities are taking them down, citizens are taking them down.
I request you not only not put up any more bells but that you support the removal of ALL El Camino Bells on public lands.
Respectfully,
Greg Cotten
Marine Biologist and founding member of Friends ofJuristac
3
Anne Bybee
From:
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 11:46 AM
To: Council Member Fred Tovar
Cc: City Clerk; Amuh Mutsun Tribe
Subject: EXTERNAL - No Mission Bell for Gilroy
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links, or
responding to this email.
"Hello my name is Julie Kowalewski Ward and I am a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Santa Cruz
County. I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection
of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in
California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We
should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire
region.
I was raised Catholic, but I do not support this part of our history. All mission bells should be removed. I ask you to
respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed."
Julie Kowalewski Ward
1
Anne Bybee
From:
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 10:55 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please Don't Erect a Mission Bell in Gilroy
i
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Council Members,
As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Hayward, CA, and as a supporter of the Amah Mutsun, I am
contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El
Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
The mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not
romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
I ask you to do the right thing -- respect the calls of Indigenous communities, and act to prevent this mission bell
from being installed.
Thank you for your time.
Sincerely,
Lucretia Whitener
i
Anne Bybee
From:
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 10:25 AM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques; City Clerk
Cc: Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Subject: EXTERNAL - NO NEW MISSION BELLS
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Greetings. My name is Beth Ogilvie. I live in the SF Bay Area. I've been studying the history of California with a focus on
the catastrophic impact of Europeans on the Native peoples. This catastrophe began with the Missions. The missions
enslaved thousands of Indigenous people, treated them brutally, and directly or indirectly caused the death of 150,000.
To memorialize this horrific time in our history with a mission bell would be unconscionable. It would send a message to
the world that we the people of California are either unforgivably ignorant of our horrific history or shockingly
indifferent to the suffering of so many people. We need to work toward healing the sins of the past, not glorifying them.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Sincerely
Beth Ogilvie
Member, Peace and Justice Action Team
Starr King Unitarian Universalist Church, Hayward
1
Anne Bybee
From: Rename Squaw Valley <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 10:00 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc: Tedde Simon
Subject: EXTERNAL - Support to ask Gilroy not to install a new mission bell
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Mayor Blankley and Council Members,
Humbly and respectfully we write to you to reconsider your intent to erect a new El Camino Real Mission
Bell.
Not one American Presidency has addressed the primary problem of Indigenous people. The primary problem
plaguing American tribal groups isn't civil rights, social integration, or even honoring treaties. It's that the
United States has never corrected the legacies and burdens of genocide and slavery. Before genocide was
carried out by the state of California, the Doctrine of Discovery not only permitted, but demanded, the
subjugation of Indigenous peoples, void of any rights, opportunities or privileges under the Mission system.
Missions redistributed 100% of what they saw as "natural resources," including land, water, flora and fauna,
and slave labor. Business and trading were integral to this, and "rights" of those subjugated did not exist. In a
nation of a race spaced society, it is what you own and control that determine your equal opportunities, rights,
and privileges. As such, California remains the largest populated state in the union of Non -Federally
Acknowledged tribes. Acknowledge the continued indigenous existence of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band and
respect their wishes.
For over a half a century, continued lack of Federal Acknowledgement for most tribes petitioning for
recognition is not only symptomatic of a broken system, but its continued awareness, prevailing disregard of its
state, and insistence as the only means of Federal tribal acknowledgement, amounts to genocide through
1
beauracracy. Without Federal Acknowledgement America continues to tell individuals like myself and our
tribes that we are anything but Native American until we have provided bona fide evidence from the United
States only approved resources i.e. anthropologist and government officials. Honor our indigenous population,
the first Californians, who continue to be disregarded, by hearing the calls for healing from the Amah Mutsun
Tribal Band and respect their wishes.
Matthew 7:12 is the golden rule and very much applicable as these bells memorialized the rhythm of life
for all who lived at the christian missions, slaves included. They announced when it was time to go to church,
time for breakfast, lunch and dinner, time for work, or time for rest, unless you were Indigneous - An Indian, A
Native American. Those bells also rang for funerals, but did they ring for our people? For the mass
graves? The bells are a symbol of intergenerational trauma of our indigenous communities and both their sight
and sound are traumatic triggers for many tribal members.
The pope in 2018 has publicly offered his voice to help amplify the call for healing within indigenous
communities around the world - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ay4pAAtx0wM&t=19s
Here, locally, the Fresno Diocese very much personifies the Pope's request, standing by our side,
amplifying our calls to heal our indigenous communities.
Please join the City of Santa Cruz and resolve to remove all El Camino Real bell markers from public
property and respect the calls from the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band to heal our indigenous communities.
Collectively we can better decide how to spend the allocated funds for these bells for an endeavor that
will promote inclusiveness, welcome new residents, and live up to the Gilroy City "Vision" that "promotes
Gilroy as a community for all."
God Bless
Roman C. Rain Tree
Rename S-Valley (Fresno, County) Coalition Chair
(
2
Anne Bybee
From: toni bauer <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:50 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL -
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
To: The Gilroy City Council
RE: Consideration of erecting a Mission Bell on Monterey Road
Dear Members,
Please do not approve the addition of this mission bell.
These bells began as a tourism advertising, marketing and promotional real estate strategy to idolize the Mission Period.
They subvert the full truth of the indigenous history of the Mutsun and Awaswas peoples. Some may have since attached
religious significance to these decorations, but it must be remembered that they also represent repression, religious
subjugation and genocide to many. What is horrifyingly apparent is the nearly complete eradication of tribal culture and
religion within the last 250 years of Western colonialization. Opposing this bell would be a significant gesture to the Amah
Mutsun and could show a genuine desire to address the lack of awareness that is embedded in our community.
There is a growing recognition among many in the spiritual community that the history of the first nations people who
stewarded this land for millenia must be learned and honored. The Amah Mutsun understood the complex system of
stewarding the land, fauna and flora; for example, their methods of controlled burns. How many of us are fluent in the
culture and history of the people that stood here for at least 15,000 years? How many of us are even aware that their
descendents continue to steward this land today? Failing to open our minds and change our perceptions further
perpetuates these shameful activities. We have a long journey of introspection and action in order to right these
injustices.
would encourage the council to deny the approval of the bell, and to act proactively, commit funding and resources into
promoting the true history of this area —in the words of the Amah Mutsun—and to recommend a complete history be
taught in our schools and at our historic sites. Even though the history of the western treatment of tribal people is
abhorrent, it is a disservice to our children to continue a myth of false reality. I challenge you to add your voice and
position to encourage Gilroy and neighboring communities to take down the bells and educate our communities.
Let us not only do this one thing. Let us heal.
Antoinette Bauer Smedberg
Director, Wisdom Center of Santa Cruz
1
Anne Bybee
From:
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:32 AM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley
Cc: Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca Armendariz; Council Member
Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz;
Council Member Carol Marques; City Clerk; Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please support all your citizens and do NOT install the mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Mayor Blankley,Council Members Tovar, Armendariz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Munoz, and Marques,
I urge you to reconsider installing an El Camino Mission Bell in your city of Gilroy. And take a longer look to discover a
symbol for yourupcoming celebration that represents all your citizens.
Chair Valentin Lopez of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band has offered to join you with the Gilroy members of their tribe to
create a vision that represents the truth of the history of the Missions and the lives of all your citizens.
I hope you will take this opportunity to go forward in your city acknowledging the true history of the missions and a
vision of hope and inclusion.
In community,
Colleen Cabot, member
First Unitarian Church of San Jose
Anne Bybee
From: Liz Milazzo <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:31 AM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Fwd: No new Mission Bells in Gilroy!
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Forwarded message
From: Liz Milazzo <
Date: Mon, Jan 10, 2022 at 9:20 AM
Subject: No new Mission Bells in Gilroy!
To:<marie.blankley@ci.gilroy.ca.us>, <fred_tovar@cityofgilroy.org>,<rebeca.armendariz@citvofgilroy.org>,
<dion.braccoPcityofgilroy.org>,<zachary.hilton@cityofgilrov.org>, <peter.Ieroe.munoz@citvofgilrov.org>,
<caroLmarques@cityofgilroy.org>
Cc: < , <cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org>
Dear Mayor Blankley, Mayor Pro Tempore Tovar and Council Members Armendariz, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe_Munoz and
Marques,
I am writing to sincerely request that the City not erect a replica of the Spanish Mission bells. I attended two days of
public events last August, held in Santa Cruz, to tell the true history of the California missions, and to remove the last of
the Mission bells from public spaces in Santa Cruz. These bells represent the destruction of indigenous culture,
spirituality and traditional knowledge. The bells were used to regulate the daily life of California Indians forcibly brought
to the Missions and enslaved there. Chairman Valentin Lopez, other members of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, and
representatives of many Native California Tribes spoke to the intergenerational trauma felt today when seeing or
hearing the Mission bells, a symbol of the brutality and genocide their ancestors suffered.
We have much work to do to tell the real truth of California history, and begin to find a path to reparations and
healing. I grew up in California, and know now that I learned a whitewashed version of Mission history in the 4th grade.
Our towns and communities continue to tell the history of California through the lens of settler colonialism, ignoring
10,000 years of history. We owe a huge debt of gratitude to the Mutsun people and all the indigenous peoples of
California who stewarded these beautiful and productive landscapes for thousands of years. Every aspect of our current
day towns and communities depends on this past and present stewardship of the Earth. Refraining from installing the
Mission bell would be a sign of respect to the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band.
Sincerely,
Liz Milazzo
1
Anne Bybee
From: Stacie Wolny <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:31 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - No new mission bells
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links. or
responding to this email.
I've heard that the city of Gilroy has plans to install a mission bell as part of its sesquicentennial, and I'm
writing to ask you to soul -search, reconsider and change direction. The glorification of California missions is a
horror of continuing to whitewash their brutality against the Indigenous people of this land. That is not
something we should celebrate, but is something that we should face up to, apologize for, learn from, and
begin to make amends for. Other communities are finally removing their mission bells for this very reason,
which is long past due.
The very fact that a new mission bell is even being considered shows how unfortunately far we have to go to
even acknowledge the genocidal history of the place we live. "Gilroy" as it is now wouldn't exist if land hadn't
been stolen from its original people, ancestors of the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band, who lived here for thousands
of years (and we think that 150 years is a long time, try 10,000...) before being cruelly decimated by those
missions.
If you're commissioning a piece that celebrates Gilroy, please work with the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band to
create something that heals, not hurts. Something that not only acknowledges the recent invader history of
this place, but respects the deep history of its first people, and the very land itself that Gilroy sets upon.
Something that speaks the truth, and helps us *all* move a step forward *together*, which is what a
celebration of community should be.
Thank you.
Stacie Wolny
a white lady in nearby Campbell CA
Anne Bybee
From: Katherine McCamant <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 9:11 AM
To: City Clerk
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - Mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links, or
responding to this email.
"Hello my name is Katherine McCamant. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Santa Cruz, I am
contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El
Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in
California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction. and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We
should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire
region.
1 ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being
installed." Sent from my iPad
Sent from my iPad
1
Thai Pham
From: rooney farris <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:50 AM
To: Council Member Carol Marques; City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred
Tovar; Council Member Rebeca Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council
Member Zachary Hilton; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - Opposing new mission bell
U
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Hello,
My name is Rooney Farris. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community
of Santa Cruz, I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side
of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real
mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted
genocide of Indigenous people in California, a symbol that glorifies the
dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our
state. We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history.
Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to
prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Sincerely,
Rooney
i
Thai Pham
From: Jacqueline Tuttle <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:49 AM
To: City Clerk
Cc: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz;
Subject: EXTERNAL - Don't erect a new mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
"Hello my name is Jackie Tuttle. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Santa Cruz, I am contacting you
to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real
mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in
California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We
should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire
region
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
I'm not sure why the lovely and growing city of Gilroy would choose to erect a new mission bell when most
surrounding communities have removed their mission bells.
Thank you for taking my comment.
Jackie Tuttle
Thai Pham
From:
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:46 AM
To: Victor Sin; City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council
Member Rebeca Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary
Hilton; Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - El Camino Real Mission Bell Marker
' CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tempore, and Councilmembers,
My name is Victor Sin. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of San Jose and a volunteer leader with the
ACLU Santa Clara Valley chapter, I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to
prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy. Simply put, the mission bell is a
symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a symbol that glorifies the
dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not romanticize or celebrate this
brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you to respect the calls of
Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Thank you for your kind attention.
Respectfully,
Victor Sin
1
Anne Bybee
From: William Ware <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:13 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please Do Not Install A Mission Bell Marker
i
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Gilroy City Council members,
I am imploring you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real
mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not
romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed. This
will make native people and other people of color, like myself, feel that municipalities care about them.
Please do not erect a mission bell marker,
Will
William Ware (he/him)
M.Sc. Fellow in Coastal Science & Policy (2020-22)
- Please do not feel obligated to reply during non -work hours -
Anne Bybee
From: Brett Garrett <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 8:03 AM
To: City Clerk
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please cancel new mission bell
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear City Clerk and members of City Council,
I am disappointed to learn that the City of Gilroy has been making plans to install a new mission bell.
Last year I attended a ceremony in Santa Cruz, recognizing that city's decision to remove all of its mission bells from city
property. I listened to many Indigenous speakers describing the bells as painful reminders of the enslavement and
torture that their ancestors endured under the California mission system.
Please work with Indigenous leaders to learn more, and to educate others, regarding the tragic and shameful events of
the past. Please cancel the proposed new bell.
Sincerely,
Brett Garrett
Thai Pham
From: Jennifer Astone <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 7:44 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar
Cc: amahmutsun2020@gmail.com
Subject: EXTERNAL - Prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell in Gilroy
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear City Clerk Thai Pham, Mayor Marie Blankly and Mayor Pro Tempore Fred Tovar,
Hello my name is Jennifer Astone.
As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Aptos, I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to
prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a symbol that glorifies the
dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a
new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
Please respect our Indigenous relatives and restore a dialogue towards reconciliation that can be healing for all. Our Indigenous communities have
much to teach us and ways to guide us to be in better balance with our land, the animals and the ecosystem.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Sincerely yours,
Jennifer Astone
Jennifer Astone
+nhvw.iciaptos.com
she/her/hers (Why Pronouns Matter)
INTEGRATED
y,. CAPITAL
INVESTING
Skin up for my newsletter here
Living and working on the unceded territory of the Awaswas / Ohlone Peoples of Aptos, California, represented today by
the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band
1
CITY OF GILROY I CITY CLERK'S OFFICE
Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC I City Clerk
7351 Rosanna Street I Gilroy, CA 95020-6197
Email: thai.phamPcityofgilroy.org
Phone: (408) 846-0204 I www.cityofgilroy.org
January 10, 2022
TO : Mayor Blankley
City Councilmembers
FROM: Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC
RE: Public Comment
Agenda Item IX. 1 — Streamline Boards and Commissions
Attached is email correspondence received in the City Clerk's Office
regarding Agenda Item IX. 1 from the following individuals:
•
•
Joanne Fierro
Maria Aguilar
cc: City Administrator
City Attorney
Anne Bybee
From: Joanne Fierro
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:22 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Reduction of Boards and Commissions
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links. or
responding to this email.
Please read at 1/10/2022 meeting
Mayor and council members I want to ask you to postpone any decision on eliminating any boards or commissions until
the COVID restrictions are lifted and we can see if participation returns. By eliminating 5 now that will take away 20 or
more opportunities for citizen participation in city government.
Thank you
Joanne Fierro
1
Anne Bybee
From: Maria Aguilar <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 3:44 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - On the agenda Jan 10th consolidation of committees
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links. or
responding to this email.
At present I don't believe that this is the right time to consolidate committees the last two years have produced
unprecedented challenges for many of us. I belong to various organizations and because of covid we have experienced a
vast reduction of participants. Perhaps, this should be tabled for the end of this year. We need to give residents time to
sign up for committees our city needs diversified input to represent the needs of our residents, it's their city and their
voices should be given the opportunity to be heard.
Thank you
Maria Aguilar
Seat from Yahoo Mail on Android
1
Thai. Pham _
From: Leah Helper <
Sent: Saturday; January 8, 2022 8:33 AM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Toyer; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - mission Bells are not appropriate for a modern California community
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening
attachments, clicking links, or responding to this email.
Dear City Clerk, Mayor, and City Council,
I have been a Gilroy resident for 31 years. I taught History including California History at Gavilan College for most of
those years, and it is no longer acceptable for California cities like Gilroy to romanticize and cover over the brutal history
of the mission system as it impacted California native peoples. Teaching about the genocide involving murder, rape,
theft, and other violence is very important; celebrating that genocide by honoring and forefronting the symbol of the
Spanish violators is morally and municipally wrong.
We are on unceded native land. It was won by conquest. We are very lucky we have descendents of the Amah Mutsen
and other groups allive and well to help us understand the extent of the losses, and the path to restoring at least some
of the dignity, land, and sovereignty of native peoples and nations. It is imperative that we listen to these descendents,
and respect their voices.
Please do not introduce this symbol of hatred into Gilroy as if it were something to be honored.
Leah Halper
1
Thai Pham
From: sheila carrillo <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 6:51 AM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; City Clerk; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton;
Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Mission Bells represent our SHAMEFUL HISTORY
i
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
To: Gilroy City Council,
It is an affront to the Ahmah Mutsen tribal members and a blight on the City of Gilroy to even have a conversation
about erecting a mission bell monument at a time when monuments to racism and genocide are being torn down all
over the country. I attended the heart -wrenching precedent -setting bell removal ceremony in the City of Santa Cruz, and
I urge you to dismiss the racist plan to install a bell signifying the heinous treatment of our indigenous population and
instead hold educational forums about the true history of the mission period.
Sheila Carrillo
1
Thai Pham
From: Smith, Kimberly <
Sent: Saturday, January 8, 2022 1:17 PM
To: City Clerk
Cc: Council Member Zachary Hilton
Subject: EXTERNAL - Public Comments for Items NOT on the Agenda Jan. 10, 2022
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
To Whom It May Concern:
Please add the following letter into the public record.
Thank you
Dear Council Members,
My name is Kimberly Smith, and I have been teaching English courses at Gavilan College for more than 20
years.
write to encourage a no vote regarding the proposed installation of an El Camino Real Mission Bell in Gilroy.
Such markers cause material harm to our communities. They disregard the pain and suffering the mission
period caused for Amah Mutsun people, as well as create and maintain a distorted historical picture, one that
particularly damages the lives of young scholars and writers, who need to be grounded in truth in order to
realize their full potential as citizens of our world.
The El Camino Real bells obscure the violence that came with Spanish settlement in California, a time that was
then followed by the also wretchedly violent Mexican and Anglo periods. Erasing these important parts of
California history dangerously lessens the knowledge required to best care for the land and our futures. For
such historical distortions show up in how we envision our relationship to this place and how we choose to
take care of it for ourselves and our children. Our choices will affect generations to come, but until we know
our history, we cannot face our future with integrity, whole-heartedness, and well-being.
The Amah Mutsun people continue to work toward sharing their history, so they may heal from it, and that we
may also all be lifted from our faulty understandings of where we are, where we have been, and where we
might yet arrive.
As you surely know, last year Gavilan College celebrated its centennial. One hundred years of educating
people is certainly an accomplishment. In that we can take pride.
The Amah Mutsun people lived on this land for 11,000 years and their connection to it must also be realized
and celebrated. The installation of a mission bell, however, would work against that goal and does so in a
particularly dismissive and harmful manner.
i
Such a dismissal damages both recipient and perpetrator because it distorts the consciousness and hearts of
all it touches, which is why in my role as educator I particularly beseech you to avoid this harm and work
toward closeness and understanding with the Amah Mutsun.
Honoring their request to reject an El Camino Real Mission Bell is an important step in forming that life -
affirming connection.
Best,
Kimberly Smith
English Instructor
Gavilan College
2
Thai Pham
From: Angelee Dion <
Sent: Saturday, January 8, 2022 4:42 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - No new mission bell in Gilroy
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Thai Pham,
am writing to you today to express my sincere hope that you
will rescind your decision to install a mission bell in the city of
Gilroy. We are living in a time of reckoning for the true, brutal
history of this nation and this state. In our region, this includes
acknowledging the near -genocide of the native inhabitants by
Spanish colonizers and Catholic missionaries.
We can't undo the past, but we can stop sweeping the truth
under the rug, which only perpetuates oppression and harm
to us all. We can show respect to the descendants of these
original inhabitants (represented by the Amah Mutsun Tribal
Band) by acknowledging the truth now. By acknowledging that
despite the loss of home, culture, languages, spirituality, family,
and traditional knowledge, the AMTB is working hard to re-
establish its ancient lifeways and teachings in order to fulfill
their obligations to their creator to care for all living things.
Please do not perpetuate the illusion of a peaceful and
beneficent mission system in the face of what we know to have
been true. Please do not continue to disrespect and ignore the
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band and other Indigenous Californians
who have persevered despite the tragic history wrought on
them by the missionaries. Please envision a kinder and more
appropriate symbol with which to mark the sesquicentennial of
Gilroy.
Thank you for your time and your consideration,
Angelee Dion
(a concerned Santa Cruz neighbor)
2
Thai Pham
From: Peter Gelblum <
Sent: Saturday, January 8, 2022 5:35 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Do NOT erect a new mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Mayor, Mayor Pro Tem, Councilmembers, and City Clerk:
As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Boulder Creek in Santa Cruz County, I am contacting you to
ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real
mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy. Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and
attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization,
destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal
history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you to respect the calls of
Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Thank you for your thoughtful consideration,
Peter Gelblum
Boulder Creek
Thai Pham
From: Kaleo Kaluhiwa <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 9:41 AM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - Public comments on items not on agenda for January 10
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear members of the Gilroy city council,
I am writing to you today to express my
sincere hope that you will rescind your decision
to install a mission bell in the city of Gilroy. We
are living in a time of reckoning for the true, brutal
history of this nation and this state. In our region,
this includes acknowledging the near -genocide of
the native inhabitants by Spanish colonizers and
Catholic missionaries.
We can't undo the past, but we can stop
sweeping the truth under the rug, which only
perpetuates oppression and harm to us all. We
can show respect to the descendants of these
original inhabitants (represented by the Amah
Mutsun Tribal Band) by acknowledging the truth
now. By acknowledging that despite the loss of
home, culture, languages, spirituality, family, and
traditional knowledge, the AMTB is working hard
to re-establish its ancient lifeways and teachings
in order to fulfill their obligations to their creator to
care for all living things.
Please do not perpetuate the illusion of a
peaceful and beneficent mission system in the
face of what we know to have been true. Please
do not continue to disrespect and ignore the
Amah Mutsun Tribal Band and other Indigenous
Californians who have persevered despite the
tragic history wrought on them, in part, by the
Mission system.
Please envision a kinder and more appropriate
symbol with which to mark the
sesquicentennial of Gilroy.
Thank you for your service to our community and
your consideration,
Kaleo Kaluhiwa
2
Thai Pham
From: Emma Hartung <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 2:36 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please stand with Indigenous peoples & say no to El Camino Real bell
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear Gilroy City Council,
As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of San Jose, I am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of
history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not
romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you
to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Best,
Emma Hartung
San Jose, CA
1
Thai Pham
From: Dan Daniels <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 2:42 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please Do Not Erect El Camino Real Mission Bell in Gilroy Vicinity
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Greetings:
I understand Gilroy is proposing to install its own El Camino Real mission bell. I am contacting you to ask you to stand on
the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown
Gilroy. Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in
California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should
not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you
to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Respectfully submitted,
Mrs. Daniels
I.
Thai Pham
From: Lin Colavin <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 6:07 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council
Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Please Respect our Indigenous Neighbors.
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
"Hello my name is Lin Florinda Colavin . As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Santa Cruz. I am contacting
you to ask you to take action to prevent the erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown
Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in California, a
symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state. We should not
romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our entire region. I ask you
to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being installed.
Thank you for your consideration.
Lin Florinda Colavin
Santa Cruz, California.
1
Thai Pham
From: Steve Palmisano <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 8:08 PM
To: City Clerk
Cc:
Subject: EXTERNAL - No new mission bell in Gilroy
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links. or
responding to this email.
Dear members of the Gilroy City Council,
am writing to you today to express my sincere hope that
you will rescind your decision to install a mission bell in the
city of Gilroy. We are living in a time of reckoning for the
true, brutal history of this nation and this state. In our
region, this includes acknowledging the near -genocide of
the native inhabitants by Spanish colonizers and Catholic
missionaries.
We can't undo the past, but we can stop sweeping the
truth under the rug, which only perpetuates oppression
and harm to us all. We can show respect to the
descendants of these original inhabitants (represented by
the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band) by acknowledging the truth
now. By acknowledging that despite the loss of home,
culture, languages, spirituality, family, and traditional
knowledge, the AMTB is working hard to re-establish its
ancient lifeways and teachings in order to fulfill their
obligations to their creator to care for all living things.
Please do not perpetuate the illusion of a peaceful and
beneficent mission system in the face of what we know to
have been true. Please do not continue to disrespect and
ignore the Amah Mutsun Tribal Band and other Indigenous
Californians who have persevered despite the tragic
history wrought on them by the missionaries. Please
envision a kinder and more appropriate symbol with which
to mark the sesquicentennial of Gilroy.
Thank you for your time and your consideration,
Steve Palmisano
2
Thai Pham
From: Celia Babcock <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 8:23 PM
To: City Clerk
Subject: EXTERNAL - mission bell
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments. clicking links. or
responding to this email.
Dear Thai Pham,
Recently I traveled on Highway 101 and greatly enjoyed the beautiful hillsides with oak trees and
cloudy skies with rainbows. I noticed many mission bells along and the way and each time I saw one
it broke my heart. The mission bells remind me of the horrific treatment of the Indigenous people and
how hard its been for the remaining people to recover from the trauma. How hard it is to for us the
white people, the perpetrators to overcome our history. The fact that the mission bells are there to
increase tourism takes away from any meaningful purpose.
What if there was a marker to give thanks to the Indigenous people who lived here for thousands of
years, caring for and protecting the land that is so beautiful? Maybe it would be a group of trees,
Native plants and a notice that the Earth is here for all people plants animals to live together.
Something nurturing and enlivening. Gilroy could to this!
Thank you so much for your consideration.
Celia Hursey Santa Cruz
Thai Pham
From: Benny Drescher <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 10:27 PM
To: City Clerk; Mayor Marie Blankley
Subject: EXTERNAL - Prevent Mission Bell Violence
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, licking links, or
responding to this email.
Hello my name is Benny Drescher. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community Sants Cruz, I am
contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the erection of a new
El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous people in
California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first peoples of our state.
We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new mission bell would be a stain on our
entire region.
I ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from being
installed.
Thank you,
Benny Drescher
Thai Pham
From: Peter Klotz -Chamberlin <
Sent: Sunday, January 9, 2022 10:46 PM
To: City Clerk; Council Member Fred Tovar
Subject: EXTERNAL - Mission bell in Gilroy would be a mistake
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email_
Dear Mayor Pro Tempore Tovar,
I encourage you to vote against a proposal to install a mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy. The Indigenous people in
our communities deserve public recognition that our cities and state and missions removed Indigenous people from the
land, and forced them to give up their heritage. It would be a profound mistake to honor missions. These religious
institutions played a direct role in removing Indigenous people from their lands, working them to death to build and
maintain the missions, and beating and killing Indigenous people when they resisted.
We need to uncover this history, listen to the Amah Mutsun and other Indigenous people from California, tell their
stories, not continue symbols and histories that glorify institutions that sought to erase Indigenous people and
Indigenous nations from society and the land.
Mission bells symbolize the enslavement of Indigenous people in the California Mission system. The El Camino Real bell
markers were created in the early 1900s to promote tourism and to celebrate a distorted version of history — one that
glorifies and romanticizes the brutal mission era that sought to erase Indigenous people altogether.
• Over 75% of children born into the mission system at Santa Cruz died before the age of 5.
• Indigenous people were worked to death building and maintaining the 21 missions.
• If they resisted, they were beaten, tortured —or killed.
• The ringing of the mission bells was used to call Indigenous slaves back to the missions from a day's work in the
fields, a reminder that they were subjugated to the priests and the missions.
• Between 1769 and 1834, approximately 150,000 California Indians died as a direct result of the mission system.
Also, it is a violation of the separation of church and state if the city were to honor one religion's history. Our residents
come from many histories.
Even while Indigenous people in Gilroy compose a small minority of residents, I hope the majority of residents and
council members will listen and honor their calls to cease honoring symbols of oppression against Indigenous people.
Thank you,
Peter Klotz -Chamberlin
1
Thai Pham
From: sheila carrillo <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 6:51 AM
To: Mayor Marie Blankley; Council Member Fred Tovar; Council Member Rebeca
Armendariz; City Clerk; Council Member Dion Bracco; Council Member Zachary Hilton;
Council Member Peter Leroe-Munoz; Council Member Carol Marques
Subject: EXTERNAL - Mission Bells represent our SHAMEFUL HISTORY
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
To: Gilroy City Council,
It is an affront to the Ahmah Mutsen tribal members and a blight on the City of Gilroy to even have a conversation
about erecting a mission bell monument at a time when monuments to racism and genocide are being torn down all
over the country. I attended the heart -wrenching precedent -setting bell removal ceremony in the City of Santa Cruz, and
I urge you to dismiss the racist plan to install a bell signifying the heinous treatment of our indigenous population and
instead hold educational forums about the true history of the mission period.
Sheila Carrillo
1
Thai Pham
From: Gregory Bondi <
Sent: Monday, January 10, 2022 7:34 AM
To: City Clerk
Cc: amahmutsun2020@gmail.com
Subject: EXTERNAL - Public Comments on Items NOT on Agenda for January 10, 2022 Meeting
ICAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
Dear City Clerk of Gilroy
Hello my name is Gregory Bondi. As a resident of Gilroy's neighboring community of Santa Cruz, I
am contacting you to ask you to stand on the right side of history and take action to prevent the
erection of a new El Camino Real mission bell marker in downtown Gilroy.
Simply put, the mission bell is a symbol of the enslavement and attempted genocide of Indigenous
people in California, a symbol that glorifies the dehumanization, destruction, and erasure of the first
peoples of our state. We should not romanticize or celebrate this brutal history. Erecting a new
mission bell would be a stain on our entire region.
ask you to respect the calls of Indigenous communities and act to prevent this mission bell from
being installed.
Sincerely,
Gregory Bondi
NAME: CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (tCNJe used to call you to the podium) ~3~t-~·\ (Jc\ \ \ V t i '--; .--. ' . ) ~ Email/Mailing Address: \){:__.=f\'\~f_; :')-Q__ t\,,,-\ (_) , L'\ S7: (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) --z 0 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 voluntary. All persons may attend th.is meeting and speak regardless ifa 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) NAME: 0_~ C10 9vL)--I I c_ l Email/Mailing Address: Vt/ I;/ / 2 J §1 ?~L •· c:_· vVV\. (Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) I i 1 /0 / / ) ~/ AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER ·-r . ) --~~--------------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 1w~siding 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) ' /;, / ; NAME: //·. · , ,, ') .,.,---i V ''\ ~ ' ,-\ !:~\ -.-. ~ .. ii 7 Email/Mailing Address: 1.'::t _.!., -·• .· -;·-'; ·· ,:_, , ,:_ (' ( . : · ,·1 .,-_ ~-(Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) ~) 8 ('> i . AGENDAITEM(S): NUMBER .·LI,/ I..'.,, ~~~-----------------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) NAME. .-.. r . -·\ °' .. • ,. 1. i ,l ~i !... · ~ t \ t· ._;.. -~ -_ ~ \· 1 "t . · Email/Mailing Address: 1 fJ; , ,. 1 , , · , \ •• , · \ \. •. : < : .· (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) ~. -~ AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER lf\L\ , \: ',1 \ i..__ '... , •' · ·~: ~~-•· \ i TITLE -. ..J.....J .' ! (tl1 ~I -----~--------------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) NAME J,'I I ~n /:;zh~~~ Email/Mailing Address: f _ I D'u _vM (Optional, to be used if r pond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER ~'f v-k~L0 ~--t--! ) TITLE H -', 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.
;0~ \ _) .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: . · ·.'.-e:c."' (~~: :t\-e \'" _) Email/MailingAddress: C· ,:>1...; l,5;J,.,. ~11-\-2 ~ . , . \,,,\ <,~-\.. (Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respon ack.lto you) 1=-~\ / \ AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER l1~ \:...\.......•• \) • C-L,: I•·\,;~'-~, \T TITLE ,;_/ l ..• ------------------NUMBER -----------------TITLE t.· I ('i_, v~'-\ ""-G Qt., L \ Bf\\ 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) .. -. 7D NAME: _, -'------'"', \; Email/Mailing Address: ------------------------(Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER ________________ _ ,-.. \ ....... ., "'':-' \" ~ ., ,··...:.,; TITLE ---~----------------=-:r '-'' \.., 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 pref.iding officer, speak directly into the microphone.
J(_ ', '. \ . 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: f . ~ -i i . t . . . __ Email/Mailing Address: ------------------------(Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER -----------------.j A .._ TITLE --~--7~-,-+--------------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 Indiv:c: ·al public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item ~\ PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME: ;Jc44 Gu{fc-:2 Email/Mailing Address: ....,-,-,,./, j.rt'-(Optional, to be used if r ck to you) ~,~ . .' ,.,-..,. / L J --c· ., I ~~LL AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER!I eJJb-C C'Ov>'\.i,,Vte'~ I 1 t., n~ ) '"--·-----· ~:;;-TITLE ---------------NUMB E R~~~-c 1~' -----------c·ort5ot1d~ TITLE ~oa eds . . 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) \. l . li ,' NAME: t--·'\,(\.,·.;\( (,/(,\ .. , ... Email/Mailing Address: ------------------------(Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) --AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER ___ J _____________ _ TITLE I th ( i (~ l,. L I i'\ I) l( I \ ~-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) NAME: . /] 1 Cl [t Cf _s Roel (\\9 \AC?::-Email/Mailing Address: _____________________ _ (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER ~ -------------------! . I I TITLE \ '-\ I ) ' i -~ ,,__:_ (; ;. ) 'I'(\-( I ) \ 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) r /. -r ( NAME• !/ ( f' I.,'/( /L (1, ,'1 (,·I • \, V .._ .., \.. Email/Mailing Address: /'/ .· , -_ / _ ,., ~ ,,_ ,_. (Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) ' -7 AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER -----------------TITLE --------------------NUMBER '~.--·~ I 1!,c:_ 'I Ii. · .... , CC,, l)n lei\\------------------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 public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) ( l ( i ( fc \_ --,---., "\ (1.1 '\ ( I Email/Mailing Address: ------------------------(Optional, to be used ifrequest is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER __ ··+f_:r_<--'-i___._._i ___________ _ . 1 . TITLE t> ' ',_·1 ! I I :, 1-(_ ( I I ) 1(3" ) / s ~, ( ) j 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) NAME: ~~:.r:.{1., )c✓l"\ '.-,T,,r,v, J L J --/--\ -t---\ i -, ' \ . ·---;,' ... __ --Email/Mailing Address: _<_-~~....,\~C:_--+--~~-------~------------(Optional, to be used if req AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER / X ~ / ~--~--------------, ; , ( 1 TITLE ,/ ' / , , r-,t -£.,_ ) 1 r--~-,<. ,·-./\. : ' "·'.\ , ' ·-J ' ...; ,, r..:tJ '.·\'-'\_i",..,.-,_ ;,(: \ r __,,; v' 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 i1111 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) f} /4") j / NAME: :to,... C-1 /,! rL 7 • , Email/Mailing Address: llr f<;,;:_k,,.( I o:cJo~. /Jc(./---(Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER (// /. --z..__ ( / >< .. i ) TITLE ~ cJ S':4-/'?',,... ,,,C_,~,./ / 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.
q ., . /1'· .. ;./,./ ,·, , .. / ' I 1-·: , . ( ~ \ /-/ .( i.. r' ; / ,'. 1 ... j ' i '~. ) / , I ) . ' / l' (.__ / ) ,.. -:'-/'-'-'· -' ! . . ·'\·'--CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD ,, l c I I ( Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item (.. ,; ) . . 1 I ( II I PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME:~ t .,, l-1.·t-i./:i. •• , , -1,... ·.11' Email/Mailing Address: \ ;,1 A ; ,~1:;'..,'L), _; --,(_ i, j ,:< ... t l'! ( 6r~ ,--:A,.,.,01 ,!.1/(oti., , G..:':'V'i (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond lSack to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER r; --------------------[' . -;-., . TITLE r't.? I l J... 0 c;t,,:) r 0-f 1 ,, /: 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, spf 1k directly into the microphone.
j ... __ .,,. f CITY COUNCIL MEETING SPEAKER'S CARD ,,l~ "1 t.1 '\ Individual public comment is limited to 3 minutes per agenda item .. i i, i~ _ , __ _ '---' PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME CLEARLY (to be used to call you to the podium) NAME: . '.,t,,,,, I ·, ~; ~ l-Email/Phone Number: --------------------( O p ti on a I, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER _______________ _ TITLE 1 · _,, ~) I I ·; ~ j . j NUMBER --------------TITLE ----------------Please complete this card and present it to the City Clerk prior to discussion of the agenda item. Completion of this speaker's card is voluntary_ All persons may attend this meeting and speak regardless if a card is comoleted 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) NAME:"--, -,·. ~-/ ··"v i • I ' ,,. I ~ ---------------------------Email/Mailing Address: ______________________ _ (Optional, to be used if request is made that staff respond back to you) AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER -----------------\ TITLE j _ i 1 i i '·~ "-... ·-. l) '/) r 1 \:t I 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.
6-4n
T NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium)
PLEASE P
AGENDA ITEM(S):
o
i
o 0
o
o-d 0
U ;? 0
..,
o El 0
U .DA
O O
U
bQ
ct ••-•1
.- •bil ,
el En
U 0,
pa44 d s+ d
,0
C A ..
fi
-.
p ¢' c O
S i.b
H •a a •
.., ''d U
y O
CD
W U 0
H U cz C
41 "Ed' O
0 H H
o ct
cci 4-1
a)
P. • 0) 0)
►�
al i
4-4 } "c
U (I)U O
_-(
.0-dd ct
a)c�
U c
o Q. a)
a0i
ao
PLEASE PRINT YOUR NAME CLEARLY (to be used to call you to the podium)
0
E
Z
a)
O
CL
< E
Z W
AGENDA ITEM(S): NUMBER
co -E
- c1
co
a) co
O 6 U L
L N Q
L
Icii O
'N Q ,U
N N
'5 (6 O
E 1
o E m >
"C O U
Y -a Q. N
L a N La
ca co
E 0 4)
U c = 0 Q
°° Q
s 0a 0�+ a CO U
�� a)c
a) = a
o -6 En
Iri.L N a)N
-o a
a ° C.) a)
�ea E
Y
CO E O
v Q (0 "-
N N C c
`t O
2 o . - O> C
.co c O
cy
Q° -
E a) o N U
v E a)
a) 0o -
co
cDm E. U
o.. .N
PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium)
L
z
5 o
o -
c/a cn
b
U
V
mr0.1 CI)
O
v
y
P� 0
O
4-4
O
•
•
0
U
bA .
•
•
N O
U
Nam+
ct
ct• o
•-
� • U
4
- a)
0C3
O
CSai 4:1U
cn
O
a) • bA
T
U
.-4
a)
czt
x-.
O
N
In 1769_n Spain begs � •cupying what
is now'California. Franciscan padres
supervised the constructionof 21
missions to convert the California Indians to
Raman Catholicism and teach them European
agriculture and trade. The military established
four presidios (forts) to protect the new colonies.
_7 Travel between thesettlements was difficult due to
the great distances and rough terrain. ,Establishing a
connecting road system was vital to the Spanish
success., The Native Californians had developed . routes to their hunting, gathering and trade ;areas: The
roads and routes varied with the seasons. The Spanish
followed and expanded these existing routes to link the
missions, presidios, and pueblositowns). Sonie of these
routes became the Royal Road, today's El Camino Real.
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: City Clerk
Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips
Prepared By: 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
Attachments:
1. Draft Minutes December 6 2021
6.1
Packet Pg. 8
1
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
City of Gilroy
City Council Meeting Minutes
December 6, 2021
I. OPENING
A. Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 PM by Mayor Marie Blankley.
1. Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Leroe-Munoz led the Pledge of Allegiance.
2. Invocation
None.
3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
Interim City Clerk McPhillips reported that the agenda was posted on
Wednesday, December 1, 2021 at 4:52 p.m.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Marie Blankley Mayor Present 5:20 PM
Rebeca Armendariz Council Member Absent
Dion Bracco Council Member Present 5:10 PM
Zach Hilton Council Member Present 5:11 PM
Peter Leroe-Muñoz Council Member Present 5:13 PM
Carol Marques Council Member Present 5:11 PM
Fred Tovar Council Member Present 5:13 PM
B. Orders of the Day
C. Employee Introductions
City Administrator Forbis introduced the following new employees:
Thai Pham, City Clerk
Crystal Zamora, Program Administrator
II. CEREMONIAL ITEMS
A. Proclamations, Awards, and Presentations
None.
III. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period. The following individuals
provided public comments:
Kristin Brown
Paul Brown
Beatrice Macias
Petra Macias
Ron Kirkish
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 9 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
2
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
Dori Prado
There being no further public comment, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
City Attorney Faber made a brief statement at the close of public comment: The
Gilroy City Council does not have control over whether a Council Member steps
down or stays on Council.
IV. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco - no report.
Council Member Hilton – reported on Visit Gilroy and the review of the Strategic
Marketing Report for quarter ending September 30, 2021; also reported on
Silicon Valley Clean Energy and a pilot program to provide fifty portable electric
batteries to residents dependent upon medical devices which go down in a power
outage.
Council Member Leroe-Munoz - no report.
Council Member Marques – reported that there was a very nice tree lighting and
parade this past Saturday evening in the downtown; also recommended the
Holiday Lights show at Gilroy Gardens which is available through New Year’s.
Vice Mayor Tovar - no report.
Mayor Blankley – no report; will include some comments related to Cities
Association when Item IX C. is discussed.
V. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
Council Member Tovar - requested discussion of a second Downtown Paseo;
City Council provided support to place on future agenda.
Council Member Marques - requested report on homeless encampments and
meth use. Jimmy Forbis - fielded comments and question on this item and
offered to give a verbal report at next meeting focused on the problems around
Gilroy Prep School; Council Member Tovar asked that report cover the full city
rather than just one specific area. City Council provided support to place on a
future agenda.
VI. CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment.
No public comments regarding consent calendar items.
Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 10 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
3
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member
SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
A. Approval of a Notice of Acceptance of Completion for the FY21 Citywide
Pavement Maintenance Project No. 21-PW-260 and Approval of a Final
Contract with Teichert & Son, Inc in the Amount of $2,965,305.92
A motion was made to approve the notice.
B. Acceptance of an Edward Byrne Memorial Justice Assistance Grant for
$16,732 and Adoption of a Resolution of the City Council of the City of
Gilroy Approving a Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Budget Amendment
A motion was made to accept the grant and adopt the resolution.
Enactment No.: Resolution No. 2021-65
C. Second Reading and Adoption of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 27 of
the Gilroy City Code, Article VI "Water Supply Shortage Regulations"
Authorizing the Public Works Director to Make Changes to the City of
Gilroy Watering Schedule as Needed
Enactment No.: Ordinance No. 2021-05
D. Second Reading and Adoption of An Ordinance of the City Council of the
City of Gilroy Amending Gilroy City Code Chapter 12 to Add a New Article
VI, Entitled Mandatory Organic Waste Disposal Reduction, to Chapter 12 of
the Gilroy City Code to Implement the Requirements of SB 1383
Enactment No.: Ordinance No. 2021-06
E. 10-18-21 City Council Meeting Minutes
A motion was made to approve the minutes.
F. 10-25-21 City Council Study Session Minutes
A motion was made to approve the minutes.
G. 11-1-21 City Council Meeting Minutes
A motion was made to approve the minutes.
H. 11-15-21 City Council Meeting Minutes
A motion was made to approve the minutes.
VII. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
None
VIII. PUBLIC HEARINGS
A. Project Garlic Industrial Subdivision (Panattoni Development) Mitigated
Negative Declaration and Request for Industrial Planned Development
Approval for Warehouse, Distribution Facility and Commercial Use of
Property at the Northeast Corner of Pacheco Pass Highway and Camino
Arroyo (File No.s Z 20-07, AS 20-21, TM 20-07, CUP 20-02 and GPA 20-01)
Item withdrawn by Applicant. No continuance.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 11 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
4
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
Michelle Nelson commented on this project.
Mayor Blankley closed Public Comment.
Possible Action:
Staff and the Planning Commission analyzed the proposed project
and recommend the City Council:
a) Adopt, by resolution, the Mitigated Negative Declaration and
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program prepared for the
project with findings required by the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA);
b) Adopt a resolution to approve General Plan Amendment GPA
20-01 amending the Mobility Element Figures M-1 and M2 for the
project;
c) Motion to read the ordinance by title only and waive further
reading;
d) Introduce an ordinance to approve Z 20-07
Commercial/Industrial Planned Unit Development Zoning
Amendment;
e) Adopt a resolution to approve Architectural and Site Review AS
20-21 for the site planned unit development plan and buildings,
with findings and conditions; and
f) Adopt a resolution to approve Tentative Parcel Map TM 20 -07,
with findings and conditions.
The applicant requests a second continuance to January 2022.
Staff recommends continuance to January 24, 2022.
IX. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There were no Unfinished Business items listed.
X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
A. Gilroy Zoning Code Update Progress Report
Staff report provided by Senior Planner Kraig Tambornini.
Council Members asked questions of staff (Bracco, Hilton).
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
No public comment.
Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 12 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
5
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
Possible Action:
Accept report.
Council provided unanimous support to receive the report with no objections.
B. Discussion on Renter Protection Policies
Staff report provided by Senior Management Analyst Bryce Atkins.
Item returning as item was on legislative agenda of Council with budget.
Council asked questions of staff (Blankley, Leroe-Munoz, Bracco).
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
No public comment.
Mayor closed public comment.
A motion was made by Council Member Leroe-Munoz, seconded by Council
Member Bracco, to take no action on the item. The motion was carried by the
following vote:
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member
SECONDER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
C. A Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Supporting the
"Brand-Huang-Mendoza Tripartisan Land Use Initiative" to Amend Article XI
of the Constitution of the State of California to Make Zoning and Land Use
Community Affairs, and Not of State Interest
Staff report provided by Senior Management Analyst Bryce Atkins.
No questions of staff.
Mayor Blankley spoke about SB 9 and discussion ensued between the Council
Members.
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
Ron Kirkish commented on this item.
There being no further public comment, Mayor closed public commen t.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 13 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
6
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
Possible Action:
Consider the adoption of a resolution supporting the initiative to amend the
California Constitution to make zoning and land use a local affair.
RESULT: APPROVE [5 TO 1]
MOVER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
AYES: Marie Blankley, Dion Bracco, Peter Leroe-Munoz, Carol
Marques, Fred Tovar
NAYS: Zach Hilton
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
D. Community Development Block Grant (CDBG) Overview
Community Development Director Karen Garner provided staff report.
Council questions of staff (Blankley).
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
No public comment was given.
Mayor closed public comment.
Possible Action:
Receive report and provide direction to move to two-year cycle.
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Carol Marques, Council Member
SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
E. Status Report Regarding City Cyber Security Assessment, Cyber
Resilience Program, and Implementation Plan
Staff report provided by IT Manager Scott Golden.
Council questions and comments of staff (Leroe-Munoz, Tovar, Marques).
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
No public comment was given.
Mayor closed public comment.
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 14 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
7
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
Possible Action:
Receive report.
RESULT: APPROVE [5 TO 1]
MOVER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member
SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques
NAYS: Fred Tovar
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
XI. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
Council Chambers Modernization Project - City Administrator Forbis provided a
brief update on project.
A. Gilroy Crime Update
City Administrator Forbis provided an introduction of this item.
Police Chief Pedro Espinoza provided a Gilroy Crime Update report.
Council asked questions of staff (Leroe-Munoz, Tovar, Blankley, Bracco).
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
Public Comments:
Cheryl Parks and Ron Kirkish commented on this item.
There being no further public comment, Mayor closed public comment.
B. Sharks Ice Update
City Administrator Forbis provided a status update on the Sharks Ice project. City
still discussing terms with the Sharks. City hopes to return to Council in January
with a further update.
XII. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
There was no City Attorney’s Report.
XIII. CLOSED SESSION
City Attorney announced the closed session.
No public comment.
Adjourned to closed session at 7:38 p.m.
A motion was made by Council Member Lero e-Munoz, seconded by Council
Member Tovar, to stay in Closed Session. The motion was carried by the
following vote:
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 15 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
8
City Council Meeting Minutes
12/6/2021
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Peter Leroe-Munoz, Council Member
SECONDER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Hilton, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Rebeca Armendariz
Reportable Action: None
A. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to
Government Code Section 54957 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11
(2); Employee Name/Title: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
1. Public Comment on Closed Session Items
2. Adjourn to Closed Session
ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION
Report of any action taken in Closed Session and vote or abstention of
each Councilmember if required by Government Code Section 54957.1 and
Gilroy Code Section 17A.13 (a); Public Report of the vote to continue in
closed session if required under Gilroy Code Section 17A.11 (5)
ADJOURNMENT
Mayor Blankley adjourned the meeting at 8:42 p.m.
MEETING DATES
FUTURE MEETING DATES
DECEMBER 2021
13* Special Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
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.
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 web streamed and televised
/s/ LeeAnn McPhillips
Administrative Services/HR Director/Risk Manager
6.1.a
Packet Pg. 16 Attachment: Draft Minutes December 6 2021 (3611 : December 6, 2021 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Action Minutes of the December 13, 2021 City Council Special
Meeting.
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: City Clerk
Submitted By: Thai Pham
Prepared By: Thai Pham
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 to approve the Action Minutes.
Attachments:
1. Action Minutes
6.2
Packet Pg. 17
DRAFT1
City of Gilroy
City Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 13, 2021
I.OPENING
A.Call to Order
The meeting was called to order at 6:00 P.M. by Mayor Blankley.
1.Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Armendáriz led the pledge of allegiance.
2.Invocation
None.
3.City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
City Clerk Pham declared the posting of the agenda.
Attendee Name Title Status Arrived
Marie Blankley Mayor Present
Rebeca Armendáriz Council Member Present
Dion Bracco Council Member Present
Zach Hilton Council Member Absent
Peter Leroe-Muñoz Council Member Present
Carol Marques Council Member Present
Fred Tovar Council Member Present
B.Orders of the Day
There were none.
C.Employee Introductions
City Administrator Jimmy Forbis introduced Andrea Yanez, new Permit Technician,
Lisa Hernandez, new Office Assistant, and Cindy McCormick, promoted to
Customer Service Manager from Senior Planner.
II.CEREMONIAL ITEMS
A.Proclamations, Awards and Presentations
There were none.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 18 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
DRAFT
City Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 10, 2021
Page 2 of 6
III. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
The following speaker spoke on items not on the agenda:
Teresa Perez requested an update on the timeline of the installation and
implementation of the equipment that will allow hybrid meetings for members of
the public to participate via online. She also requested an update on the South
County Youth Task Force.
Being no further public comment, Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
1. Annual Presentation from the Personnel Commission
Personnel Commissioner Catherine Cummins provided a presentation about the
board's annual accomplishments.
Council accepted the report.
IV. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco had no report.
Council Member Armendáriz reported on the Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority
noting the board is working to reach its gas reduction goals and replace power
from Diablo Canyon set to close by 2026. She also noted that she attended the
Historic Heritage Commission and that they are continuing to work on the work
plan. She notified about two upcoming events: a health fair at the Neon Exchange
on January 14th, and a Fentanyl Town Hall on January 18th at Old City Hall at 6
P.M.
Council Member Marques reported on the Downtown Business Association noting
that they were able to provide power to some of their buildings and they should be
online in June at the latest. She also reported that new street benches from Jeff
Orth were installed on the west side of Monterey Road between 5th and 6th Street.
Council Member Tovar had no report.
Council Member Leroe-Muñoz had no report.
Mayor Blankley reported that the Gilroy Sister Cities Association is still engaging
with Takko Machi, Japan, via Zoom. She also reported that Cities Association of
Santa Clara had a one-on-one meeting with the upcoming chairperson for 2022,
San Jose Vice Mayor Charles "Chappie" Jones, who shared his three priorities are
local control, elected officials use of social media, and matters of racial and social
justice.
V. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
None.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 19 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
DRAFTCity Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 10, 2021
Page 3 of 6
VI.CONSENT CALENDAR (ROLL CALL VOTE)
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment.
No public comment was provided.
Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
A motion was made by Council Member Bracco, seconded by Council Member
Leroe-Muñoz, to approve the consent calendar. The motion was carried by the
following vote:
RESULT: APPROVE [5 TO 1]
MOVER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
SECONDER: Peter Leroe-Muñoz, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
NAYS: Rebeca Armendáriz
ABSENT: Zach Hilton
1.Appointment of Peter Leroe-Muñoz to Position of Mayor Pro Tempore for
2022
A motion was made to approve the appointment.
2. Mayoral Appointments of Council Members to Serve in Regional
Representative Seats and Seats on Local Boards and Committees
A motion was made to approve the appointments.
VII.BIDS AND PROPOSALS
There were no Bid and Proposals listed.
VIII.PUBLIC HEARINGS
There were no Public Hearings listed.
IX.UNFINISHED BUSINESS
1.Streamline Consolidation of the City's Boards and Commissions
Senior Management Analyst Bryce Atkins gave the staff presentation and
responded to Council Members questions.
Mayor Blankley opened the public comment period.
Gary Walton commented that consolidating the boards and commissions may not
be the best path forward and requested Council Members talk to committee
members in ways to improve the recruitment and retention process.
Patricia Bentson recommended that Council not to follow staff's recommendation
for Parks and Recreation Committee to meet quarterly. She also stated that the
committee can also take on the development review and thereby inherit all of the
duties of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 20 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
DRAFT
City Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 10, 2021
Page 4 of 6
Carolyn Schimandle hoped that items currently being worked on by the Bicycle
Pedestrian Commission will continue to be worked on after the consolidation
process.
Vanessa Ashford agreed with Mr. Walton that city staff should receive feedback
from current and past committee members.
Mayor Blankley closed Public Comment.
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.
A motion was made by Mayor Blankley, seconded by Council Member Bracco, to
approve Actions A, B, and C. The motion failed by the following vote:
RESULT: FAILED [3 TO 3]
MOVER: Marie Blankley, Mayor
SECONDER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
AYES: Marie Blankley, Dion Bracco, Peter Leroe-Muñoz
NAYS: Rebeca Armendáriz, Carol Marques, Fred Tovar
ABSENT: Zach Hilton
A motion was made by Council Member Tovar, seconded by Mayor Blankley, to
continue this item in January with staff providing information on committees’
attendance, resignation, and the frequency of the meetings from 2021. The motion
was carried by the following vote:
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 21 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
DRAFT
City Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 10, 2021
Page 5 of 6
RESULT: CONTINUE THE ITEM [5 TO 1]
MOVER: Fred Tovar, Council Member
SECONDER: Marie Blankley, Mayor
AYES: Blankley, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
NAYS: Rebeca Armendáriz
ABSENT: Zach Hilton
X. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
1. Update by City Attorney on Recent Housing Legislation (Including SB9)
Presentation: Andrew L. Faber, Esq., City Attorney
City Attorney Faber gave the staff presentation and responded to Council Member
questions.
2. Gilroy Senate Bill 9 Objective Design Standards Policy
Senior Planner Cindy McCormick gave the staff presentation and responded to
Council Members questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
Gary Walton encouraged Council to raise the standards on the Objective Design
Standards to improve neighborhoods.
Mayor Blankley closed Public Comment.
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
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rebeca Armendáriz, Council Member
SECONDER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Zach Hilton
Enactment No.: Resolution No. 2021-67
b) Adopt a Resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy adopting the
Gilroy SB9 Residential Lot Split Objective Design Standards Policy
RESULT: APPROVE [UNANIMOUS]
MOVER: Rebeca Armendáriz, Council Member
SECONDER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
AYES: Blankley, Armendáriz, Bracco, Leroe-Muñoz, Marques, Tovar
ABSENT: Zach Hilton
Enactment No.: Resolution No. 2021-68
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 22 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
DRAFTCity Council Special Meeting Minutes
December 10, 2021
Page 6 of 6
3.1st Quarter Update on the City's Departmental and Legislative Work Plan
City Administrator Jimmy Forbis gave staff presentation and responded to Council
Members questions.
Mayor Blankley opened Public Comment.
No public comment was provided.
Council received the report.
XI.CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
1.Update on Sidewalk Assessment Project
No report was given.
2.Update on Illegal Activity at Unhoused Encampments
Police Chief Espinoza provided an update on the item and responded to Council
Members questions.
Mayor Blankley opened public comment.
Vanessa Ashford wanted to reiterate that out of the work plan discussed in Chief
Espinoza's update to Council, very few resources were attainable to those
experiencing homelessness.
Mayor Blankley closed public comment.
Council received the report.
3.Presentation of 2021 City Accomplishments
A video presentation was provided.
XII.CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
There were no City Attorney's Reports listed.
XIII.CLOSED SESSION
There were no Closed Session items listed.
ADJOURNMENT
Meeting was adjourned at 8:15 P.M.
I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at
a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gilroy.
/s/Thai Nam Pham
Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk
6.2.a
Packet Pg. 23 Attachment: Action Minutes (3603 : 12/13/2021 City Council Special Meeting Action Minutes)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Claim of Westwood Inv., LLC (The City Administrator recommends
a “yes” vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute the denial
of the claim)
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Human Resources Department
Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips
Prepared By: 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
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal
counsel, this claim is recommended for rejection.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal
counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the January
10, 2022 meeting:
• Claim of Westwood Inv., LLC
Attachments:
6.3
Packet Pg. 24
1. Claim for Westwood Inv LLC
6.3
Packet Pg. 25
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 26 Attachment: Claim for Westwood Inv LLC (3594 : Claim of Westwood Inv., LLC)
6.3.a
Packet Pg. 27 Attachment: Claim for Westwood Inv LLC (3594 : Claim of Westwood Inv., LLC)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application's
AS21-13 and TM 21-02 for 6970 Camino Arroyo Development
Project.
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Planning Division (Planning Commission Meetings)
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Kraig Tambornini
Kraig Tambornini
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
Award a contract to EMC Planning in the amount of $169,049.00 for preparation of an
initial study/mitigated negative declaration for Planning Application AS 21 -13 and
authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.
BACKGROUND
On July 28, 2021, Temple Gilroy LLC submitted applications for zoning approvals to
develop a 10.11-acre site at 6970 Camino Arroyo which is located on the east side of
Camino Arroyo, south of Highway 152 and east of US 101 (File no. AS 21-13 and TM
21-02). This property is in the Gilroy Crossings Commercial/Industrial - C3/M2 PUD
(Phase II).
7.1
Packet Pg. 28
The project requires environmental review pursuant to the California Environmental
Quality Act (CEQA). Therefore, staff initiated the process to select a consultant to
prepare the necessary CEQA document.
On September 17, 2021, a Request for Proposals (RFP) was published to the current
City list of on-call environmental planning consultants, with proposals due October 14,
2021. A total of five proposals were received, all exceeding $100,000.00, which required
the RFP to be republished for general submittal by any interested environmental
consultant. The second submittal deadline closed November 19, 2021 with no additional
submittals received.
On December 3, 2021, a notice of intent to award the contract was published selecting
EMC Planning as the environmental consultant. No protests were received by the
December 10, 2021 deadline, allowing staff to proceed with the next step to request City
Council award of the contract.
ANALYSIS
The Request for Proposal identified the City’s desire to retain services of a qualified
environmental consultant to complete environmental review for the proposed major
development project, which includes a gas station, drive through food service, two
hotels and future medical and industrial development as a later phase.
The five proposals were received from CSG Consultants, EMC Planning, First Carbon,
Stantec, and SWCA, which are all on the City list of qualified environmental consultants.
The proposals ranged in scope from preparation of a Mitigated Negative Declaration to
more conservative Environmental Impact Report review, if needed. Proposed budgets
ranged from $153,681 to $330,315. The median bid amount was $160,000. All bids
included the same traffic analysis scope of work from Hexagon, in the amount of
$79,975.00.
The proposals were scored in accordance with the City Purchasing Policy with the
following ranking:
1. EMC Planning
2. First Carbon Solutions
3. Stantec
4. SWCA
5. CSG Consultants
EMC Planning was identified as having greater familiarity with the project, and adequate
scope necessary for CEQA compliance. EMC Planning was determined to provide the
most efficient, expedient and cost-effective environmental documentation for the project.
The cost of the proposal is $153,681.34. The proposed contract amount includes a 10%
contingency, for a total contract amount not to exceed $169,049.10. In addition to
funding of the contract, the applicant will also be required to pay a City administrative
7.1
Packet Pg. 29
fee. The total cost to pursue work would be $192,101.70, which covers the contract
amount, contingency and City administrative fee.
ALTERNATIVES
1) Award the contract to FirstCarbon or Stantec, the next two highest scoring bidders.
Staff does not recommend this option primarily given the ability of EMC to complete the
project review with the most efficiency and understanding of the project area.
2) Reject all proposals. Staff does not recommend this option as this would delay
processing of the project.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The cost of the environmental review will be fully funded by the ap plicant prior to
execution of the contract. This will include the required 15% administrative fee that
covers staff time to manage the contract and review the environmental documents. The
administrative fee is charged based on the initial contract amount, without the
contingency fee included.
CONCLUSION
It is recommended that the City Council, by motion, award a contract to EMC Planning
in the amount of $169,049.50, including a $15,368.13 contingency, for preparation of
the environmental document for zoning applications As 21-13 and TM 21-02, and
authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents .
NEXT STEPS
Upon Council’s approval, funds will be requested from the applicant in the total amount
of $192,101.70 to cover the contract amount, contingency and administrative fee. Once
funds are received the contract will be executed.
Attachments:
1. EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal
7.1
Packet Pg. 30
Proposal
Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/MND
File No. AS 21-13 and TM 21-02
22-RFP-CDD-467
October 14, 2021
Prepared by
EMC Planning Group
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 31 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Prepared for
C ity of G ilroy
Carina Baska, Senior Management Analyst
7350 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
Prepared by
EMC P lanninG G rouP in C.
301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C
Monterey, CA 93940
Tel 831.649.1799
Fax 831.649.8399
Teri Wissler Adam, Senior Principal
wissler@emcplanning.com
www.emcplanning.com
October 14, 2021
CITY OF GILROY
Camino Arroyo Development Project Initial Study/MND
ProposalProposal
FILE NO. AS 21-13 AND TM 21-02
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 32 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Table of Contents
1.0 Setting .......................................................................................................1
2.0 Project Description .................................................................................1
2.1 Tentative Subdivision Map ..................................................................................1
2.2 Architectural and Site Review ..............................................................................1
2.3 Applicant-Submitted Technical Reports...............................................................2
3.0 Past Planning Actions and Environmental Review Relevant to the
Proposed Project ......................................................................................2
4.0 Approach- CEQA Guidelines §15183 ......................................................3
5.0 Scope of Work ...........................................................................................6
Task 1 Management/Consultation/Meetings ...................................................6
Task 2 Research ...............................................................................................6
Task 3 Transportation Analysis (Hexagon) .....................................................7
Task 4 Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Evaluation .........7
Task 5 Biological Resources Analysis .............................................................10
Task 6 Cultural and Tribal Resources ............................................................12
Task 7 Environmental Noise Assessment .......................................................12
Task 8 Administrative Draft Initial Study and Mitigated
Negative Declaration..........................................................................12
Task 9 Public Review Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration ........12
Task 10 Public Notices and Document Distribution .......................................12
Task 11 Response to Comments/Final Mitigated Negative Declaration/
Mitigation Monitoring and Reporting Program .................................13
Task 12 Public Hearings and Notice of Determination ...................................13
6.0 Budget and Schedule .............................................................................13
Attachments
Attachment A Transportation Analysis Scope of Work
Attachment B Environmental Noise Assessment Scope of Work
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 33 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 34 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 1Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
1.0 Setting
The 10.18-net acre project site is located at the south of Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) and east of
Camino Arroyo, within the city limits of Gilroy. Although the project site was historically in agricultural
production, it has been fallow for years.
The property is surrounded by SR 152 to the north, Holloway Road to the south, undeveloped property
designated General Industrial and Commercial to the east, and Camino Arroyo and the Gilroy Crossing
Shopping Center (Regency Commercial Center) to the west.
The project site has a general plan land use designation of General Industrial. The property is zoned
Regency/Newman Center PUD on the Gilroy Zoning Map.
2.0 Project Description
The Camino Arroyo Development Project, File No. AS 21-13 and TM 21-02 (proposed project)
includes subdividing 10.18 acres into five (5) lots, and Architectural and Site Review for development
on four (4) of the lots.
2.1 Tentative Subdivision Map
The applicant proposes to subdivide APN 841-070-049 into the following lots:
Lot 1 0.825± acres
Lot 2 1.313± acres
Lot 3 2.061± acres
Lot 4 1.933± acres
Lot 5 4.026± acres
2.2 Architectural and Site Review
The applicant is proposing development of the five lots in three phases, as follows. Architectural and
Site Review is not proposed for the last phase at this time; however, anticipated development of that
phase will be evaluated in the initial study, as development of the third phase is reasonably foreseeable.
Proposed development is summarized in the following table.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 35 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 2Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
Development Summary
Phase/Lot Project Square Footage or
Rooms
Phase 1a
1 Drive-thru Burger King 2,600 sf
2 Gas Station (8 pumps)
Car Wash
Convenience Store
8 pumps
1,152 sf
2,880 sf
Phase 1b
3 Residence Inn (4-story)112 rooms
82,568 sf
4 Holiday Inn Express (4-story)88 rooms
67,780 sf
Phase 2 (Future - No ASR Applications)
5 Medical Facility (4-story - Treatment/Outpatient Only)
Industrial Warehouse (1 story)
79,928 sf
15,000 sf
SOURCE: Site Plan, 6/30/2021; Tentative Subdivision Map, 3/12/2021; RFP Questions and Answers
2.3 Applicant-Submitted Technical Reports
The applicant has submitted a geotechnical report addressing Phases 1a and 1b. No other technical
reports are anticipated from the applicant.
3.0 Past Planning Actions and Environmental Review Relevant to the
Proposed Project
The 10.18-acre project site was included in the Regency Centers Project, for which an EIR was prepared
and certified in December 2002. The current project site was identified as a Phase II parcel, with
possible future development as hotel/retail/restaurant/industrial site. The City subsequently approved
a development agreement, tentative map, zone change, and architectural site review for the regional
shopping center known as Gilroy Crossing, subsequently developed and located immediately west of the
project site and Camino Arroyo. Although the 2002 EIR addressed environmental impacts associated
with future development of the current project site, no development application was submitted and
therefore, considered.
In November 2020, the City of Gilroy adopted the Gilroy 2040 General Plan, for which EMC Planning
Group prepared the EIR.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 36 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 3Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
4.0 Approach- CEQA Guidelines §15183
Assuming the proposed project is consistent with the development densities established in the general
plan and zoning, this environmental analysis will focus on examining whether there are project-specific
significant effects that may be peculiar to the project or the project site in accordance with CEQA
Guidelines §15183, which states:
(a) CEQA mandates that projects which are consistent with the development
density established by existing zoning, community plan, or general plan policies
for which an EIR was certified shall not require additional environmental
review, except as might be necessary to examine whether there are project-specific
significant effects which are peculiar to the project or its site [emphasis added]. This
streamlines the review of such projects and reduces the need to prepare repetitive
environmental studies.
(b) In approving a project meeting the requirements of this section, a public agency
shall limit its examination of environmental effects to those which the agency
determines, in an initial study or other analysis:
(1) Are peculiar to the project or the parcel on which the project would
be located,
(2) Were not analyzed as significant effects in a prior EIR on the zoning
action, general plan, or community plan, with which the project is
consistent,
(3) Are potentially significant off-site impacts and cumulative impacts
which were not discussed in the prior EIR prepared for the general
plan, community plan or zoning action, or
(4) Are previously identified significant effects which, as a result of
substantial new information which was not known at the time the
EIR was certified, are determined to have a more severe adverse
impact than discussed in the prior EIR.
(c) If an impact is not peculiar to the parcel or to the project, has been addressed
as a significant effect in the prior EIR, or can be substantially mitigated by
the imposition of uniformly applied development policies or standards, as
contemplated by subdivision (e) below, then an additional EIR need not be
prepared for the project solely on the basis of that impact.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 37 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 4Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
(d) This section shall apply only to projects which meet the following conditions:
(1) The project is consistent with:
(A) A community plan adopted as part of a general plan,
(B) A zoning action which zoned or designated the parcel on
which the project would be located to accommodate a
particular density of development, or
(C) A general plan of a local agency, and
(2) An EIR was certified by the lead agency for the zoning action, the
community plan, or the general plan.
(e) This section shall limit the analysis of only those significant environmental effects
for which:
(1) Each public agency with authority to mitigate any of the significant
effects on the environment identified in the EIR on the planning or
zoning action undertakes or requires others to undertake mitigation
measures specified in the EIR which the lead agency found to be
feasible, and
(2) The lead agency makes a finding at a public hearing as to whether
the feasible mitigation measures will be undertaken.
(f) An effect of a project on the environment shall not be considered peculiar to
the project or the parcel for the purposes of this section if uniformly applied
development policies or standards have been previously adopted by the city
or county with a finding that the development policies or standards will
substantially mitigate that environmental effect when applied to future projects,
unless substantial new information shows that the policies or standards will not
substantially mitigate the environmental effect. The finding shall be based on
substantial evidence which need not include an EIR. Such development policies
or standards need not apply throughout the entire city or county, but can
apply only within the zoning district in which the project is located, or within
the area subject to the community plan on which the lead agency is relying.
Moreover, such policies or standards need not be part of the general plan or any
community plan, but can be found within another pertinent planning document
such as a zoning ordinance. Where a city or county, in previously adopting
uniformly applied development policies or standards for imposition on future
projects, failed to make a finding as to whether such policies or standards would
substantially mitigate the effects of future projects, the decision-making body
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 38 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 5Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
of the city or county, prior to approving such a future project pursuant to this
section, may hold a public hearing for the purpose of considering whether, as
applied to the project, such standards or policies would substantially mitigate
the effects of the project. Such a public hearing need only be held if the city or
county decides to apply the standards or policies as permitted in this section.
(g) Examples of uniformly applied development policies or standards include, but are
not limited to:
(1) Parking ordinances.
(2) Public access requirements.
(3) Grading ordinances.
(4) Hillside development ordinances.
(5) Flood plain ordinances.
(6) Habitat protection or conservation ordinances.
(7) View protection ordinances.
(8) Requirements for reducing greenhouse gas emissions, as set forth in
adopted land use plans, policies, or regulations.
(h) An environmental effect shall not be considered peculiar to the project or
parcel solely because no uniformly applied development policy or standard is
applicable to it.
(i) Where the prior EIR relied upon by the lead agency was prepared for a general
plan or community plan that meets the requirements of this section, any rezoning
action consistent with the general plan or community plan shall be treated as a
project subject to this section.
(1) “Community plan” is defined as a part of the general plan of a
city or county which applies to a defined geographic portion of
the total area included in the general plan, includes or references
each of the mandatory elements specified in Section 65302 of the
Government Code, and contains specific development policies and
implementation measures which will apply those policies to each
involved parcel.
(2) For purposes of this section, “consistent” means that the density of
the proposed project is the same or less than the standard expressed
for the involved parcel in the general plan, community plan or
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 39 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 6Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
zoning action for which an EIR has been certified, and that the
project complies with the density-related standards contained in that
plan or zoning. Where the zoning ordinance refers to the general
plan or community plan for its density standard, the project shall be
consistent with the applicable plan.
(j) This section does not affect any requirement to analyze potentially significant
offsite or cumulative impacts if those impacts were not adequately discussed
in the prior EIR. If a significant offsite or cumulative impact was adequately
discussed in the prior EIR, then this section may be used as a basis for excluding
further analysis of that offsite or cumulative impact.
5.0 Scope of Work
The initial study will evaluate the environmental impacts associated with development of the proposed
project, using the Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR, as well as Regency Centers Property EIR, as may still be
applicable. The proposed tasks are presented below.
Task 1 Management/Consultation/Meetings
This task includes coordinating staff, general management and administration, providing CEQA
consultation for client, and managing subconsultants.
This task also includes attendance at three meetings with City staff and one meeting with Caltrans (all
either virtually or in the City of Gilroy).
Task 2 Research
This task includes a thorough review of the application materials and review of the following plans and
documents, as applicable to the proposed project:
Gilroy 2040 General Plan;
Gilroy 2040 General Plan EIR;
Regency Centers Property EIR;
City of Gilroy Municipal Code;
City of Gilroy 2020 Urban Water Management Plan (anticipated to be adopted in October 2021);
City of Gilroy 2020 Water Shortage Contingency Plan (anticipated to be adopted in October 2021); and
Environmental documents prepared for project in the vicinity including but not limited to,
Project Garlic Initial Study/MND and UNFI Warehouse and Distribution Facility EIR.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 40 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 7Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
Task 3 Transportation Analysis (Hexagon)
Hexagon Transportation Consultants will conduct a transportation analysis for the proposed project.
The scope of work is included in Attachment A.
The scope of work in Attachment A notes the General Plan network improvement to extend Cameron
Boulevard north to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley Road, and south to the extension of Luchessa Avenue.
However, Project Garlic, on the north side of SR 152, proposes to eliminate the extension at SR 152
through their site to Gilman Road. If the Project Garlic proposal is approved, the scope of work would
be modified accordingly, but would not result in a change to the budget.
Task 4 Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy Evaluation
4.1 Emissions Modeling
Run the California Emissions Estimator Model (CalEEMod) to calculate the change in criteria
air pollutant and greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions based on the proposed land uses, the model’s
construction defaults, and information from the transportation analysis. Construction and operational
emissions will be modeled.
The following tasks will be completed:
Review the project description and information to identify proposed sources of criteria air
pollutants and GHGs and to develop the model data inputs.
Up to five model runs (unmitigated and mitigated) will be conducted to quantify the criteria
pollutants and GHG emissions during construction and operations of the overall project, and to
quantify as needed, GHG emissions generated by operations by phase;
Assumptions, methodology, and modeled results will be presented in a technical memorandum for
use as an appendix to the initial study;
Vehicle miles traveled (VMT) data generated by CalEEMod serves as a general proxy for the magnitude
of transportation fuel consumption. The VMT data from CalEEMod will be input into the Emissions
Factors (EMFAC) model to quantify the transportation fuel demand for all planned and anticipated
development. The modeled fuel demand results will be presented in an appendix to the initial study;
4.2 Air Quality
The proposed development of each parcel and the project as a whole would result in an increase in
criteria air pollutant emissions during construction and operations. The proposed project may also result
in construction-related air quality impacts; however, because no sensitive receptors are located within
1,000 feet of the project site, receptor exposures and associated health risks during construction will be
discussed qualitatively, consistent with air district guidance.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 41 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 8Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
The following tasks will be completed:
Conduct a consistency analysis for each land use to determine if the proposed project is consistent
with the applicable air quality management plan;
Describe the physical and climatological characteristics of the air basin, existing air pollutant
conditions, and health effects of air pollutants;
Review current air district documents, policies, and regulatory requirements applicable to the
proposed project;
Compare modeled air pollutant emissions results to air district’s impact thresholds to determine if
the proposed project would result in significant impacts from criteria air pollutant emissions;
Identify any project sources of hazardous air pollutants or odors, as well as any existing or planned
nearby sensitive receptors that could be affected; and
Present mitigation measures to reduce significant impacts to a less-than-significant level.
4.3 Greenhouse Gas Emissions
Construction and operation of uses on each individual parcel and the project as a whole will generate
greenhouse gas emissions (GHGs). GHG emissions would be quantified based on the modeling scope
identified in Section 4.1 above.
Two different thresholds of significance could be employed to evaluate the significance of impacts for
the project as a whole and/or for individual parcels. The choice will depend on the outcome of the
vehicle miles traveled (VMT) analysis prepared by Hexagon, the methodology of which is discussed in
the transportation analysis scope presented in Attachment A. The VMT analysis is a substitute measure
of a project’s mobile source GHGs. If the VMT impact from developing the entire site and/or an
individual parcel is less than significant, mobile source GHG emissions can be omitted from the project/
parcel GHG emissions inventory. In this case, the balance (non-mobile source) emissions can either
be evaluated against a service population threshold or a mass emissions threshold. We would employ
whichever threshold imposes a lower mitigation burden on each developer.
An efficiency-based GHG threshold of significance would be derived for the buildout year of the
four parcels that current have active applications with the City. A second efficiency threshold would
be developed for the two parcels for which specific development is not currently proposed, with an
assumed buildout year of 2030. Mitigation for these two parcels would provide the flexibility to define
an earlier buildout year (and less stringent) threshold of significance. Where a mass emissions (bright
line) threshold may be a more advantageous approach, it will be based on the air district’s prior CEQA
guidance for the year 2020, with the threshold scaled down to reflect deeper emissions reductions
needed to meet the state reduction target for the year 2030.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 42 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 9Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
For development on individual parcels that exceeds the applied threshold of significance, mitigation
will be proposed in the form of a GHG reduction plan. The reduction plan will call for each developer
to maximize on-site emissions reductions in an effort to reduce emissions to below the threshold of
significance. Where doing so is not feasible, the option to purchase GHG emissions offset credits will be
provided to reduce the impact to less than significant.
The following tasks will be completed:
Briefly summarized the applicable climate change policy and regulatory setting;
Develop efficiency-based thresholds of significance for the four parcels proposed for development
and another for the remaining two parcels. Calculate a mass emissions threshold for projects with
less-than-significant VMT impacts and for these parcels, determine whether the efficiency threshold
or mass emissions threshold creates the lowest mitigation burden;
Calculate the service population associated with proposed/planned development on each parcel for
parcels where the service population threshold will be utilized;
Present CalEEMod results as may be modified by applying GHG reductions that accrue to state
legislative/regulatory actions;
Compare the service population-based project emissions to the efficiency threshold (or mass
emissions threshold as appropriate) to determine impact significance; and
Present mitigation to reduce significant impacts to a less-than-significant level.
4.4 Energy
Energy will be required to construct and operate the development planned for each parcel. The three
primary sources of energy consumption will be fuel use in vehicles traveling to and from the project
site, natural gas, and electricity in buildings. Energy demand from the cumulative planned development
will be calculated and reported. Parcel specific information will not be necessary because the thresholds
of significance for energy impacts are qualitative and development for each parcel will be required to
comply with uniformly applied regulations and to reduce GHG emission via measures that also reduce
energy demand.
The following tasks will be completed:
Report energy demand from on-site use of natural gas and electricity at buildout of the proposed
project based on the modeled CalEEMod results;
Identify transportation fuel demand result from cumulative development based on EMFAC results;
Present thresholds of significance based on the CEQA Guidelines;
Identify regulatory requirements that would reduce energy demand from future development;
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 43 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 10Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
Describe energy demand reduction that would occur with implanting mitigation measures for GHG
impacts, if any;
Identify energy impacts; and
Present mitigation measures to reduce energy consumption, if necessary.
Task 5 Biological Resources Analysis
Based on a preliminary review of project plans, site photographs, and aerial photographs, the proposed
project site is a parcel (APN 841-70-149) of flat land dominated by annual grassland. A review of the
National Wetlands Inventory (NWI) shows there are no wetland features on the project site.
According to the California Natural Diversity Database (CDFW 2021), there are a number of special-
status species with the potential to occur within the project area, including:
Plants
Congdon’s tarplant (Centromadia parryi ssp. congdonii)
Hoover’s button-celery (Eryngium aristulatum var. hooveri)
Loma Prieta hoita (Hoita strobilina)
Most beautiful jewelflower (Streptanthus albidus ssp. peramoenus)
Pink creamsacs (Castilleja rubicundula var. rubicundula)
Prostrate vernal pool navarretia (Navarretia prostrata)
Saline clover (Trifolium hydrophilum)
San Joaquin spearscale (Extriplex joaquinana)
Wildlife
American badger (Taxidea taxus)
Burrowing owl (Athene cunicularia)
California red-legged frog (Rana draytonii)
California tiger salamander (Ambystoma californiense)
Hoary bat (Lasiurus cinereus)
Pallid bat (Antrozous pallidus)
Tricolored blackbird (Agelaius tricolor)
White-tailed kite (Elanus leucurus)
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 44 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 11Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
This evaluation will assess potential habitat present for special-status species in the area and recommend
mitigation measures for the protection of biological resources. If suitable habitat is identified,
recommendations may also include the need for additional specific or protocol-level surveys to be
conducted during an appropriate time of year.
The following scope of work includes tasks to conduct a reconnaissance-level biological survey and
prepare a section addressing biological resources in an Initial Study.
5.1 Research
Compile and review available project information, including preliminary site plans and aerial
photographs. Conduct a review to determine the special-status species that have been recorded as
occurring within the general project vicinity based on current database searches of CDFW’s California
Natural Diversity Database (CNDDB), the California Native Plant Society (CNPS) Rare and Endangered
Plant Inventory, the US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Endangered Species Program, the USFWS
NWI; and other biological studies conducted in the vicinity of the project site, including the studies
prepared for the Project Garlic project north of SR 152.
Review the project Habitat Plan application and access the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency
Geobrowser to determine the fee zone and any surveys or other requirements that may be necessary.
5.2 Reconnaissance-level Field Survey
Complete a reconnaissance-level field survey to (1) identify and map the principal plant communities;
(2) assess the potential for special-status species and their habitats, wildlife movement corridors,
potentially jurisdictional wetlands and waterways, regulated trees, and other significant biological
resources to occur; and (3) identify and map any observed locations of special-status species and/
or habitats. Plant and wildlife species observed during the survey will be recorded in field notes. Any
special-status species observed will be reported to the CNDDB in compliance with CDFW permit
requirements, after the information is provided to the client.
5.3 Initial Study Section
Prepare the biological resources section of the Initial Study, describing existing habitats and plant and
animal species found on the project site, and the occurrence of and/or potential for special-status species
and their habitats. If needed, one or more figures will be prepared to illustrate habitat types and the
location(s) of special-status species occurring on or in the vicinity of the project site. Potential impacts
to biological resources will be identified, and mitigation measures will be provided to minimize potential
impacts when possible.
Note: Focused surveys for specific plant and/or animal species are not included in this proposed scope
of work. The presence or absence of certain species can be determined during the reconnaissance-level
site assessment. If appropriate habitat for other sensitive species is observed during the site assessment,
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 45 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 12Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
species-specific surveys may be required (i.e., surveys for annual plants not in bloom at the time of the
reconnaissance-level survey, protocol-level surveys for special-status wildlife species, etc.). Species-specific
survey requirements will be determined based on the results of the reconnaissance-level site assessment.
Task 6 Cultural and Tribal Resources
This scope of work does not include another archaeological survey, as surveys have been conducted
in the past on this site, as well as properties in the vicinity, with negative results. However, this task
includes obtaining an updated records search from the Northwest Information Center to determine if
any sensitive resources have been discovered in the vicinity since the previously surveys were conducted
for this project site. This records search may also assist the City with Tribal Consultation in accordance
with SB52 and CEQA.
Task 7 Environmental Noise Assessment
WJV Acoustics will conduct an environmental noise assessment for the proposed project. The scope of
work is included in Attachment B.
Task 8 Administrative Draft Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Prepare the administrative draft initial study and mitigated negative declaration and provide two (2)
paper copies and one (1) electronic version in Word format to the City for review and comment.
Task 9 Public Review Initial Study and Mitigated Negative Declaration
Revise the administrative draft initial study based upon City staff comments and prepare the public
review initial study and mitigated negative declaration. Provide two (2) paper copies and one (1)
electronic copy for City staff to upload to the City website.
Task 10 Public Notices and Document Distribution
Prepare a draft notice of intent, draft notice of completion, and draft OPR summary form for review
and comment by City staff.
Prepare final notices and file, along with the initial study and mitigated negative declaration,
electronically with the State Clearinghouse.
This scope assumes City staff will arrange for publishing the notice of intent with the Dispatch and
posting with the County Clerk.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 46 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
EMC Planning Group Inc. 13Camino Arroyo Development Project
Initial Study/Mitigated Negative Declaration Proposal
Task 11 Response to Comments/Final Mitigated Negative Declaration/Mitigation
Monitoring and Reporting Program
Prepare a draft response to comments and final mitigated negative declaration, if necessary, for review
and approval by the City. One electronic proof copy will be provided. Upon receipt of the City’s
comments, our firm will prepare the final response to comments for incorporation into the staff report
and use by the decision-makers.
A draft and a final mitigation monitoring and reporting program will be prepared.
Task 12 Public Hearings and Notice of Determination
Project manager will attend two public hearings to answer questions on the mitigated negative
declaration and CEQA process.
Prepare notice of determination to be filed with the County Clerk and State Clearinghouse.
6.0 Budget and Schedule
The proposed budget and schedule are presented on the following pages.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 47 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
TaskStaffSenior Principal PrincipalAssociate Planner Principal BiologistAssociate BiologistGraphicsProduction ManagerAdmin./ ProductionBilling Rate (Per Hour) $250.00 $225.00 $150.00 $190.00 $130.00 $95.00 $125.00 $115.001. Management/Consultation/Meetings 20.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 32.0 $6,660.002. Research 2.0 0.0 10.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 12.0 $2,000.003. Transportation Analysis 2.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 3.0 $650.004. Air Quality, Greenhouse Gas Emissions, and Energy 0.0 66.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 66.0 $14,850.005. Biological Resources 0.0 0.0 0.0 4.0 36.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 42.0 $5,630.006. Cultural and Tribal Resources 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 $300.007. Environmental Noise Assessment 0.0 0.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 2.0 $300.008. Administrative Draft IS/MND 16.0 0.0 52.0 0.0 0.0 16.0 4.0 2.0 90.0 $14,050.009. Public Review Draft IS/MND 4.0 0.0 8.0 0.0 2.0 2.0 4.0 2.0 22.0 $3,380.0010. Public Notices and Document Distribution 0.0 0.0 4.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 1.0 5.0 $715.0011. Response to Comments/Final MND/MMRP 8.0 2.0 8.0 2.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 20.0 $4,030.0012. Public Hearings and NOD 8.0 0.0 1.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 0.0 9.0 $2,150.00Subtotal (Hours)60.0 68.0 96.0 6.0 38.0 20.0 8.0 9.0Total Hours Total CostSubtotal (Cost)$15,000.00 $15,300.00 $14,400.00 $1,140.00 $4,940.00 $1,900.00 $1,000.00 $1,035.00305.0 $54,715.00Additional CostsProduction CostsTravel CostsPostal/DeliverablesMiscellaneous (NWIC Records Search and CNDDB)Administrative Overhead 10%TotalSubconsultant FeesHexagon Transportation ConsultantsWJV AcousticsSubconsultant Overhead 10%TotalTotal CostsNOTE: This proposal is valid for 90 days$79,975.00$8,850.00$153,681.34$8,882.50$97,707.50$550.00$1,258.84$114.44$294.40$200.00$100.00 Camino Arroyo Development Project IS/MND BudgetEMC Planning Group Inc.Total CostTotalHours7.1.aPacket Pg. 48Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA
Activity NameStart Date Finish Date31 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26Nov 2021 Dec 2021 Jan 2022 Feb 2022Mar 2022 Apr 2022 May 2022 Jun 202231 7 14 21 28 5 12 19 26 2 9 16 23 30 6 13 20 27 6 13 20 27 3 10 17 24 1 8 15 22 29 5 12 19 26Authorization to Proceed11/1/21 11/1/21Research11/1/21 11/30/21Draft Transportation Analysis11/1/21 1/24/22City Staff Review1/24/22 2/4/22Final Transportation Analysis2/4/22 2/11/22AQ/GHG/Energy1/24/22 2/11/22Biological Resources11/8/21 12/17/21Environmental Noise Assessment11/8/21 12/17/21Admin Draft IS/MND10/11/21 2/25/22City Staff Review2/28/22 3/11/22Public Review IS/MND3/14/22 3/25/22Noticing and Distribution3/28/22 4/1/2230-day Public Review Period4/4/22 5/5/22Response to Comments/Final MND/MMRP5/5/22 5/20/22Public Hearings6/1/22 6/30/22123456789101112131415Camino Arroyo Development Project IS/MNDSchedule7.1.aPacket Pg. 49Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-13)
A
ATTACHMENT
Transportation Analysis Scope of Work
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 50 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
October 7, 2021
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
EMC Planning Group
301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C
Monterey, CA 93940
Subject:Proposal to Prepare a Transportation Analysis for the Proposed Gilroy Square
Development at 6970 Camino Arroyo in Gilroy, California
Dear Ms. Wissler Adam:
Hexagon Transportation Consultants, Inc. is pleased to submit this proposal to prepare a transportation
analysis for the proposed Gilroy Square development in Gilroy, California. The project site is located at
6970 Camino Arroyo and consists of an undeveloped 10.18-acre site.The project site is bounded by
Pacheco Pass Highway (SR 152) to the north, Camino Arroyo to the west, Holloway Road to the south,
and undeveloped land to the east.It should be noted that the project site, along with the parcel south of
the project site to Holloway Road, was evaluated with potential development as Phase II of the Regency
Centers Gilroy Crossing shopping center project in 2002 (Regency Centers Traffic Impact Analysis, by
Hexagon). The Regency Centers Phase I project is located in the southwest corner of the Camino
Arroyo/Pacheco Pass Highway intersection, across the street from the project site, and is completed and
occupied (Gilroy Crossing shopping center).
The proposed project would be developed in three phases with the following land uses:
Parcel 1A –a 16-fueling positions gas station with a 2,880-square-foot (s.f.)convenience store and 1,152-
s.f. car wash; a 2,600-s.f.fast-food with drive-thru restaurant (Burger King)
Parcel 1B –a 112-room 5-story hotel (Residence Inn)and an 88-room 4-story hotel (Holiday Inn Express)
Parcel 2 –a 79,928-s.f. medical facility (treatment/outpatient only) and a 15,000-s.f. industrial warehouse
Access to the project site would be provided via three existing driveway openings along Camino Arroyo
and one along Holloway Road. Additionally, a fourth driveway is proposed along Camino Arroyo, north of
the Camino Arroyo/Gilroy Crossing intersection.
This scope of services was developed by Hexagon staff based on our knowledge of City of Gilroy traffic
study requirements. The City of Gilroy has not yet reviewed the scope of work below. Therefore,upon
their review, City staff may request changes to the scope of work or additional work elements not included
in our proposal.
Roadway Network
Under the current roadway network, all access to the project sites is provided via Pacheco Pass Highway.
In order to provide a secondary access route to the project site, a connection from the project area to the
south would be required.
The recently adopted City of Gilroy 2040 General Plan includes roadway improvements throughout the
city that will support the projected growth associated with buildout of the General Plan. Some of these
planned improvements would directly affect the project area by changing travel patterns. Planned roadway
network improvements in the project area include:
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 51 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 2 of 9
The extension of Luchessa Avenue from its current terminus point at Rossi Lane eastward to
connect to the future Cameron Boulevard extension.
The extension of Cameron Boulevard to the north to connect to Marcella Avenue at Leavesley
Road and to the south to connect to the Luchessa Avenue extension.
The extension of Rossi Lane from its current terminus point at Luchessa Avenue northward to
connect to Holloway Road.
The planned new roadway connection between Luchessa Avenue/Rossi Lane and Holloway Road would
provide a second access route to/from the project site area to/from the south and southwest parts of
Gilroy.From conversations with City staff, this planned new roadway connection should be constructed
parallel to/west of Camino Arroyo/Venture Way and the existing UNFI building,and connect to Luchessa
Avenue at its planned extension rather than at Rossi Lane.
Therefore, this study will evaluate operations of the proposed project under the current roadway network
and assuming the construction of a new roadway providing a direct connection between Luchessa Avenue
and Holloway Road (referred to hereafter as the Luchessa/Holloway connection).The Luchessa/Holloway
connection, as described above, would replace the Rossi Lane extension to Holloway Road assumed in
the General Plan roadway network. Additionally, implementation of the Luchessa/Holloway connection will
require an evaluation of roadway traffic conditions and a General Plan Amendment.
SCOPE OF SERVICES
Our proposed scope of services was developed by Hexagon staff based on our understanding of the
project and our knowledge of the City’s traffic study requirements. The purpose of the traffic analysis is to
satisfy the requirements of the City of Gilroy, Caltrans, the Congestion Management Program (CMP) of
the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority (VTA), and CEQA. The study will determine the traffic
impacts of the proposed project on the transportation network in the vicinity of the site.
Historically, traffic impact analysis has focused on the identification of traffic impacts and potential
roadway improvements to relieve traffic congestion that may result due to proposed growth based on
delay. However, with the adoption of Senate Bill (SB) 743 legislation, effective July 1, 2020, public
agencies are required to base transportation impacts on vehicle miles traveled (VMT) rather than
congestion and delay metrics, such as Level of Service (LOS), as the measurement for CEQA
transportation analysis. The change in measurement is intended to better evaluate the effects on the
state’s goals for climate change and multi-modal transportation. In adherence to SB 743, the City of Gilroy
is currently developing the framework for new policies based on the implementation of VMT as the primary
measure of transportation impacts. Therefore, the effects and impacts to the transportation network as the
result of the implementation of the proposed project will be evaluated based on VMT.
However, the City of Gilroy currently uses LOS as their adopted methodology for the evaluation of the
effects of new development and land use changes on the local transportation network. In addition, the City
is still required to conform to the requirements of the VTA, which establishes a uniform program for
evaluating the transportation impacts of land use decisions on the designated CMP Roadway System.
Therefore, in addition to the evaluation of VMT, this transportation study also will include roadway capacity
analyses, based on level of service,to evaluate the effects of the proposed project on the citywide
transportation system, including intersections, freeway segments, and freeway ramps. The level of service
analysis is presented to determine conformance to General Plan transportation policies. However, the
determination of project impacts per CEQA requirements is based solely on the VMT analysis.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 52 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 3 of 9
VMT Evaluation Methodology and Criteria
Pursuant to SB 743, the Governor’s Office of Planning and Research (OPR) released the current CEQA
Guidelines Update in late 2018, which proposes VMT as the replacement metric for LOS in the context of
CEQA. While OPR emphasizes that a lead agency has the discretionary authority to establish thresholds
of significance, the Final Guidelines suggests criteria that indicate when a project may have a significant,
or less than significant, transportation impact on the environment. In accordance with CEQA, all proposed
projects are required to analyze transportation as a component of environmental review using average trip
length per resident and/or per employee as metrics (total VMT for retail/commercial projects).
The City of Gilroy draft guidelines for the evaluation of transportation impacts based on VMT are based on
OPR’s technical recommendations regarding assessment of VMT, thresholds of significance, and
mitigation measures, contained in their Technical Advisory on Evaluating Transportation Impacts in CEQA
document, dated December 2018. Thus, for the purpose of this analysis, a comparison of the citywide
VMT (or baseline VMT) versus the project’s VMT is made to determine the effects of the proposed project
on VMT. The VMT analysis will utilize OPR’s recommendation of a net increase in total VMT from baseline
conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for commercial/retail projects and 15 percent
(%) below baseline conditions as the threshold to identify potential VMT impacts for employment projects.
The Valley Transportation Authority (VTA)VMT Evaluation Tool was developed to streamline the analysis
for development projects in Santa Clara County, however, it has the capability to analyze only the most
common land uses consisting of residential, office, and industrial land uses. For non-residential or non-
office projects, very large projects, or projects that can potentially shift travel patterns (such is the case of
the project), the City’s TDF Model,or other City-approved method,can be used to determine project VMT.
Thus,the CEQA VMT analysis will be completed utilizing the City of Gilroy Travel Demand Forecasting
(TDF) model.Total VMT will be calculated for the commercial/retail portion of the project and VMT per
employee for the employment components of the project.
If a project is found to have a significant impact on VMT, the impact must be reduced by modifying the
project to reduce its VMT to an acceptable level (below the identified thresholds of significance), mitigating
the impact through multimodal transportation improvements, implementing Transportation Demand
Management (TDM) measures, and/or by establishing a trip cap.
Roadway Capacity Analysis
For conformance with City of Gilroy General Plan transportation policies, the project will be required to
complete an analysis of the effects of project traffic on the local transportation system, or a roadway
capacity analysis. The roadway capacity analysis will include the evaluation of intersections based on
delay/level of service. A roadway segment analysis also will be completed to evaluate the effect of the
Luchessa/Holloway connection on operations along other roadway in the project area.
Preliminarily, we estimate a need to include up to 20 intersections, 8 roadway segments, 6 freeway
segments, and two freeway interchanges. The study intersections will be evaluated during the weekday
AM and PM peak commute hours and the Saturday peak-hour.The study freeway segments will be
evaluated during the weekday AM and PM peak hours only.The list of study facilities will be finalized in
coordination with City staff. Additional study facilities will require authorization and additional budget.
The study intersections, roadway segments, freeway segments, and freeway ramps we have identified are
listed below.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 53 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 4 of 9
Study Intersections
AM PM Sat
1 Monterey Street and Tenth Street 05/07/19 09/05/19 09/07/19
2 Alexander Street and Tenth Street 11/05/19 11/05/19 09/28/19
3 Chestnut Street and Tenth Street 05/07/19 05/07/19 09/07/19
4 US 101 SB Ramps and Tenth Street 05/07/19 05/07/19 09/07/19
5 US 101 NB Off-Ramp and Pacheco Pass Highway 05/07/19 05/07/19 09/07/19
6 Camino Arroyo and Pacheco Pass Highway 05/07/19 05/07/19 11/07/20
7 Silacci Way and Pacheco Pass Highway 11/05/20 11/05/20 11/07/20
8 Cameron Boulevard and Pacheco Pass Highway 11/20/19 11/05/20 11/07/20
9 Gilroy Foods and Pacheco Pass Highway 11/05/20 11/05/20 11/07/20
10 Holsclaw Road and Pacheco Pass Highway 01/23/18 01/23/18 11/18/17
11 Frazier Lake Road and Pacheco Pass Highway 01/23/18 01/23/18 11/18/17
12 Monterey Street and Luchessa Avenue 11/05/19 09/05/19 09/07/19
13 Automall Parkway and Luchessa Avenue N/A N/A N/A
14 US 101 SB Ramps and Monterey Road 03/27/18 09/05/19 09/07/19
15 US 101 NB Off-Ramp and Monterey Road 03/27/18 09/05/19 09/07/19
16 Camino Arroyo and Gilroy Crossing 11/23/18 11/23/18 11/18/17
17 Camino Arroyo and Holloway Road 11/23/18 11/23/18 11/18/17
18 Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Holloway Road (Future)Future Future Future
19 Luchessa/Holloway Connection and Luchessa Avenue (Future)Future Future Future
20 Rossi Lane and Luchessa Avenue (Future)Future Future Future
Available Count Dates
Study Roadway Segments
1.Camino Arroyo, between SR 152 and Holloway Road
2.Holloway Road, west of Camino Arroyo
3.SR 152, between US 101 and Camino Arroyo
4.Tenth Street, between Chestnut Street and US 101
5.Luchessa Avenue, between Rossi Lane and Luchessa/Holloway Connection (Future)
6.Luchessa Avenue, between Automall Parkway and Rossi Lane
7.Luchessa Avenue, between Monterey Road and Automall Parkway
8.Monterey Road, between Tenth Street and Luchessa Avenue
Study Freeway Segments
1.US 101, between SR 25 and Monterey Road
2.US 101, between Monterey and Pacheco Pass Highway
3.US 101, between Pacheco Pass Highway and Leavesley Road
4.US 101, between Leavesley Road and Buena Vista Road
5.US 101, between Buena Vista Road and Masten Avenue
6.US 101, between Masten Avenue and San Martin Avenue
Study Freeway Ramps
1.US 101 at Tenth Street
2.US 101 at Monterey Road
Study Scenarios
The key transportation facilities will be evaluated for the following study scenarios:
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 54 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 5 of 9
Existing Conditions : Existing traffic volumes on the existing roadway network.
Background Conditions: Existing + approved developments on the existing roadway network.
Background + Project Conditions: Existing + approved developments + project trips on the
existing roadway network.
Background + Project Conditions + Luchessa/Holloway Connection*: Existing + approved
developments + project trips with traffic pattern changes associated with the proposed
Luchessa/Holloway connection.
Cumulative + Project Conditions + Luchessa/Holloway Connection*: Existing + approved
developments + potential developments + project trips with traffic pattern changes associated
with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection.
2040 General Plan No Project Conditions: Year 2040 General Plan buildout traffic volumes
without the project on the General Plan roadway network (including the planned Luchessa
Avenue and Rossi Lane extensions to Cameron Boulevard and Ho lloway Road, respectively).
2040 General Plan + Project Conditions: Year 2040 General Plan buildout traffic volumes +
project trips on the General Plan roadway network (including the planned Luchessa Avenue
and Rossi Lane extensions to Cameron Boulevard and Holloway Road, respectively).
2040 General Plan + Project Conditions + Luchessa/Holloway Connection: Year 2040
General Plan buildout traffic volumes + project trips on the General Plan roadway network (with
the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection).
* The Gilroy 2040 General Plan TDF model will be utilized to obtain 2040 General Plan conditions traffic
volumes without and with the project under the planned and proposed roadway network.
Scope Tasks
The tasks to be included in the roadway capacity analysis are described below.
1.Site Reconnaissance. The physical characteristics of the site and the surrounding roadway network
will be reviewed to identify existing roadway cross-sections, intersection lane configurations, traffic
control devices, and surrounding land uses.
2.Observation of Existing Conditions.Existing traffic conditions will be observed in the field in order to
identify any operational deficiencies and to confirm the accuracy of calculated levels of service.
3.Data Collection. Available traffic count data at most of the study intersection is two or more years old
and therefore, is considered outdated. For this reason, new AM, PM, and Saturday peak-hour
intersection turn-movement traffic counts will be collected at 14 of the 17 existing study intersections
(see list of intersections). Because current traffic conditions on the roadway network may be consider
atypical due to the unprecedented conditions caused by the Covid19 pandemic, collected traffic count
data will be compared to available pre-pandemic traffic co unts and 2020 counts to determine if the
new 2021 counts are representative of what should be current traffic conditions, and/or to derive a
growth factor to be applied to the available/new counts. A total of 42 new peak-hour counts will be
collected at the study intersections.
In addition, 24-hour mechanical (tube) counts will be collected for a minimum of three consecutive
days (including Thursday,Friday, and Saturday)along the study roadway segments (8 segments).
The final number of study intersections and procedure to obtain existing traffic count data will be
determined in collaboration with City staff.
4.Evaluation of Existing Conditions. The existing traffic conditions at the study intersections will be
evaluated with the Santa Clara County CMP level of service methodology, TRAFFIX, using current
conditions peak-hour traffic volumes.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 55 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 6 of 9
5.Evaluation of Background/Approved Conditions. Traffic volumes from approved developments will
be added to the existing peak-hour volumes to obtain traffic volumes for background conditions. A list
of approved projects (including size, use, and location) will be obtained from the City of Gilroy Planning
Division for this task. Improvements associated with approved developments will be assumed as
directed by the City of Gilroy. Intersection levels of service under background conditions will be
evaluated using the CMP methodology.
6.Site Traffic Projections. Based on the proposed development size and land uses, site-generated
traffic will be estimated using the appropriate vehicular trip generation rates published in the latest
edition of ITE’s Trip Generation. The trip estimates also will account for applicable trip reductions, such
as pass-by and mixed-use reductions.
7.Trip Distribution and Assignment. The directional distribution of site-generated traffic utilized in the
2002 Regency Centers TIA will be reviewed and updated to reflect changes in the project description,
anticipated service areas, proposed site access points, existing and future roadway network, travel
patterns, and relative locations of complementary land uses in the area. Additionally, a trip distribution
pattern for project traffic with the Luchessa/Holloway connection will be developed based on
information obtained from the City’s TDF model. The site-generated traffic will be added to the
roadway network based on the directions of approach and departure discussed above.
8.Evaluation of Background + Project Conditions. Project-generated traffic will be added to
background traffic volumes to yield traffic volumes under background + project conditions. This
scenario will assume the existing roadway network. Background plus project conditions will be
evaluated for all three proposed development phases separately and collectively to identify the effect
each phase would have on the adjacent roadway network.Intersection levels of service under project
conditions will be evaluated using the CMP methodology.
9.Evaluation of Background + Project Conditions +Luchessa/Holloway Connection. This scenario
assumes the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection would be implemented providing a second
access route to/from the project site.Traffic pattern changes associated with the Luchessa/Holloway
connection will be developed using the Gilroy TDF model and applied to background traffic volumes.
Project-generated traffic (with the Luchessa/Holloway connection) will be added to the redistributed
background traffic volumes to yield traffic volumes under background plus project conditions with the
Luchessa/Holloway connection. All three proposed development phases will be evaluated separately
and collectively to identify the effect each phase would have on the adjacent roadway network. This
scenario will identify the effect of providing a second access route on traffic operations with the project
on the surrounding roadway network.
10.Evaluation of Cumulative Plus Project Conditions +Luchessa/Holloway Connection. This
scenario represents traffic conditions with buildout of the proposed project as well as all other
approved and potential projects in the area on the future roadway network, including the proposed
Luchessa/Holloway connection. This scenario will identify the project’s contribution to the need for the
second access route (Luchessa/Holloway connection).
11.Evaluation of General Plan Conditions. A level of service analysis under 2040 General Plan
conditions without and with the project will be conducted. The General Plan scenarios will evaluate
traffic conditions under the 2040 General Plan Buildout conditions on the planned roadway network
(including the planned Rossi Lane extension between Luchessa Avenue and Holloway Road)without
the project and compare them to traffic conditions with the proposed project, as evaluated in the
recently completed General Plan update. Traffic volumes for General Plan conditions will be obtained
from the City’s traffic demand forecasting model. Intersection levels of service under General Plan
conditions will be evaluated using the CMP methodology.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 56 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 7 of 9
12.Evaluation of General Plan Conditions + Luchessa/Holloway Connection.This scenario will
evaluate General Plan with project conditions with the proposed Luchessa/Holloway connection.The
Luchessa/Holloway connection would replace the planned Rossi Lane extension as it is coded in the
Gilroy General Plan TDF model. This scenario will identify the effect of the proposed change in the
planned roadway network on General Plan traffic conditions.
13.Roadway Segment Analysis. Future conditions along each of the studied roadway segments will be
evaluated using average daily traffic (ADT)volumes (obtained from new tube counts and from the TDF
model)to identify the potential traffic pattern changes associated with the proposed
Luchessa/Holloway connection and its effects on the planned roadway network.
14.Signal Warrant Analysis.The need for future signalization of the unsignalized study intersections will
be evaluated on the basis of the Peak Hour Warrant (Warrant 3 –Part B) in the California Manual on
Uniform Traffic Control Devices. The warrant will be evaluated using peak-hour volumes for all study
scenarios.
15.Freeway Segment Analysis. Freeway level of service will be determined in accordance with the
Santa Clara County CMP guidelines for freeway analyses. The analysis will include evaluation of AM
and PM peak-hour freeway conditions for existing and project conditions. Deficiencies to freeway
segments caused by the project, if any, will be identified.
16.Freeway Ramp Analysis. Existing traffic volumes at the study freeway ramps will be obtained from
the existing traffic count data. Field measurements of existing vehicular queues and ramp meter rates
will be completed and supplemented with previously collected data at the study freeway ramps. The
freeway ramp analysis will evaluate the effects of project traffic on traffic volumes and queue lengths at
the study freeway ramps.
17.Evaluation of Vehicle Queue. For selected locations specified by City staff and/or where the project
is projected to add a significant number of turning traffic, the adequacy of existing storage at turn
pockets will be assessed by means of comparison with expected maximum vehicle queues.
18.Site Access, On-Site Circulation, and Parking Analysis. A review of the project site plan will be
performed to determine if adequate site access and on-site circulation are provided and to identify any
access or circulation issues that should be improved. This will include a quantitative analysis of the
anticipated traffic volumes at the site’s driveways, as well as a qualitative analysis of the proposed site
access and site layout. The review will be based on the site’s overall anticipated trip generation and
consider the following: sight distance, vehicle queuing at site access intersections and on-site, traffic
control requirements, driveway locations and alignment, on-site layout and circulation, and pedestrian
access and circulation. Additionally, the proposed parking supply on the site will be compared to City
parking requirements and documented in the traffic report.
19.Bicycle, Pedestrian, and Transit Facilities. A qualitative analysis of the project’s effect on transit
service and bicycle/pedestrian circulation in the study area will be conducted. Bicycle and pedestrian
circulation will be reviewed for consistency with the City’s General Plan, the Bicycle/Pedestrian
Transportation Plan, and the Complete Streets Policy. Connectivity between the project site and the
adjacent land uses,as well as pedestrian circulation within the project area, will be reviewed and
possible improvements identified, if necessary.
20.Description of Impacts and Recommendations. Based on the results of the above analyses,
deficiencies to the roadway network as the result of the site-generated traffic will be identified.
Recommendations will be formulated that identify the locations and types of improvements or
modifications necessary to mitigate significant project impacts. Improvements could include street
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 57 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 8 of 9
widenings, lane additions, changes in lane usage, addition of traffic signals, or modifying existing traffic
signals.
21.Reports. Our findings and recommendations will be summarized in an administrative draft report for
review by the City Transportation Engineer. Hexagon Transportation Consultants will respond to
editorial comments on the administrative draft and prepare a draft report for review by the
environmental consultant and/or City Planning staff. Comments received on the draft report will be
addressed and a final traffic report will be developed.
22.Response to Comments. Hexagon will assist the City and the environmental consultant in
responding to comments on the traffic section of the EIR. The fee estimate includes up to 16 hours of
Hexagon staff time to responding to EIR comments.
23.Meetings. Our cost estimate includes Hexagon staff attendance at up to three meetings with City
and/or project team in connection with the project. In addition, budget has been allocated for
attendance at one meeting with Caltrans in connection with the project.Additional meetings will require
authorization and additional budget.
24.Public Meetings. Our cost estimate includes Hexagon staff attendance at two public meetings (one
Planning Commission meeting and one City Council meeting) in connection with this project.
Additional meetings will require authorization and additional budget.
ADDITIONAL SERVICES
Any work not specifically referenced in the above Scope of Services—for example,analyzing a different
project description, analyzing additional intersections or scenarios, analyzing different phases of
development, attending additional meetings, and providing engineering drawings or cost estimates for
mitigation measures—shall be considered additional services.Additional services will require additional
budget and time.
TIME OF PERFORMANCE
We are prepared to start work on this project immediately upon notice to proceed. Barring any unforeseen
delays, the administrative draft report will be submitted twelve weeks after (1) authorization to proceed, (2)
receipt of all requested project information from the project applicant, and (3) receipt of all data provided or
required by the City.The draft and final reports will each be delivered one week after receipt of all
respective review comments.
COST OF SERVICES
The cost for services rendered under this agreement (VMT evaluation and Work Items 1 through 24
associated with the roadway capacity analysis), as outlined above, will be billed on a time and expenses
basis, not to exceed $79,975, which includes $9,525 in data collection.Billing will be conducted monthly,
on a percent complete basis.Additional Services shall be provided upon authorization and, if requested,
will be billed separately. This price quote is good for 30 days and assumes that all project-related activities
will be completed within one year. Extended project schedules will require additional budget for project
administration.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 58 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Ms. Teri Wissler Adam
October 7, 2021
Page 9 of 9
We appreciate your consideration of Hexagon Transportation Consultants for this assignment. If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
HEXAGON TRANSPORTATION CONSULTANTS, INC.
Gicela Del Rio, T.E.
Senior Associate
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 59 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
B
ATTACHMENT
Environmental Noise Assessment Scope of Work
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 60 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Aviation Noise Studies ꞏ Community Noise ꞏ Architectural Acoustics ꞏ Environmental Noise Assessments
113 N. Church Street, Suite 203 ∙ Visalia, CA 93291∙ (559) 627-4923
1529 (Camino Arroyo Development Project, Gilroy)
October 4, 2021
Teri Wissler Adam
Senior Principal
EMC PLANNING GROUP INC.
301 Lighthouse Avenue, Suite C
Monterey, California 93940
RE: ENVIRONMENTAL NOISE ASSESSMENT, CAMINO ARROYO DEVELOPMENT
PROJECT, GILROY, CALIFORNIA
Dear Ms. Wissler Adam:
Based upon the information you have provided, WJV Acoustics, Inc. (WJVA) is pleased to submit
this proposal to prepare an environmental noise assessment for the above‐referenced project.
Following is a description of our proposed scope of services, fee and schedule for completion.
Scope of Services:
1. Conduct a project site inspection to evaluate the acoustical characteristics of the project
site and surrounding area, note the locations of nearby noise‐sensitive receptors and
identify existing noise sources in the project area. Conduct ambient noise monitoring
at representative locations throughout the project vicinity that could have potential
noise‐related conflicts as a result of the proposed project. It is anticipated that continuous
24‐hour ambient noise measurements will be conducted at up to two (2) locations using
automated noise monitors and that short‐term sampling of ambient noise levels will be
conducted at up to four (4) additional sites.
2. Analyze potential project‐related changes in roadway traffic noise exposure along
roadways near or adjacent to the project site. Calculations will be performed using the
FHWA Highway Traffic Noise Prediction Model and traffic data to be obtained from the
project traffic engineer or other sources as may be appropriate. Compare project‐related
changes in traffic noise exposure to applicable City of Gilroy noise level standards and
other thresholds of significance.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 61 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Teri Wissler Adam
Senior Principal
EMC PLANNING GROUP INC.
October 4, 2021
Page 2
1529 (Camino Arroyo Development Project, Gilroy)
3. Evaluate potential noise impacts from the project including 1) noise levels from existing
noise sources as they may affect the proposed development, and 2) noise levels resulting
from development of the project as they may affect existing and proposed noise‐sensitive
uses in the project area.
4. If available, review the construction plans for the proposed hotels to determine the
outdoor‐to‐indoor noise level reduction (NLR) that would be expected from the proposed
building. Recommend additional sound attenuation measures if required for compliance
with the applicable City of Gilroy and California Building Code (CalGreen) interior noise
level standards. Alternatively, calculate the required NLR of the hotel façade if
construction details are not available at the time the analysis is prepared.
5. Quantify noise and vibration levels that would likely occur during construction of the
project as they could affect nearby existing or planned noise‐sensitive receptors. Identify
nearby existing or planned noise‐sensitive receptors that could be subjected to noise or
vibration levels in excess of applicable noise standards or CEQA thresholds as a result of
the project construction.
6. Prepare recommendations for noise mitigation as may be required to reduce significant
noise impacts to less‐than‐significant. Significance will be based on City of Gilroy noise
standards and the CEQA Guidelines criteria. Identify any significant project‐related noise
impacts that cannot be reasonably mitigated.
7. Prepare a written technical report summarizing the methods, findings and
recommendations of the study. The report and associated exhibits will be formatted to
facilitate incorporation into the CEQA documents being prepared for the project.
Fee:
WJVA proposes to provide the services described above for a total fee of $8,850, including
expenses. Attendance of meetings or hearings, if required, would be subject to additional charges
based upon the enclosed Fee Schedule plus expenses. Full payment for services rendered will be
due upon submittal of the completed report.
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 62 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
Teri Wissler Adam
Senior Principal
EMC PLANNING GROUP INC.
October 4, 2021
Page 3
1529 (Camino Arroyo Development Project, Gilroy)
Schedule For Completion:
Work will be scheduled for completion in compliance with the overall project schedule. It is
anticipated that the noise study will be completed within 30 days after receipt of all necessary
maps, traffic data, project information and the notice‐to‐proceed.
We are looking forward to the possibility of working with you on this project. Please do not
hesitate to contact me at (559) 627‐4923 or walter@wjvacoustics.com if you have any questions
or would like additional information.
Sincerely,
WJV ACOUSTICS, INC.
Walter J. Van Groningen
President
WJV:wjv
Enclosure: Fee Schedule
7.1.a
Packet Pg. 63 Attachment: EMC Planning - Camino Arroyo Subdivision Proposal (3602 : Award of Contract for CEQA Review of Planning Application AS21-
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approval of a Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Budget Amendment
Increasing Appropriations in the Amount of $63,502 and Award of a
Contract to Burkett's Pool Plastering Inc. for a Base Bid amount of
$280,457, with a contingency of $28,045 for the Christopher High
School Activity Pool Re-Plaster, Project No. 22-ASD-271.
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administrative Services
Submitted By: LeeAnn McPhillips
Prepared By: Walter Dunckel
Walter Dunckel
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
a. Adopt a resolution of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending the FY 22
budget to transfer $63,502 from Capital Projects Fund (400) to Facilities Fund
(651) and appropriate the related expenditure for the Pool Replaster project.
b. Award a contract to Burkett's Pool Plastering Inc. for the base bid price of
$280,457 for the Christopher High School Activity Pool Re -plaster, Project No.
22-ASD-271, establish a contingency of up to $28,045 (10%), and authorize the
City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.
7.2
Packet Pg. 64
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City maintains the Christopher High School Activity Pool as part of a shared use
agreement with Gilroy Unified School District. The cost of repairs and maintenance of
the Activity Pool is solely the City’s responsibility. The Activity Pool was built in 2011
and opened in 2012. Re-Plastering is required every 10 to 15 years, and we have been
experiencing plaster issues for a few years. These plaster issues could cause the pool
to be shut down by the Santa Clara County Health Department if not addressed. As
areas of the pool’s plaster crack, the City has been required to perform temporary
repairs. Temporary repairs are no longer an option and resurfacing is required at this
time.
BACKGROUND
In June of 2021 Council approved a budget item to resurface the Activity Pool for an
amount of $245,000, which was the engineer’s estimate for this project at that time. In
November 2021, staff issued an advertisement for bids for the project. In December,
staff received one bid. Burkett’s Pool Plastering Inc. submitted a bid in the amount of
$280,457.
ANALYSIS
Staff advertised bids on November 5, 2021 and were opened on Wednesday,
December 1, 2021. The City received a single bid from Burkett’s Pool Plastering Inc.
with a base bid of $280,457. The bid exceeds the engineer’s estimate by 14%.
At this time, staff does not believe rebidding the project will result in additional or lower
bids. Also, the work needs to proceed for the City intends to operate the Activity Pool
this summer.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may reject staff’s recommendation and not award the bid. As mentioned above,
the plaster has ongoing issues that temporary repairs are no longer sufficient to
address.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The base bid is $280,457 and staff recommends including a 10% contingency of
$28,045, for a total allocation of $308,502. Council appropriated funds in the amount of
$245,000 on June 7, 2021, with the adoption of the biennial budget within the Facilities
Fund (651). Staff recommends the remaining balance of $63,502 to be covered by the
Capital Project Fund (400) which has adequate fund balance to fully fund the project.
The budget amendment will authorize the transfer of $63,302 from Capital Projects
Fund (400) to the Facilities Fund (651) and appropriate the additional expenditure in the
Facilities Fund (651).
7.2
Packet Pg. 65
Staff recommends that the City Council adopt a resolution to amend the budget for
resurfacing the activity pool ($63,502) to appropriate $308,502 for this project for the
reasons cited above.
CONCLUSION
Staff requests City Council’s approval of a contract with Burkett’s Pool Plastering Inc. for
the Christopher High School Activity Pool Re-Plastering Project No. 22-ASD-271,
establish the appropriate project contingency, and authorize the City Administrator to
execute the contract and associated documents. The contingency amount is intended to
account for unforeseen conditions or necessary field changes in the scope of work
during the resurfacing process. If the contingency is not needed, it will not be expended.
Attachments:
1. Draft Budget Amendment Resolution - CHS Activity Pool Resurfacing Project Jan
2022
7.2
Packet Pg. 66
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY
AMENDING THE ADOPTED BUDGET FOR FISCAL YEAR 2021-2022 TO
APPROPRIATE $63,503 FROM CAPITAL PROJECTS FUND (400) AS
TRANSFER OUT TO FACILITIES FUND (651) AND INCREASE THE
REVENUE AND EXPENDITURE APPROPRIATIONS IN FACILITIES FUND
(651) BY $63,503 FOR THE CHRISTOPHER HIGH SCHOOL ACTIVITY
POOL RESURFACING PROJECT
WHEREAS, the City Council adopted a budget for the City of Gilroy for the Fiscal Year
2021-2022 on June 7, 2021; and
WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared and submitted to the City Council, in the staff report
dated January 10, 2022, a proposed amendment to said budget for Fiscal Year 2021-2022. The
purpose of such amendment is to appropriate $63,503 from Capital Projects Fund (400) as a
transfer out to Facilities Fund (651) and increase the revenue and expenditure appropriation in
Facilities Fund (651) by $63,503, for the Pool re-surfacing project.
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and considered the same and is satisfied
with said budget amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES HEREBY
FIND, DETERMINE, RESOLVE AND ORDER AS FOLLOWS:
Section 1. Recitals. The City Council does hereby find, determine, and resolve that all of the
foregoing recitals are true and correct.
Section 2. Approval and Authorization. The City Council does further resolve, order and/or direct
as follows:
a. That the City’s previously adopted Fiscal Year 2021-2022 Budget, as the same has been
amended to date, is hereby further amended; and
b. That the City Clerk is hereby authorized and directed to forward a copy of this Resolution
to the City’s Finance Director, who is hereby authorized and directed to take all actions
necessary to implement the terms of this Resolution pertaining to the Fiscal Year 2021-2022
Budget of City.
Section 3. This Resolution shall take effect immediately upon adoption.
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 67 Attachment: Draft Budget Amendment Resolution - CHS Activity Pool Resurfacing Project Jan 2022 (3585 : CHS Activity Pool Resurfacing
PASSED, APPROVED, AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Gilroy at its meeting
held on 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:
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
7.2.a
Packet Pg. 68 Attachment: Draft Budget Amendment Resolution - CHS Activity Pool Resurfacing Project Jan 2022 (3585 : CHS Activity Pool Resurfacing
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Streamline Consolidation of the City's Boards and Commissions
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis
Prepared By: Jimmy Forbis
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 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.
9.1
Packet Pg. 69
BACKGROUND
At the December 13, 2021 Regular Council Meeting, as directed to Council, staff
returned to Council for approval of the full streamline option, with the modification to
retain the Youth Commission. The full history of this item is contained in the December
13, 2021 Council staff report, attached to this agenda item. At the December 13, 2021
meeting Council directed staff to return to Council with some follow-up information to
consider the consolidation approach to the City’s boards and commissions.
INFORMATION FOR CONSIDERATION
Below is the data in question for consideration of the consolidation.
Number of boards comparison of cities with similar general tax revenues for
2020, including Hollister and Morgan Hill
Entity Name
Total Taxes -
General Revenues Boards FTEs
FTE to
Board
Ratio
Hollister $ 24,735,393 6 193 32
Morgan Hill $ 28,463,397 4 183 46
Camarillo $ 39,086,937 5 147 29
Jurupa Valley $ 39,348,889 3 65 22
Campbell $ 39,654,505 9 193 21
Whittier $ 39,941,838 17 486 29
La Habra $ 40,121,603 7 265 38
South Lake Tahoe $ 40,507,469 7 195 28
San Ramon $ 40,795,810 14 278 20
La Mesa $ 40,860,802 13 263 20
Poway $ 41,350,363 3 228 76
Norwalk $ 42,505,668 10 269 27
Gilroy $ 42,560,015 13 258 20
Gardena $ 42,732,414 10 423 42
La Quinta $ 43,753,786 5 86 17
Brea $ 44,088,008 6 352 59
Merced $ 44,104,438 9 507 56
Emeryville $ 45,042,890 10 170 17
Monterey $ 45,463,003 9 427 47
Hemet $ 45,920,828 6 303 51
Woodland $ 46,607,332 10 317 32
National City $ 46,878,982 9 331 37
Cathedral City $ 47,796,502 8 199 25
Average $ 42,855,385 9 275 34
9.1
Packet Pg. 70
This table uses data from the State Controller’s Office listing California cities with the
next ten higher and lower general tax revenues. Board numbers came from each city’s
website, excluding joint power authority boards, Council-only boards, and former
redevelopment agency boards. Full-time equivalents (FTEs) came from their latest,
posted adopted budgets. The average number of boards for the comparis on cities is
nine.
Number of board members removed due to the number of absences in 2021
In 2021, there were five members removed from commissions and committees for
absences. It should be noted that most meetings held in 2021 were conducted virtually.
By board, below are the numbers:
• Arts and Culture Commission – two members
• Physically Challenged Board of Appeals – two members
• Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee – one member
Total absences
Over the span of 2021, the total number of documented absences was 63. Of these, 32
were documented as excused, while the remaining 31 were marked as unexcused.
Below is a breakdown of the absences by type and board.
Board Excused
Absences
Other
Absences
Total
Absences
Arts and Culture Commission 3 7 10
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 3 0 3
Building Board of Appeals 0 0 0
Historic Heritage Committee 2 5 7
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Committee
2 5 7
Library Commission 2 2 4
Open Government Commission 1 2 3
Parks and Recreation Commission 4 1 5
Personnel Commission 6 1 7
Physically Challenged Board of Appeals 1 0 1
Planning Commission 5 2 7
9.1
Packet Pg. 71
Board Excused
Absences
Other
Absences
Total
Absences
Street Naming Committee 0 0 0
Youth Commission 3 6 9
TOTAL 32 31 63
Number of board vacancies and recruitments in 2021
At the beginning of the year with the annual call for applicants heard on the January 4,
2021 Council Meeting, the following vacancies and applications were considered, with
no recruitments for the Street Naming Committee nor the Youth Commission:
Board Seats Applicants
Arts and Culture Commission 2 1
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 3 6
Building Board of Appeals 2 0
Historic Heritage Committee 2 4
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee 2 8
Library Commission 2 1
Open Government Commission 3 4
Parks and Recreation Commission 2 4
Personnel Commission 1 4
Physically Challenged Board of Appeals 1 0
Planning Commission 3 10
Street Naming Committee N/A N/A
Youth Commission N/A N/A
Since the annual recruitment process, there were additional calls for applicants due to
resignations or removals, a total of seven rounds including the Youth Commission’s
annual recruitment. Below is the list of recruitments and applications heard by Council:
1. February 1st Council Meeting – continued recruitments due to no or limited
applicants in the annual process:
9.1
Packet Pg. 72
o Pre-existing Vacancies
▪ Arts and Culture Commission – one applicant for one seat
▪ Building Board of Appeals – three applicants for two seats
▪ Library Commission – three applicants for one seat
▪ Physically Challenged Board of Appeals
o Additional vacancies
▪ Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee (2 new
vacancies) – four applicants for two seats
2. April 5th Council Meeting – vacancy on Planning Commission. Used remaining
seven applicants from annual recruitment, no separate recruitment conducted
3. May 17th Council Meeting – one new vacancy on Parks and Recreation
Commission for a member who relocated. Four applications for one seat.
4. August 16th Council Meeting – five new vacancies, one resignation and four
members dismissed due to excessive unexcused absences.
o Resignation
▪ Library Commission – one applicant for one seat
o Unexcused Absences
▪ Arts and Culture Commission – one applicant for one seat
▪ Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee – one
applicant for one seat
▪ Physically Challenged Board of Appeals – one applicant for two
seats
5. September 20th Council Meeting – one new vacancy on Planning Commission –
one applicant for one seat
6. October 4th and 18th Council Meetings – Youth Commission regular recruitment –
nine applicants for five seats (fifth seat realized and appointed at the meeting on
October 18th)
7. November 15th Council Meeting – three vacancies
o Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee – four applicants for
one seat
o Open Government Commission – two applicants for one seat
o Physically Challenged Board of Appeals – no applicants for one seat –
9.1
Packet Pg. 73
rolled into new year’s annual recruitment process
Although there were seven recruitments, the number of Council interactions for these
recruitments were greater. Each recruitment initiates with a Council action, typically on
consent calendar, to open the recruitment for the vacant seat(s). Council then typically
conducts an interview with candidates, then at a later meeting appoint selected
residents to the vacant seat(s). 20 agenda items relating to board recruitments were
brought to Council in 2021.
Historical number of boards in Gilroy
In a review of the City Clerk records, the furthest back identifiable data on boards is the
adoption of the Charter in 1960, where four commissions were established. Since then,
boards have been added throughout the years. The dates are from enacting
ordinances, or recorded minutes. The Street Naming Committee enactment could not
be found, so the earliest found reference in minutes was used.
Year Number
of Boards
1960 4
1971 5
1976 6
1984 7
1990 8
1995 10
2000 11
2005 12
2008 13
2009 14
2014 15
2019 13
The boards have been increasing, but not decreasing until the first consolidation in
2019.
Board meetings in 2021
Below is a table showing the board meetings that were held in 2021. The column for
meetings scheduled include regular meetings and special meetings called by the board.
Some boards pre-plan to go “dark” for certain months, which is why some are less than
the 12 monthly meetings contained in the Charter. The column for meetings cancelled
are those that were not held as planned. Cancellations can be for several reasons
including lack of business, lack of quorum, a rescheduled meeting, or a special meeting
where the need or reason for the meeting no longer existed.
9.1
Packet Pg. 74
Board Meetings
Scheduled
Meetings
Held
Meetings
Cancelled
Arts and Culture Commission1 11 10 1
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 12 9 3
Building Board of Appeals 0 0 0
Historic Heritage Committee 12 8 4
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization
Committee
13 9 4
Library Commission 5 5 0
Open Government Commission 5 3 2
Parks and Recreation Commission2 11 10 1
Personnel Commission 12 5 7
Physically Challenged Board of Appeals 4 1 3
Planning Commission 16 12 4
Street Naming Committee 0 0 0
Youth Commission 8 8 0
Boards’ staff time consumption in 2021
Below are the estimates from the staff liaisons regarding the number of hours of staff
time that were given to each board and commission. As staff does not document eac h
hour of every staff members’ work, these are estimates. Those with special notes are
identified below the table.
Board Staff
Hours
Arts and Culture Commission 165
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 103
1 ACC had 10 regular meetings scheduled, but one was cancelled and was rescheduled to a special
meeting.
2 PRC had scheduled 10 regular meetings, but added a special meeting pertaining to Pic kleball, which
was cancelled before being held. This committee’s regularly scheduled meetings were all held.
9.1
Packet Pg. 75
Board Staff
Hours
Building Board of Appeals 2
Historic Heritage Committee 54
Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee 287
Library Commission 25
Open Government Commission Data not
Available
Parks and Recreation Commission 200
Personnel Commission 65
Physically Challenged Board of Appeals 24
Planning Commission 234
Street Naming Committee 0
Youth Commission 120
1. Open Government Commission. The staff that had supported the Open
Government Commission meetings is no longer with the City. There are no
estimates currently for time staff spends in support of this commission.
2. Planning Commission. Planning Commission hours are purely time preparing for
and attending meetings. Unlike other boards, Planning Commission is a
discretionary board and has significant work generated from project applicants.
The work on the projects themselves in review and preparation for the meetings
are not included in this estimate but are significant.
3. Street Naming Committee. This committee meets only as needed and has not
had a meeting in 2021.
Reduction in staffing
During and due to the pandemic, the City had to reduce staffing throughout the City.
Pre-pandemic, the City’s authorized full-time staffing for Fiscal Year 2020-2021 was 284
positions. In the Fiscal Year 2021-22 adopted budget, the City’s authorized staffing is
258, a decrease in staffing by 9%. While the budget authorized additional positions, the
amended staffing for Fiscal Year 2020 -2021 after the start of the pandemic reduced
staffing to 246 full-time positions. Staff is currently conducting recruitments and will be
continuing to recruit for positions throughout the year. However, this means that the full
staffing of 258 has not yet been reached. Currently there are 233 full-time staff
9.1
Packet Pg. 76
employed, an effective reduction of 18% from the pre-COVID 2021 authorized staffing,
and current staffing is 10% below the authorized staffing for FY22 . With fewer staffing,
and many of these reduced positions being office and management staffing, there is
more tasks that each remaining staff member must take on, creating less capacity to
serve in support of the boards and commissions.
CONSOLIDATION PLAN
As a summary of the plan contained in the previous staff report, the proposal is to
consolidate four boards as identified below, and move their functions to other
commissions:
1. Historic Heritage Committee – move duties to Planning Commission.
2. Housing and Neighborhood Revitalization Committee – move duties to Planning
Commission.
3. Street Naming Committee – move duties to Planning Commission.
4. Bicycle Pedestrian Commission – move infrastructure planning and development
review duties to the Planning Commission, and the education and
encouragement duties to the Parks and Recreation Commission.
The consolidated boards would have six months to wind down their operations and
transition the work to the commission inheriting their duties. The implementation plan for
each board will be unique, and developed between the chairs and staff liaisons,
coordinating with their equivalents in the inheriting commission. The implementation
plans and updates would be shared with the City Council via e-mail updates on the
progress of any consolidations approved by Council.
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 of board and commission meetings being reduced.
CONCLUSION
With the consolidation of the four Commissions the demand for Commissioners and
staff will be reduced. It will reduce the number of commissioners that would need to be
recruited, as well as reducing City resource consumption and staff time, which will be
made available for other tasks that are assigned to the staff liaisons and board
secretaries.
9.1
Packet Pg. 77
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. The December 17, 2021 staff report was transmitted to all board members on
December 22, 2017, advising the City’s board members that they will also receive this
staff report when finalized.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution - Committee Consolidation
2. Draft Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
3. Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021
9.1
Packet Pg. 78
Resolution No. 2022-XX Page 1 of 2 January 10, 2022
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-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
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.
9.1.a
Packet Pg. 79 Attachment: Draft Resolution - Committee Consolidation (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
Resolution No. 2022-XX Page 2 of 2 January 10, 2022
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of January 2022, by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
9.1.a
Packet Pg. 80 Attachment: Draft Resolution - Committee Consolidation (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
Ordinance No. 2022-XX Page 1 of 2 January 24, 2022
ORDINANCE NO. 2022-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.
9.1.b
Packet Pg. 81 Attachment: Draft Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
Ordinance No. 2022-XX Page 2 of 2 January 24, 2022
SECTION II
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 24th
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:
Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
9.1.b
Packet Pg. 82 Attachment: Draft Ordinance - Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
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
9.1.c
Packet Pg. 83 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
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
9.1.c
Packet Pg. 84 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
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
9.1.c
Packet Pg. 85 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
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
9.1.c
Packet Pg. 86 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
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)9.1.c
Packet Pg. 87 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission 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)9.1.c
Packet Pg. 88 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission 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)9.1.c
Packet Pg. 89 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission 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)9.1.c
Packet Pg. 90 Attachment: Streamline Consolidation Staff Report - December 13, 2021 (3619 : Commission Consolidation)
0
0
0
0
Z1
0
a
z
0
,o 0
., 0 O
H o
U 0
0
V •° o b
rg° O
v� U
E
rn
U -
›., 'o an
o 2 -
> O
c e� up • U Q,
.o �J °; N O
.0 0 .0 ;-,1-4
0
4O�+ 8 "CS
C CZ O
trs•CT— 0o E ',
a �,
'd O
U
cep
P:1 W W W Vd . N
N HHcu O
En 4-1 H H › 41 cd
1�0��c
b`D CD ~ �N �, 4-1
to-0w ; °—
° Q'4
0
z 0'
W ...
AG
ct
N
C.)> N
ch
.0 El
'd Cd
0 a
0 y
ao
4
PLEASE PRINT NEATLY (to be used to call you to the podium)
a 2
o
o b
A • 0
v)
t.
"RI irj
O a)
CJrciti
• A
G�, o
0
0
by
0
0
a)
br)• (1-.
•o
�
a.) O
0
N
cc; a)
CC^
O 0
1b
Ct
O
CC3 (7)
O
U
cip 0
• bD
a4
f., b
.4
7
U a)
,-0
•
a)
E
5.
0
0
O
u
0
a)
0
a
z/
Ei
PLEASE P
W
AGENDA ITEM(S): NU
a
w
PI
H ▪ a)v o
c co � H ,
cd
23 • R. � N
C A-,
'' U O
"Cet O . -4
0ca N
rA -
a) ▪ U
✓ �Q., Q)
ril ',E 5
a) ccn
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Consideration of authorizing virtual meetings pursuant to Section
54953 of the Brown Act for Council and all Boards and
Commissions
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
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
Adopt Resolution authorizing virtual meetings pursuant to Section 54953 of the Brown
Act for Council and all Boards and Commissions.
BACKGROUND
On March 4, 2020, the Governor of the State of California (“Governor”) issued a
Proclamation of a State of Emergency due to COVID-19. Such proclamation remains in
effect, as are the facts, circumstances, and emergency under which it was issued.
On March 17, 2020, the Governor issued Executive Order N-29-20 allowing local
legislative bodies to hold meetings via teleconference and to make meetings accessible
electronically without it constituting a violation of the open meeting laws found in the
Ralph M. Brown Act (California Government Code Sections 54950 et seq., “Brown Act”).
10.1
Packet Pg. 91
On March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2020-17 ratifying the City
Administrator as Director of Emergency Services Proclamation dated March 13, 2020.
Since the enactment of the Executive order, local legislative bodies in California have
been able to hold public meetings by “teleconference” (a term that includes video
conferencing) without complying with all the Brown Act requirements for teleconference
meetings, as follows:
• Giving notice of each teleconference location from which, a member would by
participating in a public meeting and specifically identifying each teleconference
location in the meeting notice and on the agenda, including the full address and
room number;
• Assuring that each teleconference location is accessible to the public;
• Allowing members of the public to address the body at each teleconference
location;
• Posting agendas at all teleconference locations; and
• During teleconference meetings, at least a quorum of the members of the local
body must participate from locations within the boundaries of the territory over
which the local body exercises jurisdiction.
In March 2020, staff transitioned holding public meetings via WebEx, and eventually to
Zoom for all City meetings. Remote meetings have allowed the City Council, City
Council Committees, and the City’s community advisory bodies to continue to conduct
City business from the safety of their individual locations. The usage of remote
technology for public meetings over has allowed the City to ensure the public’s
continued access to meetings while also ensuring the public’s safety.
On June 11, 2021, the Governor issued Executive Order N -08-21, which, among other
things, rescinded his prior Executive Order N-29-20 and set a date of October 1, 2021,
for public agencies to transition back to public meetings held in full compliance with the
Brown Act.
In August 2021 the City Council, City Council Committees, and the City’s community
advisory bodies returned to in-person meetings as the positive rate of Covid-19 cases
had decreased nationwide and continued to do so for several months.
ANALYSIS
Due to the recent rise in COVID-19 cases, including due to the Omicron variant, the City
is concerned about protecting the health and safety of attendees. This concern is
heightened given that even fully vaccinated people have contracted the Omicron
variant, that people may have and transmit the virus before knowing they are infected
and/or if they are asymptomatic, that meetings of City legislative bodies often last
several hours, and that City meeting facilities are limited in space with seats close
together.
10.1
Packet Pg. 92
Subsequent to the above-mentioned Executive Order issuance, and because of the
Delta variant surge in California back in late summer 2021, the legislature took action to
extend the COVID-19 exceptions to the Brown Act’s teleconference requirements,
subject to additional safeguards. AB 361, signed by the Governor on September 16,
2021, allows a local agency to continue to use teleconferencing without complying with
the Brown Act provisions above in any of the following circumstances:
• The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency,
and state or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote
social distancing.
• The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency for
the purpose of determining, by majority vote whether, as a result of the
emergency, meeting in person would present imminent risks to the health or
safety of attendees.
• The legislative body holds a meeting during a proclaimed state of emergency and
has determined, by majority vote, that, as a result of the emergency, meeting in
person would present imminent risks to the health or safety of attendees.
The City meets the requirements to hold meetings remotely in order to ensure the
health and safety of the public if:
• The Santa Clara County Health Officer has issued various health orders and
updates designed to slow the spread of COVID-19 (including variants thereof)
such as vaccinations, quarantines, face covering requirements, and social
distancing recommendations designed to protect public health.
• The Santa Clara County Health Officer is strongly recommending teleconferenced
meetings as those meetings present the lowest risk of transmission of SARS-CoV-
2, the virus that causes COVID-19, and further recommends social distancing and
face masking of all attendees.
AB 361 also provides that, if the state of emergency remains active for more than 30
days, a local agency must make the following findings by majority vote 30 days after it
first implements the bill’s exemptions to the Brown Act teleconferencing rules and every
30 days thereafter to continue using them:
(A) The legislative body has reconsidered the circumstances of the state of
emergency.
(B) Any of the following circumstances exist:
(i) The state of emergency continues to directly impact the ability of the
members to meet safely in person.
10.1
Packet Pg. 93
(ii) State or local officials continue to impose or recommend m easures to
promote social distancing.
The City will have to put an item on the agenda once every 30 days to make findings
regarding the circumstances of the emergency and vote to continue using the law’s
exemptions.
The stated aim of AB 361 is “to improv e and enhance public access to local agency
meetings during the COVID-19 pandemic and future applicable emergencies, by
allowing broader access through teleconferencing options” consistent with Executive
Order N-29-20. The bill sunsets as of January 1, 2024.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None.
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
Attachments:
1. Draft Resolution
10.1
Packet Pg. 94
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX 4894-1564-7497v1
ALF\04706083
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY
OF GILROY MAKING CERTAIN FINDINGS RELATING
TO THE EXISTING STATE OF EMERGENCY CAUSED BY
THE COVID-19 PANDEMIC AND DETERMINING AS A
RESULT OF THE STATE OF EMERGENCY THAT CITY
COUNCIL MEETINGS AND MEETINGS OF OTHER CITY
LEGISLATIVE BODIES SHALL BE HELD BY
TELECONFERENCING PURSUANT TO GOVERNMENT
CODE SECTION 54953(E)
WHEREAS, on March 4, 2020, the Governor issued a proclamation of a state of
emergency pursuant to Government Code Section 8625, relating to the respiratory illness known
as COVID-19, which is caused by the novel coronavirus SARS-CoV-2; and
WHEREAS, the Governor’s proclamation remains in effect; and
WHEREAS, on March 11, 2020, the World Health Organization declared the existence
of a pandemic due to the global spread of COVID-19; and
WHEREAS, on March 13, 2020, the Director of Emergency Services issued a
proclamation declaring the existence of a local emergency within the City relating to COVID-19,
and on March 16, 2020, the City Council adopted a resolution ratifying the declaration of local
emergency; and
WHEREAS, since August 2, 2021, an order of the Santa Clara County Public Health
Officer has been in effect requiring the use of face coverings indoors by all persons; and
WHEREAS, despite progress in addressing the pandemic, not all eligible individuals are
fully vaccinated, and new, more virulent variants of the SARS-CoV-2 virus are spreading in
California and throughout the world; and
WHEREAS, to date, Santa Clara County has had nearly 190,000 reported cases of
COVID-19, and nearly 2,000 residents of the County have died of the illness; and
WHEREAS, as of January 6, 2022, the Santa Clara County Health Department reported
a seven-day rolling average of 1,918 new COVID-19 cases per day; and
WHEREAS, since Thanksgiving, the statewide seven-day average case rate has
increased by over 800 percent, and the number of COVID-19 hospitalized patients has increased
by over 150 percent; and
WHEREAS, this surge is being driven by the recent emergence of the Omicron variant,
which early data suggests is more transmissible than the Delta variant; and
10.1.a
Packet Pg. 95 Attachment: Draft Resolution (3621 : Authorizing Virtual Meetings)
RESOLUTION NO. 2022-XX 4894-1564-7497v1
ALF\04706083
WHEREAS, on January 5, 2022, the Governor issued Executive Order N-1-22, which
extends from January 1, 2022, until April 1, 2022, the date by which state bodies may continue
to meet by teleconferencing; and
WHEREAS, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, and in particular because of the
recent surge in cases caused by the Omicron variant, continuing to hold in-person meetings of
the City Council and of the City’s other legislative bodies would present imminent risks to the
health or safety of attendees;
WHEREAS, AB 361, which was signed into law on September 16, 2021, amended
Government Code Section 54953 to authorize local legislative bodies to determine by resolution
to conduct meetings by teleconferencing during proclaimed public health emergencies, and any
such resolution must be reaffirmed every thirty (30) days to continue in effect;
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT,
1. The City Council finds that the foregoing recitals are true and correct.
2. Beginning on the date following the date of the adoption of this resolution, the City Council
and the City’s other legislative bodies shall meet by teleconferencing. Such meetings shall
be conducted according to the requirements set forth in Government Code Section
54953(e)(2).
3. This resolution shall be of no further force and effect on February 9, 2022, unless prior to
that date the City Council reconsiders this resolution and finds that either of the following
circumstances exists:
a. The state of emergency relating to COVID-19 continues to directly impact the ability of
the members of the City Council and of the public to meet safely in person; or
b. State or local officials have imposed or recommended measures to promote social
distancing.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 10th day of January, 2022, by the following vote:
AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:
Thai Pham, City Clerk
10.1.a
Packet Pg. 96 Attachment: Draft Resolution (3621 : Authorizing Virtual Meetings)
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Accept the Annual Comprehensive Financial Report for Fiscal
Year-Ended June 30, 2021
Meeting Date: January 10, 2022
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Finance Department
Submitted By: Harjot Sangha
Prepared By: Harjot Sangha
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
Accept and file report.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Accept and file the audited Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR)1 for the
fiscal year-ended June 30, 2021 (FY21).
ANALYSIS
1 The Government Finance Officers Association has changed the title and abbreviation from the
Comprehensive Annual Financial Report (CAFR), to the title and abbreviation used in this report.
10.2
Packet Pg. 97
Following the close of each fiscal year on June 30th, the City’s external auditors
conduct an audit of the City’s financial records and assist in the compilation of the
ACFR.
The objective of external financial reporting is to ensure accountability. The goal of a
financial statement audit is to provide users with a reasonable assurance from an
independent source that the information presented in the statements is reliable. The
audit for the fiscal year ended June 30, 202 1 (FY21) and was recently completed by
The Pun Group, LLP (Auditor), Certified Public Accountants. The firm was engaged in
2020 and issued the FY20 ACFR. FY21 is the second year of the three -year term.
In conjunction with the annual audit, the City prepares the ACFR to comply with the
requirements to receive the Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial
Reporting administered by the Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA). The
Certificate of Achievement is a prestigious national award recognizing conformance with
the highest standard for preparation of state and local government financial reports. The
City’s ACFR has received this award for the previous seven fiscal years and believe the
current report continues to conform to GFOA’s highest standard.
As a result of their annual independent audit of the City’s financial records and
statements, the Auditor has rendered an unmodified (“clean”) opinion, the optimal
opinion issued by independent auditors, on the City’s financial statements for the fiscal
year ended June 30, 2021.
A detailed analysis of the City’s financial position as of June 30, 2021 is included in the
ACFR attached to this staff report (Attachment 1). In accordance with Government
Auditing Standards, the auditors also identify any deficiencies in internal control over
financial reporting and provide recommendations to City management on correcting
these deficiencies.
Summary of highlights are as follows:
• Citywide: The City’s overall net position decreased by $3.2 million from prior
fiscal year (FY20) primarily due to change in net investment in capital assets.
• General Fund:
o Revenues: The general fund actual revenues of $55.9 million were $4.6
million more than the prior year primarily in the areas of property related
tax revenues, building permit, and plan check and inspection related
revenues. A key item of note is the $5.5 million of American Rescue Plan
Act (ARPA) funding the City received during the fiscal year was
subsequently recorded as unearned revenue at June 30, 2021 as
expenditures related to those funds are programmed in FY 22 and
onwards.
10.2
Packet Pg. 98
o Expenditures: The general fund actual expenditures of $51.0 million were
$5.1 million less than the prior year, a result of the fiscal recovery plan
instituted by the City Council during the year. From a budgetary
perspective, during the fiscal year, the actual expenditures were $3.6
million less than the amended budget due to savings in personnel related
expenses and conservative departmental spending practices.
o Fund Balance: The fund balance (ACFR purposes) in the general fund
increased by $4.6 million to $19.6 million from the prior year, which
represents 38% of actual FY21 expenditures.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There are no direct fiscal impacts to receiving and filing the ACFR. The audit provides
Council and other stakeholders with the assurance that the City is meeting its obligation
for producing financial reports that are presented fairly and accurately. Annual financial
audit is part of the Finance Department’s annual workplan, thus the resources and costs
associated with the audit and preparation of the report are included in the adopted
budget.
Attachments:
1. Annual Comprehensive Financial Report as of June 30, 2021
10.2
Packet Pg. 99
City of Gilroy
California
Year Ended June 30, 2021
Annual Comprehensive
Financial Report
INTRODUCTORY
SECTION
City of Gilroy
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Table of Contents
Page
INTRODUCTORY SECTION (Unaudited)
Letter of Transmittal ...................................................................................................................................................... i
Elected Officials & City Staff ....................................................................................................................................... v
Organizational Chart .................................................................................................................................................... vi
Map ............................................................................................................................................................................. vii
GFOA Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting ............................................................... viii
FINANCIAL SECTION
Independent Auditors’ Report on Financial Statements ......................................................................................... 1
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Required Supplementary Information) (Unaudited) ......................... 5
Basic Financial Statements:
Government-Wide Financial Statements:
Statement of Net Position .............................................................................................................................. 18
Statement of Activities ................................................................................................................................... 20
Fund Financial Statements:
Governmental Fund Financial Statements:
Balance Sheet .......................................................................................................................................... 27
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet
to the Government-Wide Statement of Net Position ......................................................................... 28
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and
Changes in Fund Balances ................................................................................................................ 29
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues,
Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances to the Government-Wide
Statement of Activities ...................................................................................................................... 30
Proprietary Fund Financial Statements:
Statement of Net Position ........................................................................................................................ 32
Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position ............................................................ 35
Statement of Cash Flows ......................................................................................................................... 36
Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements:
Statement of Fiduciary Net Position ........................................................................................................ 41
Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position ..................................................................................... 42
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements ........................................................................................................... 47
City of Gilroy
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page
FINANCIAL SECTION (Continued)
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios– Last Ten Fiscal Years
CalPERS Miscellaneous Plan ........................................................................................................................ 92
CalPERS Safety Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 94
Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension – Last Ten Fiscal Years
CalPERS Miscellaneous Plan ........................................................................................................................ 96
CalPERS Safety Plan ..................................................................................................................................... 98
Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios – Last Ten Fiscal Years ...................... 101
Budgetary Comparison Schedules
General Fund ................................................................................................................................................ 102
Notes to the Budgetary Comparison Schedules ................................................................................................ 105
Supplementary Information:
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance – Budget and Actual:
Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund ............................................................................................ 108
Nonmajor Governmental Funds:
Description of Nonmajor Governmental Funds ........................................................................................... 109
Combining Balance Sheet ............................................................................................................................ 111
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances .................................... 119
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance – Budget and Actual:
Gas Tax Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................................. 127
Pavement Management Special Revenue Fund ..................................................................................... 128
Public Safety Grants Special Revenue Fund ......................................................................................... 129
Prop 172 Sales Tax Special Revenue Fund ........................................................................................... 130
Community Development Block Grant Special Revenue Fund ............................................................ 131
Rehabilitation Loans Special Revenue Fund ......................................................................................... 132
Housing Trust Fund Special Revenue Fund .......................................................................................... 133
Community Facilities District Special Revenue Fund ........................................................................... 134
Measure B Special Revenue Fund ......................................................................................................... 135
Vehicle License Fee Special Revenue Fund .......................................................................................... 136
Los Arroyos Fund Special Revenue Fund ............................................................................................. 137
CalHome Funds Special Revenue Fund .............................................................................................. 138
City of Gilroy
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page
Supplementary Information (Continued):
Nonmajor Governmental Funds (Continued):
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances – Budget and Actual (Continued):
Capital Projects Fund ............................................................................................................................ 139
BANS 2009 Financing Capital Projects Fund ....................................................................................... 140
Traffic Impact Capital Projects Fund .................................................................................................... 141
Storm Drains Capital Projects Fund ...................................................................................................... 142
Utility Undergrounding Capital Projects Fund ...................................................................................... 143
Street Trees Development Capital Projects Fund .................................................................................. 144
Sewer Development Capital Projects Fund ........................................................................................... 145
Water Development Capital Projects Fund ........................................................................................... 146
Bank Interest Capital Projects Fund ...................................................................................................... 147
Gilroy Community Library Capital Projects Fund ................................................................................ 148
Refunding Lease 2010 Debt Service Fund ............................................................................................ 149
2013 Refunding Bond Debt Service Fund ............................................................................................. 150
Gilroy Community Library Debt Service Fund ..................................................................................... 151
CA Energy Commission Loan Debt Service Fund ................................................................................ 152
Internal Service Funds:
Combining Statement of Net Position.......................................................................................................... 154
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position .............................................. 156
Combining Statement of Cash Flows ........................................................................................................... 158
Fiduciary Funds:
Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Position ......................................................................................... 162
Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position ...................................................................... 164
City of Gilroy
Annual Comprehensive Financial Report
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Table of Contents (Continued)
Page
STATISTICAL SECTION (Unaudited)
Description of Statistical Section Contents ............................................................................................................... 169
Financial Trends:
Net Position By Component - Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................................................ 170
Changes in Net Position - Last Ten Fiscal Years .................................................................................................. 172
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds - Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................... 176
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds - Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................ 178
Revenue Capacity:
Sales Tax by Category - Last Ten Fiscal Years ..................................................................................................... 180
Sales Tax Rates - Last Ten Fiscal Years ................................................................................................................ 182
Principal Sales Tax Producers – Last Fiscal Year and Nine Years Ago ................................................................ 183
Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property - Last Ten Fiscal Years ................................. 184
Assessed Value of Property by Use Code - Last Three Fiscal Years .................................................................... 185
Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates - Last Ten Fiscal Years .................................................................... 186
Principal Property Taxpayers – Last Fiscal Year and Nine Fiscal Years Ago ...................................................... 188
Property Tax Levies, Tax Collections, and Delinquency - Last Ten Fiscal Years ................................................ 189
Debt Capacity:
Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type - Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................................... 190
Ratio of General Bonded Debt Outstanding - Last Ten Fiscal Years .................................................................... 192
Schedule of Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt ................................................................................................ 193
Legal Debt Margin Information - Last Ten Fiscal Years ....................................................................................... 194
Revenue Bond Coverage - Wastewater System - Last Ten Fiscal Years .............................................................. 196
Demographic and Economic Information:
Demographic and Economic Statistics – Last Ten Fiscal Years ........................................................................... 198
Principal Employers – Current Year and Seven Years Ago .................................................................................. 199
Operating Information:
Full-Time Equivalent City Government Employees By Function/Program – Last Ten Fiscal Years ................... 201
Operating Indicators by Function / Program – Last Ten Fiscal Years ................................................................... 202
Capital Assets By Function – Last Ten Fiscal Years ............................................................................................. 204
i
CITY
ADMINISTRATOR’S
OFFICE
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
Telephone (408) 846-0202
Facsimile (408) 846-0500
http://www.ci.gilroy.ca.us
January 4, 2022
To the Honorable Mayor, Members of the City Council and Citizens of Gilroy:
The City of Gilroy’s (City) Charter requires that the City publish a complete set of audited
financial statements for each fiscal year. This report is published to fulfill that requirement for
the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021. This Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) is
submitted for your information and review. The information contained herein has been provided
to allow the reader to gain an understanding of Gilroy’s financial activities. Management
assumes full responsibility for the completeness and reliability of the information contained in
this report. The Management Discussion and Analysis (MD&A) is included to assist the reader
in its review of the City’s financial statements. It provides a roadmap for the financial statements
and related notes.
To provide a reasonable basis for making these representations, management of the City has
established a comprehensive framework of internal controls that is designed to both protect the
government’s assets from loss, theft or misuse and to compile sufficient reliable information for
the preparation of the City’s financial statements in conformity with U.S. Generally Accepted
Accounting Principles (GAAP). Because the cost of internal controls should not outweigh their
benefits, the City’s comprehensive framework of internal controls has been designed to provide
reasonable, rather than absolute assurance that the financial statements will be free from material
misstatements. Management is committed to maintaining the City’s internal controls to
adequately safeguard assets; and to provide reasonable assurances of proper recording of
financial transactions.
The Pun Group LLP, Certified Public Accountants, have issued an unmodified (“clean”) opinion
on Gilroy’s financial statements for the year ended June 30, 2021. The independent auditor’s
report is located at the beginning of the financial section of this report. The MD&A immediately
follows the independent auditor’s report and provides a narrative introduction, overview, and
analysis of the basic financial statements. The MD&A complements this letter of transmittal and
should be read in conjunction.
Profile of the government
The City is the southernmost city in Santa Clara County, and is located approximately 25 miles
south of San Jose and approximately 75 miles south of San Francisco. Gilroy sits at the crossing
of U.S. Highway 101 and State Highway 152. The City was first incorporated in 1870 and
became a charter city on January 8, 1960. Per the California Department of Finance’s annual
demographic’s report for 2021, as of January 1, 2021, the City had a population estimate of
56,599.
Situated between the Diablo and Santa Cruz mountains in the Santa Clara Valley, the City
experiences mild temperatures, while missing most of the coastal fog. The agricultural growing
season ranges from 300 to 350 days a year. Over the past few decades, the City has been
transitioning from an agricultural economy into a light industrial- and services-based economy.
ii
The City operates under the Council-Administrator form of government. The seven City Council
members, including the Mayor, are elected-at-large to four-year terms in alternate slates of three
elected every two years, and the Mayor being elected every four years. The City Council
appoints the City Administrator who heads the executive branch of the government, implements
City Council directives and policies, and manages the administrative and operational functions
through the department directors. The City Administrator appoints the department directors with
the exception of the City Clerk and the City Attorney, which are appointed by the City Council.
The budget of the City is a detailed operating and capital improvement plan that identifies
estimated costs and activities as related to estimated revenues. The City Administrator submits to
the City Council a proposed biennial budget for all funds and the Council then proceeds to make
any changes to the proposed budget it deems necessary. Before adopting the proposed budget,
the Council holds a public hearing. After the conclusion of the public hearing the Council may
further make revisions to the proposed budget. Thereafter the Council adopts the budget with
revisions, if any.
The City provides municipal services including police and fire protection, community and
economic development, recreation activities, parks and street maintenance, water and sewer
utilities and general City administration. Natural gas and electricity are provided by Pacific Gas
and Electric Company. Water service is provided by the City. Wastewater is collected and
treated by the South County Regional Wastewater Authority. Recycling and solid waste disposal
services are provided in the City by Recology South Valley.
Economic Setting
Gilroy’s economy has been dominated by agriculture and its related industries (food processing,
etc.) since the 1800s. However, the growing influence of Silicon Valley and regional population
growth have resulted in significant changes in the local economy during the past twenty years.
The economic boom in Silicon Valley which began in the early 1990s had profound impacts on
the local economy, resulting in significant increases in home prices and land values as well as
significant decreases in local unemployment. The covid-19 pandemic has fueled a crisis in the
housing market, sending demand and prices for homes soaring to all-time highs in an already
supply tight market. Gilroy is benefitting economically from this trend.
Today, Gilroy’s economy is diversified into non-agricultural commercial and industrial activities
such as light manufacturing, wholesale operations, automobile sales, and large retail centers. The
Gilroy Outlets, Auto Mall area, and retail developments east of Highway 101 have put the City
on the map as a regional retail destination and helped strengthen the City’s tax revenues.
Manufacturing and wholesale/distribution operations take advantage of Gilroy’s proximity to
Silicon Valley and easy access to Highway 152, leading to Interstate 5 and the Central Valley.
Development and Construction Activity
Prior to the 2008 economic recession, local real estate development and construction industries
experienced a high demand for new residential, commercial, and industrial development.
Although limited by the City’s Residential Development Ordinance (RDO), new housing
construction saw a surge of activity, as RDO allocations approved in earlier years were built out.
Housing developments in the northwest quad, north-central Gilroy, and Eagle Ridge area brought
new households to the City, many residents of which commute to work in the north county area.
Construction activity was also high in the southeast industrial area.
iii
The covid-19 pandemic had an impact on development activity. While much economic activity
stalled during the initial shelter-in-place order, permitting and construction activity in Gilroy
resumed in the summer of 2020 and has been steady since. Coupled with historic low interest
rates, the residential market has continued to remain robust and demand has outpaced the supply
of both new and existing housing inventory, causing an increase of approximately 15% to 18% in
year-to-year housing prices as of June 2021.
One of the most active residential development areas in Gilroy is Glen Loma Ranch. This 392-
acre master planned area is located between Santa Teresa Boulevard and the Uvas Creek corridor
and when completed, will include approximately 1,600 residential units, 145 acres of parks and
open space, and a trail system linking the various neighborhoods. Commercial development
along the First Street, Leavesley and Tenth Street corridors provides millions of square feet of
retail and professional services space to the City.
Fiscal Year 2021 (FY21) Financial Results
The City ended FY21 with an operating loss, resulting in a change in net position of $3.2 million.
In the General Fund, the revenues for FY21 were lower than budgeted, primarily due to less
Sales Tax revenue, Plan Check and Inspection revenue, and Building Permit revenue.
Expenditures were also lower than budgeted primarily due to personnel and departmental
savings. The revenues exceeded the expenditures by $4.9 million, before transfers ($0.1 million),
resulting in a net increase in fund balance for the General Fund of $4.8 million.
Revitalization and Capital Improvements
Commercial development in certain corridors in Gilroy has added millions of square feet of retail
and professional services space to the City. Downtown revitalization efforts have helped attract
new businesses to the area, has retained existing businesses, and created a core area of antique
stores, specialty shops, and restaurants. Restored historic buildings also add to the downtown’s
character, including the Old City Hall and the Train Depot. However, some vacant storefronts
persist and the City is focusing additional efforts at revitalizing these spaces. Within the past
decade major projects including the Downtown Streetscape, the Camino Arroyo Bridge, the New
Gilroy Library, and the Aquatics Center at Christopher High School have been added as
significant assets to the community.
The City’s capital improvement plan (CIP) provides a 5-year window of projects to be completed
within the CIP horizon. The financial health of the capital improvement funds have improved
over the last few years as a result of new development.
Long-term financial planning and major initiatives
The City’s general fund balance as of June 30, 2021 was $19.6 million. In June 2017, City
Council adopted a general fund reserve policy of retaining a general fund reserve equal to 20%
of annual general fund expenditures. The policy also adopted a separate economic stability
reserve that is used only for limited purposes, at 10% of general fund expenditures.
During FY21, the City was still impacted by the ongoing covid-19 pandemic but began to
experience economic recovery. During the year, the City implemented a fiscal recovery plan and
as part of the plan the City also implemented long-term expenditure adjustments to address a
known structural imbalance. These measures were made to ensure that the City maintained its’
long-standing fiscal health for years to come and to this point have achieved the desired results.
iv
Award and Acknowledgements
The Government Finance Officers Association (GFOA) awarded a Certificate of Achievement
for Excellence in Financial Reporting to the City of Gilroy for its annual comprehensive
financial report for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2020. This was the seventh consecutive year
that the City achieved this prestigious award. In order to be awarded a Certificate of
Achievement, the City had to publish an easily readable and efficiently organized ACFR that
satisfied both generally accepted accounting principles and applicable program requirements.
A Certificate of Achievement for Excellence in Financial Reporting is valid for a period of one
year only. We believe that our FY21 ACFR continues to meet the Certificate of Achievement for
Excellence in Financial Reporting Program’s requirements and we are submitting the FY21
ACFR to the GFOA to determine its eligibility for another certificate.
The preparation of this report would not have been possible without the skill, diligence, and
commitment of the entire staff of the Finance Department, and specifically Finance Manager
Rosemary Guerrero. We wish to thank all government departments for their assistance in
providing the data necessary to prepare this report. Credit also is due to the Mayor and the City
Council for their continuing support for maintaining the highest standards of professionalism in
the management of Gilroy’s finances and prioritizing the goal of financial sustainability.
Respectfully submitted,
Jimmy Forbis
City Administrator
V
City of Gilroy
Elected Officials & City Staff
As of Fiscal Year-End - June 30, 2021
ELECTED OFFICIALS
Marie Blankley Mayor
Fred Tovar Mayor Pro Tempore
Dion Bracco Council Member
Carol Marques Council Member
Peter Leroe-Muñoz Council Member
Rebeca Armendariz Council Member
Zach Hilton Council Member
CITY STAFF
Jimmy Forbis City Administrator
Andrew Faber City Attorney (Berliner Cohen, LLP)
LeeAnn McPhillips (Interim) City Clerk
LeeAnn McPhillips Administrative Services and Human Resources Director/Risk Manager
Karen Garner Community Development Director
Harjot Sangha Finance Director
James Wyatt Fire Chief
Pedro Espinoza Police Chief
Daryl Jordan Public Works Director
ORGANIZATION CHART Gilroy CommunityCity CouncilCity AttorneyCity AdministratorCommunity DevelopmentPublic WorksAdministrative ServicesFinancePoliceFireCity Clerkvi
vii
viii
FINANCIAL
SECTION
INDEPENDENT AUDITORS’ REPORT
To the Honorable Mayor and the Members of the City Council
of the City of Gilroy
Gilroy, California
Report on the Financial Statements
We have audited the accompanying financial statements of the governmental activities, the business-type activities,
the discretely presented component unit, each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of City of
Gilroy, California (the “City”) as of and for the year ended June 30, 2021, and the related notes to the basic financial
statements, which collectively comprise the City’s basic financial statements as listed in the table of contents.
Management’s Responsibility for the Financial Statements
Management is responsible for the preparation and fair presentation of these financial statements in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America; this includes the design, implementation,
and maintenance of internal control relevant to the preparation and fair presentation of financial statements that are
free from material misstatement, whether due to fraud or error.
Auditors’ Responsibility
Our responsibility is to express opinions on these financial statements based on our audit. We conducted our audit in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, and the standards applicable
to financial audits contained in Government Auditing Standards, issued by the Comptroller General of the United
States. Those standards require that we plan and perform the audit to obtain reasonable assurance about whether the
financial statements are free from material misstatement.
An audit involves performing procedures to obtain audit evidence about the amounts and disclosures in the financial
statements. The procedures selected depend on the auditor’s judgment, including the assessment of the risks of
material misstatement of the financial statements, whether due to fraud or error. In making those risk assessments, the
auditor considers internal control relevant to the entity’s preparation and fair presentation of the financial statements
in order to design audit procedures that are appropriate in the circumstances, but not for the purpose of expressing an
opinion on the effectiveness of the entity’s internal control. Accordingly, we express no such opinion. An audit also
includes evaluating the appropriateness of accounting policies used and the reasonableness of significant accounting
estimates made by management, as well as evaluating the overall presentation of the financial statements.
We believe that the audit evidence we have obtained is sufficient and appropriate to provide a basis for our audit
opinions.
Opinions
In our opinion, the financial statements referred to above present fairly, in all material respects, the respective
financial position of the governmental activities, the business-type activities, the discretely presented component unit,
each major fund, and the aggregate remaining fund information of the City, as of June 30, 2021, and the respective
changes in financial position, and, where applicable, cash flows thereof for the year then ended in accordance with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America.
200 E. Sandpointe Ave., Suite 600, Santa Ana, California 92707
Tel: 949-777-8800 • Fax: 949-777-8850
www.pungroup.cpa
3939352 Pun & McGeady_L_final.pdf 2 1/14/14 3:48 PM
To the Honorable Mayor and the Members of the City Council
of the City of Gilroy
Gilroy, California
Page 2
2
Emphasis of Matter
Implementation of GASB 84
As discussed in Note 2V to the basic financial statements, the City implemented Governmental Accounting Standards
Board (“GASB”) Statement No. 84, Fiduciary Activities. The adoption of the standard resulted in the custodial funds
reporting beginning fiduciary net position in the amount of $1,092,316, and governmental activities and governmental
funds reporting net position prior period adjustment of $12,990. Our opinion is not modified with respect to this
matter.
Other Matters
Required Supplementary Information
Accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America require that the Management’s Discussion
and Analysis, the Budgetary Comparison Schedules, the Schedules of Changes in Net Pension Liability and Related
Ratios, the Schedules of Contributions – Pensions, the Schedule of Changes in Net Other Postemployment Benefits
Liability and Related Ratios, and the Schedule of Contributions – Other Postemployment Benefits on pages 5 to 14
and 92 to 105 be presented to supplement the basic financial statements. Such information, although not a part of the
basic financial statements, is required by the Governmental Accounting Standards Board, who considers it to be an
essential part of financial reporting for placing the basic financial statements in an appropriate operational, economic,
or historical context. We have applied certain limited procedures to the Required supplementary Information in
accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in the United States of America, which consisted of inquiries
of management about the methods of preparing the information and comparing the information for consistency with
management’s responses to our inquiries, the basic financial statements, and other knowledge we obtained during our
audit of the basic financial statements. We do not express an opinion or provide any assurance on the information
because the limited procedures do not provide us with sufficient evidence to express an opinion or provide any
assurance.
Other Information
Our audit was conducted for the purpose of forming opinions on the financial statements that collectively comprise
the City’s basic financial statements. The Introductory Section, the Combining and Individual Nonmajor Fund
Financial Statements, Additional Schedules, and the Statistical Section are presented for purposes of additional
analysis and are not a required part of the basic financial statements.
The Combining and Individual Nonmajor Fund Financial Statements are the responsibility of management and were
derived from and relate directly to the underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial
statements. Such information has been subjected to the auditing procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial
statements and certain additional procedures, including comparing and reconciling such information directly to the
underlying accounting and other records used to prepare the basic financial statements or to the basic financial
statements themselves, and other additional procedures in accordance with auditing standards generally accepted in
the United States of America. In our opinion, the Combining and Individual Nonmajor Fund Financial Statements are
fairly stated, in all material respects, in relation to the basic financial statements as a whole.
The Introductory and the Statistical Sections, and Additional Schedules have not been subjected to the auditing
procedures applied in the audit of the basic financial statements and, accordingly, we do not express an opinion or
provide any assurance on them.
To the Honorable Mayor and the Members of the City Council
of the City of Gilroy
Gilroy, California
Page 3
3
Other Reporting Required by Government Auditing Standards
In accordance with Government Auditing Standards, we have also issued our report dated January 4, 2022 on our
consideration of the City’s internal control over financial reporting and on our tests of its compliance with certain
provisions of laws, regulations, contracts, and grant agreements and other matters. The purpose of that report is solely
to describe the scope of our testing of internal control over financial reporting and compliance and the results of that
testing, and not to provide an opinion on the effectiveness of the City’s internal control over financial reporting or on
compliance. That report is an integral part of an audit performed in accordance with Government Auditing Standards
in considering the City’s internal control over financial reporting and compliance.
Santa Ana, California
January 4, 2022
4
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
5
The following discussion and analysis of the financial performance of the City of Gilroy provides an overview of the
City’s financial activities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021 (FY21). Please read it in conjunction with the
financial statements identified in the accompanying table of contents.
Using the Accompanying Financial Statements
This annual report consists of a series of financial statements. The government-wide Statement of Net Position and
the Statement of Activities provide information about the activities of the City as a whole and present a longer-term
view of the City’s finances. Also included in the accompanying report are fund financial statements. For
governmental activities, the fund financial statements tell how these services were financed in the short term as well as
what remains for future spending. Fund financial statements also report the City’s operations in more detail than the
government-wide statements by providing information about the City’s most significant funds. The remaining
statements provide financial information about activities for which the City acts solely as a trustee or agent for the
benefit of those outside of the government.
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
The notes provide additional information that is essential to a full understanding of the data provided in the
government-wide and fund financial statements.
FINANCIAL HIGHLIGHTS
During FY21, the City’s overall net position, representing the difference between total assets plus deferred
outflows of resources of the City, and total liabilities plus deferred inflows of resources, decreased by $3.2
million to $347.2 million. Of the total net position, $56.7 million, or about 17%, remains as unrestricted, and
most of the remaining, about 67%, consists of net investment in capital assets. Additional detail can be found
on the Statement of Net Position on page 18.
Total Citywide revenues were $103.0 million, $4.6 million better than FY20 primarily due to an increase in
charges for services and operating grants and contributions.
Total citywide expenditures, excluding non-operating expenses, were $106.2 million, approximately $0.3
million more than FY20 primarily due to decreased spending in governmental activities of $4.7 million, offset
by an increased spending in the business-type activities of $5.0 million from prior fiscal year.
As of June 30, 2021, the City’s governmental funds reported a combined ending fund balance of $77.9 million,
an increase of 8%, or $5.9 million, from prior fiscal year.
The fund balance in the City’s General Fund increased by $4.8 million to $19.6 million, primarily due to
increased revenues and conservation spending. During FY21, the General Fund had an excess of revenues over
expenditures of $4.9 million, excluding transfers.
Actual revenues, excluding transfers, in the General Fund were $2.2 million less than the final budget, primarily
due to lower than anticipated sales tax revenue, followed by a lower than expected permit revenue.
Actual expenditures, excluding transfers, in the General Fund were $3.6 million less than the final budget,
as a result of personnel and operational savings across various departments. In addition, the City maintained
its conservative spending practices during the fiscal year.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
6
As of June 30, 2021, the City had $117.6 million in long-term debt. Of the total, governmental activities
long-term debt portion is $59.7 million, consisting of $25.6 million general obligation bonds, and $33.3
million in lease revenue bonds, and a loan payable of $0.8 million. The remaining $57.9 million is for
business-type activities – all sewer revenue bonds. During the year, the City issued new sewer revenue
bonds, Series 2021A, in the amount of $47 million to finance the City’s share of the South County Regional
Wastewater Authority’s sewer treatment plant expansion project.
OVERVIEW OF THE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
The annual report consists of four parts – management’s discussion and analysis (this section), the basic financial
statements, required supplementary information, and a supplementary information section that presents combining
statements for nonmajor governmental funds, internal service funds and fiduciary funds. The basic financial
statements include two kinds of statements that present different views of the City:
The first two statements are government-wide financial statements that provide both long-term and short-
term information about the City’s overall financial status.
The remaining statements are fund financial statements that focus on individual parts of the City
government, reporting the City’s operations in more detail than the government-wide statements.
The governmental funds statements tell how general government services like public safety were
financed in the short term as well as what remains for future spending.
Proprietary funds statements offer short-term and long-term financial information about the
activities the government operates like businesses, such as the water and sewer system.
Fiduciary funds statements provide information about the fiduciary relationships – like the agency
funds of the City – in which the City acts solely as agent or trustee for the benefit of others, to
whom the resources in question belong.
The financial statements also include notes that explain some of the information in the financial statements and
provide more detailed data. The statements are followed by a section of required supplementary information that
provides additional financial and budgetary information.
Figure A-1 summarizes the major features of the City’s financial statements, including the portion of the City
government they cover and the types of information they contain. The remainder of this overview section of
management’s discussion and analysis explains the structure and contents of each of the statements.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
7
Figure A-1
Major Features of the City’s Government-wide and Fund Financial Statements
` Fund Statements
Government-wide
Statements
Governmental Funds
Proprietary Funds
Fiduciary Funds
Scope Entire City
government (except
fiduciary funds)
The activities of the
City that are not
proprietary or fiduciary
Activities the City
operates similar to
private businesses
Instances in which the
City is the trustee or
agent for someone
else’s resources
Required financial
statements
Statement of net
position
Statement of
activities
Balance sheet
Statement of
revenues,
expenditures and
changes in fund
balances
Statement of net
position
Statement of
revenues,
expenses and
changes net
position
Statement of cash
flows
Statement of
fiduciary net
position
Statement of
change in
fiduciary net
position
Accounting basis and
measurement focus
Accrual accounting
and economic
resources focus
Modified accrual
accounting and current
financial resources
focus
Accrual accounting
and economic
resources focus
Accrual accounting
and economic
resources focus
Type of asset/ liability
information
All assets, deferred
outflows of resources
and liabilities, both
financial and capital,
and short-term and
long-term
Only assets expected to
be used up and
liabilities and deferred
inflows of resources
that come due during
the year or soon
thereafter; no capital
assets or long-term
debt included
All assets, deferred
outflows of resources
and liabilities, both
financial and capital,
and short-term and
long-term
All assets and
liabilities, both short-
term and long-term;
the City’s fiduciary
funds do not currently
contain capital assets,
although they can
Type of inflow/
outflow information
All revenues and
expenses during year,
regardless of when
cash is received or paid
Revenues for which
cash is received during
or soon after the end of
the year; expenditures
when goods or services
have been received and
payment is due during
the year or soon
thereafter
All revenues and
expenses during the
year, regardless of
when cash is received
or paid
All revenues and
expenses during the
year, regardless of
when cash is received
or paid
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
8
Reporting the City as a Whole
The accompanying government-wide financial statements include two statements that present financial data for the
City as a whole. One of the most important questions asked about the City’s finances is, “Is the City as a whole better
off or worse off as a result of the year’s activities?” The Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities
report information about the City as a whole and about its activities in a way that helps answer this question. These
statements include all assets, deferred outflows of resources and liabilities using the accrual basis of accounting,
which is similar to the accounting used by most private-sector companies. All of the current year’s revenues and
expenses are considered regardless of when cash is received or paid.
These two statements report the City’s net position and changes in them. You can think of the City’s net position –
the difference between assets, deferred inflows/outflows of resources and liabilities – as one way to measure the
City’s financial health, or financial position. Over time, increases and decreases in the City’s net position are one
indicator of whether its financial health is improving or deteriorating. You will need to consider other nonfinancial
factors, however, such as changes in the City’s property tax base and the condition of the City’s roads, to assess the
overall health of the City.
In the Statement of Net Position and the Statement of Activities, we divide the City into two kinds of activities:
Governmental activities - Most of the City’s basic services are reported here. Sales taxes, property taxes,
and other revenues finance most of these activities.
Business-type activities - The City charges a fee to customers to help it cover all or most of the cost of the
services accounted for in these funds.
Reporting the City’s Major Funds
The fund financial statements provide detailed information about the City’s most significant funds – not the City as a
whole. Some funds are required to be established by State law or by bond covenants. However, City Council
establishes many other funds to help it control and manage money for particular purposes or to show that it is meeting
administrative responsibilities for using certain taxes, grants, or other money (such as grants received). The City’s
two kinds of funds – governmental and proprietary – use different accounting approaches.
Governmental funds - Most of the City’s basic services are reported in governmental funds, which focus on
how money flows into and out of those funds and the balances left at year end that are available for
spending. These funds are reported using an accounting method called modified accrual accounting, which
measures cash and all other current financial assets that can readily be converted to cash. The governmental
fund statements provide a detailed short- term view of the City’s general government operations and the
basic services it provides. Governmental fund information helps you determine whether there are more or
fewer financial resources that can be spent in the near future to finance the City’s programs. We describe
the relationship or differences between governmental activities (reported in the Statement of Net Position
and the Statement of Activities) and governmental funds in reconciliations following the fund financial
statements.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
9
Proprietary funds - When the City charges customers for the services it provides - whether to outside
customers or to other units of the City - these services are generally reported in proprietary funds.
Proprietary funds are reported in the same way that all activities are reported in the Statement of Net Position
and the Statement of Activities. In fact, the City’s enterprise funds (a component of proprietary funds) are
the same as the business-type activities we report in the government-wide statements but provide more
detail and additional information, such as cash flows for proprietary funds. We use internal service funds
(the other component of proprietary funds) to report activities that provide supplies and services for the
City’s other programs and activities.
Reporting the City’s Fiduciary Responsibilities
The City is an agent for certain assets held for, and under the control of, other organizations and individuals. All of
the City’s fiduciary activities are reported in a separate Statement of Fiduciary Net Position and Changes in Fiduciary
Net Position. We exclude these activities from the City’s other financial statements because the City cannot use these
assets to finance its operations. The City is responsible for ensuring that the assets reported in these funds are used
for their intended purposes.
GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
Figure 1: A summary of the government-wide statement of net position (in millions) follows:
2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020
Cash and investments $ 108.0 $ 95.3 $ 100.9 $ 44.5 $ 208.9 $ 139.8
Other Assets 11.3 10.6 70.3 73.7 81.6 84.3
Capital Assets 210.1 216.7 85.9 91.4 296.0 308.1
Total Assets 329.4 322.6 257.1 209.6 586.5 532.2
Deferred Outflows 14.8 13.7 2.9 2.5 17.7 16.2
Other Liabilities 21.1 13.7 3.8 3.7 24.9 17.4
Long term liabilities outstanding 155.6 151.4 73.5 20.6 229.1 172.0
Total Liabilities 176.7 165.1 77.3 24.3 254.0 189.4
Deferred Inflows 2.5 4.8 0.4 0.8 2.9 5.6
Net Position
Net investment in capital assets 149.9 151.9 83.1 86.5 233.0 238.4
Restricted 57.6 57.1 - - 57.6 57.1
Unrestricted (42.6) (42.6) 99.2 97.5 56.6 54.9
Total Net Position $ 164.9 $ 166.4 $ 182.3 $ 184.0 $ 347.2 $ 350.4
Governmental Activities Business-Type Activities Total
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
10
Figure 2: A summary of the government-wide statement of activities follows:
Changes in Net Position (In millions)
The increase or decrease in net position can provide an indication as to whether the overall position of the City
improved or deteriorated during the year.
Governmental Activities: Figure 1 – Statement of Net Position illustrates the total net position decreased by $1.5
million compared to the prior year, primarily in net investment in capital assets. Total asset’s increased by $6.8
million primarily in the cash and investment category, offset by an increase in total liabilities attributable to pension
and OPEB liabilities. Figure 2 – Statement of Activities illustrates the program level revenues and expenditures for
the fiscal year. Total revenues for governmental activities were $75.1 million, or about 8%, higher compared to the
prior year primarily in the areas of charges for services and operating grant and contributions. Total expenditures for
governmental activities were $76.0 million, or about 6%, less compared to the prior year, notably due to decreased
spending in public works program.
2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020
Revenues
Program revenues:
Charges for services 12.1$ 9.4$ 27.5$ 27.5$ 39.6$ 36.9$
Operating grants and contributions 16.5 14.2 - - 16.5 14.2
Capital grants and contributions 2.0 1.9 2.5 2.4 4.5 4.3
General revenues:
Taxes 43.4 41.6 - - 43.4 41.6
Investment income (loss)0.5 2.0 (0.1) - 0.4 2.0
Miscellaneous 0.6 0.2 - 1.2 0.6 1.4
Share of DCU net loss (sewer)- - (2.0) (2.1) (2.0) (2.1)
Total revenues 75.1 69.3 27.9 29.0 103.0 98.3
Expenses:
General government 7.3 6.1 - - 7.3 6.1
Public safety 40.8 40.1 - - 40.8 40.1
Public works 16.9 23.5 - - 16.9 23.5
Community development 7.1 8.6 - - 7.1 8.6
Recreation services 1.8 - - - 1.8 -
Interest expense 2.1 2.4 - - 2.1 2.4
Water - - 16.4 12.6 16.4 12.6
Sewer - - 13.8 12.6 13.8 12.6
Total expenses 76.0 80.7 30.2 25.2 106.2 105.9
Change in net position
before transfers (0.9) (11.4) (2.3) 3.8 (3.2) (7.6)
Transfers (0.6) (0.4) 0.6 0.4 - -
Change in net position (1.5) (11.8) (1.7) 4.2 (3.2) (7.6)
Net position, beginning of year (as restated)166.4 178.2 184.0 179.8 350.4 358.0
Net position, end of year 164.9$ 166.4$ 182.3$ 184.0$ 347.2$ 350.4$
Business-type Activities TotalGovernmental Activities
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
11
Business-type Activities: Figure 1 – Statement of Net Position illustrates the total net position for business-type
activities decreased by $1.7 million compared to the prior year, primarily in the unrestricted net position. Total assets
increased by $47.5 million notably in the cash and investment category, offset by an increase in the long-term
liabilities due to the issuance of the sewer revenue bonds, series 2021, during the fiscal year. Figure 2 - Statement of
Activities illustrates the total revenues for business-type activities were $27.9 million, excluding transfers, a decrease
of $1.1 million from prior year, due to lower interest earnings. Total expenditures for business-type activities were
$30.2 million, about $5.0 million higher than prior year, due to increased expenditures in water and sewer enterprise.
The last rate increases for both utilities were implemented in fiscal year 2019. On October 19, 2021, Governor Gavin
Newsom declared a drought emergency across the state, urging residents to conserve water. The measures are
expected to have an impact to the water sales revenue, requiring a review of the current rate structure to ensure the
utilities are not adversely impacted in their operations and to ensure the health and safety of both systems.
MAJOR FUNDS
As noted earlier, the City uses fund accounting to provide proper financial management of the City’s resources and to
demonstrate compliance with finance-related legal requirements.
Major Governmental Funds. The General Fund is the chief operating fund of the City. The City combines its
Sidewalk Repair, Library Reserve, Golf Course and Community Recreation special revenue funds with the City’s
General Fund for financial statement presentation as required under GASB 54 as they are subsidized by the general
fund. At the end of FY21, the total fund balance of the general fund (as presented in the aforementioned manner) was
$19.6 million.
Revenues increased between the years ended June 30, 2020 and June 30, 2021 primarily as a result of increased
property tax revenue, and charges for services in the areas of plan check and inspection fees and building permits.
During FY21, the City continued to see economic recovery from the covid-19 pandemic induced recession.
The Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund has a total fund deficit of $5.4 million. The fund balance
improved by $1.0 million by a combination of increased impact fee revenue from several major development
projects, notably in the residential multi-family category, and decreased expenditures, notably in capital outlay
category. In February 2008, this fund borrowed $13.7 million from several funds for the purchase of Gilroy Gardens.
See Note 3, in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements for additional information. The balance outstanding at
June 30, 2021 is $6.3 million.
Major Enterprise Funds. Unrestricted net position of the Sewer Fund at the end of the year amounted to $78.5
million and for the Water Fund amounted to $20.7 million.
GENERAL FUND
The final budgeted operating revenues of the General Fund were $58.1 million. The actual operating revenues of the
General Fund were $55.9 million, $2.2 million less than the final budget, primarily due to lower than expected sales
tax and permit revenue received as a result of the ongoing pandemic and related measures enacted at the state and
county level.
The final budgeted operating expenditures of the General Fund were $54.6 million. The actual operating expenditures
of the General Fund were $51.0 million, approximately $3.6 million less than the final budget. The difference is
primarily due to savings in personnel and operational expenditures in various programs.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
12
In June 2017, the City Council adopted a new general fund reserve policy that consisted of (i) an unrestricted General
Fund Reserve of 20% of general fund expenditures and (ii) an Economic Stability Reserve of 10% of general fund
expenditures that is intended to help the City weather a severe economic crisis. The following table summarizes the
adopted general fund reserve policy:
The Economic Stability Reserve shall only be used in extraordinary circumstances, upon satisfaction of one of the
following “economic triggers” and with the majority vote of the City Council:
State take-away of significant revenue
Large drop in property taxes (decrease in assessed valuations)
Major business closures (sales tax and/or utility users’ tax impact)
Dramatic drop in development from projections
Large unexpected drop in sales taxes (or other primary revenues - utility users’ tax, franchise fees or
transient occupancy tax) due to severe recession
The economic triggers cause the General Fund Reserve to fall below a predetermined percentage of
expenditures (e.g. 20%).
When the Economic Stability Reserve is used, the City is obligated to replenish the reserve by the end of the next
biennial budget to 10% of the general fund expenditures for the given year.
For FY21, the City enacted numerous expenditure adjustments to minimize the use of the City’s Unrestricted General
Fund Reserve. At the start of the fiscal year, the City expected to utilize the entire Economic Stability Reserve (ESR).
During the year, various economic stimuli were enacted by the federal government to trigger an economic recovery.
The City received $5.5 million from the American Rescue Plan Act (ARPA) funding which has been recorded as
unearned revenue at June 30, 2021, and is programmed to be expended during FY 22. At June 30, 2021, the City had
replenished the ESR and exceeded the total minimum combined (30%) fund balance required by the Council policy.
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
13
CAPITAL ASSETS
The net decrease to capital assets, for both activities, during the year ended June 30, 2021 was due to depreciation
expense.
Additional information on the City’s capital assets can be found in the Notes 1(i) and 5 to the Basic Financial
Statements.
LONG-TERM DEBT
As of June 30, 2021, the City’s governmental activities had bonded debt outstanding of $59.7 million, including
unamortized premium. Of this amount, $25.6 million represents general obligation bonds secured solely by specified
revenue sources, $33.3 million represents lease refunding revenue bonds, and $0.8 million represents streetlights
related loan payable.
As of June 30, 2021, the City’s business-type activities had $57.9 million bonded debt outstanding, consisting of $6.0
million of unamortized premium, $4.8 million of 2010 wastewater revenue refunding bonds, and the newly issued
2021 wastewater revenue bonds of $47.1 million.
See Note 8 in the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements for a further discussion.
2021 2020 2021 2020 2021 2020
Land $ 21.3 $ 21.3 $ - $ - $ 21.3 $ 21.3
Construction in progress 7.3 8.8 0.1 7.6 7.4 16.4
Buildings and structures 78.6 77.8 - - 78.6 77.8
96.2 101.4 85.8 83.8 182.0 185.2
Furniture and equipment 6.7 7.4 - 6.7 7.4
Total $ 210.1 $ 216.7 $ 85.9 $ 91.4 $ 296.0 $ 308.1
Infrastructure/water and sewer
mains and lines
(in millions)
Governmental activities Business-type activities Total
2021 2020
Governmental Acitities:
Loan Payable 0.8$ 0.9$
General Obligation Bonds 25.6 26.6
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds 33.3 36.7
Total Governmental Activities 59.7 64.2
Business-Type Acitivities
Revenue Bonds 57.9 7.5
Total Business-Type Activities 57.9 7.5
Total Long-Term Debt 117.57$ 71.74$
City of Gilroy
Management’s Discussion and Analysis (Unaudited)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
14
Budgetary Highlights
See the Required Supplementary Information in the City’s financial statements for a comparison of the City’s
budgeted revenues and expenditures to actual revenues and expenditures. When preparing its budget, the City
projects its revenues using realistic, but conservative methods so as to budget its expenditure appropriations in a
prudent manner.
As previously noted, the City has two unrestricted reserve levels – the Unrestricted General Fund Reserves and the
Economic Stability Reserve, the latter being partially utilized during FY21. The City continues its conservative
spending measures to ensure the long-term fiscal sustainability.
In addition, the City continued economic incentive transfers from the general fund to the impact funds, to make these
funds whole for the previously granted incentives.
Economic Factors and Fiscal Year 21 Budgets
On March 13, 2020 the City ceased in-person operations as a results of the Santa Clara County (SCC) Public Health
“Stay-At-Home” order which also closed most of the City’s businesses to in-person activity through FY21. Although
the pandemic is still ongoing, during FY21, the City experienced economic recovery as a result of federal stimulus
funding made available for both the general public and municipalities across the nation to support the economy.
The City has always taken a conservative approach in its spending in order to maintain a balanced budget – for and
on behalf of the community – and will continue to be financially prudent during the current biennial budget.
The City regularly reviews its revenues and expenditures and reports to the City Council to keep both the Council and the
residents apprised of its current fiscal health and to ensure the adequate protection of the City’s financial resources.
Contacting the City’s Financial Management
This financial report is designed to provide our citizens, taxpayers, customers, and creditors with a general overview
of the City’s finances and to show the City’s accountability for the money it receives. If you have questions about
this report or need additional financial information, contact the Finance Director’s Office, at the City of Gilroy, 7351
Rosanna Street, Gilroy, California 95020.
BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
15
This page intentionally left blank.
16
GOVERNMENT-WIDE FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
17
Discrete Component
Unit (DCU)
South County
Governmental Business-Type Regional Wastewater
Activities Activities Total Authority
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and investments 105,132,693$ 45,781,461$ 150,914,154$ 8,893,106$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 2,920,291 55,108,183 58,028,474 -
Accounts receivable, net 96,385 3,699,027 3,795,412 173,167
Due from other governments 6,218,455 - 6,218,455 1,064,783
Inventory 91,449 310,497 401,946 -
Prepaid items 12,084 - 12,084 -
Interest receivable 883,652 - 883,652 -
Loans receivable 3,214,755 - 3,214,755 -
Due from primary government - - - 1,542,021
Due from DCU - 843,753 843,753 -
Total current assets 118,569,764 105,742,921 224,312,685 11,673,077
Noncurrent assets:
Land held for resale 706,754 - 706,754 -
Equity investment in DCU (Note 7) - 65,461,335 65,461,335 -
Capital assets - nondepreciable 28,622,389 108,139 28,730,528 27,811,293
Capital assets - depreciable, net 181,496,340 85,807,075 267,303,415 67,233,724
Total noncurrent assets 210,825,483 151,376,549 362,202,032 95,045,017
Total assets 329,395,247 257,119,470 586,514,717 106,718,094
DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Deferred charges on refunding - 62,127 62,127 -
Deferred outflows of resources related to pensions 11,692,359 2,167,877 13,860,236 -
Deferred outflows of resources related to OPEB 3,067,255 645,679 3,712,934 -
Total deferred outflows of resources 14,759,614 2,875,683 17,635,297 -
Primary Government
City of Gilroy
Statement of Net Position
June 30, 2021
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
18
Discrete Component
Unit (DCU)
South County
Governmental Business-Type Regional Wastewater
Activities Activities Total Authority
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable 2,824,374$ 582,185$ 3,406,559$ 796,324$
Accrued payroll and benefits 3,055,053 317,058 3,372,111 50,351
Deposits payable 2,852,473 20,745 2,873,218 -
Interest payable 483,917 100,417 584,334 -
Unearned revenues 6,256,473 - 6,256,473 -
Due to DCU 1,132,239 409,782 1,542,021 -
Due to the primary government - - - 843,753
Compensated absences, due within one year 249,279 25,000 274,279 -
Claims payable, due within one year 1,440,000 - 1,440,000 -
Long-term debt, due within one year 2,820,129 2,380,000 5,200,129 -
Total current liabilities 21,113,937 3,835,187 24,949,124 1,690,428
Noncurrent liabilities:
Compensated absences, due in more than one year 1,689,365 226,670 1,916,035 20,159
Claims payable, due in more than one year 4,918,812 - 4,918,812 -
Long-term debt, due in more than one year 56,923,115 55,485,509 112,408,624 -
Aggregate net pension liabilities 76,563,531 14,486,977 91,050,508 -
Net OPEB liabilities 15,490,865 3,260,939 18,751,804 -
Total noncurrent liabilities 155,585,688 73,460,095 229,045,783 20,159
Total liabilities 176,699,625 77,295,282 253,994,907 1,710,587
DEFERRED INFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Deferred pension-related items 724,406 - 724,406 -
Deferred OPEB-related items 1,814,525 381,971 2,196,496 -
Total deferred inflows of resources 2,538,931 381,971 2,920,902 -
NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets 149,891,568 83,119,598 233,011,166 95,045,017
Restricted for:
Nonspendable:
Minority interest of DCU (Note 7) - - - 44,103,153
Spendable:
Public safety 459,026 - 459,026 -
Community development 9,183,217 - 9,183,217 -
Public works 45,663,391 - 45,663,391 -
Debt service 2,264,934 - 2,264,934 -
Total restricted 57,570,568 - 57,570,568 44,103,153
Unrestricted (deficit) (42,545,831) 99,198,302 56,652,471 (34,140,663)
Total net position 164,916,305$ 182,317,900$ 347,234,205$ 105,007,507$
June 30, 2021
Statement of Net Position (Continued)
City of Gilroy
Primary Government
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
19
Capital Grants
Charges for Operating Grants and
Expenses Services and Contributions Contributions
Functions/Programs
Primary Government (PG)
Governmental Activities:
General government 7,315,868$ 2,815,647$ -$ -$
Public safety 40,797,962 1,242,281 665,683 -
Community development 7,147,532 4,185,811 1,321,563 1,937,064
Public works 16,862,660 3,593,959 14,495,658 63,293
Recreation services 1,779,121 223,154 - -
Interest 2,081,420 - - -
Total Governmental Activities 75,984,563 12,060,852 16,482,904 2,000,357
Business-Type Activities:
Sewer 15,820,944 12,702,398 - 1,894,350
Water 16,435,598 14,830,153 - 616,709
Total Business-Type Activities 32,256,542 27,532,551 - 2,511,059
Total Primary Government 108,241,105$ 39,593,403$ 16,482,904$ 4,511,416$
Discretely Presented Component Unit (DCU)
South County Regional Wastewater
Authority 13,711,342$ 13,483,246$ -$ -$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Activities
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Program Revenues
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
20
Discrete Component
Unit (DCU)
South County
Governmental Business-Type Regional Wastewater
Activities Activities Total Authority
Functions/Programs
Primary Government (PG)
Governmental Activities:
General government (4,500,221)$ -$ (4,500,221)$ -$
Public safety (38,889,998) - (38,889,998) -
Community development 296,906 - 296,906 -
Public works 1,290,250 - 1,290,250 -
Recreation services (1,555,967) - (1,555,967) -
Interest (2,081,420) - (2,081,420) -
Total Governmental Activities (45,440,450) - (45,440,450) -
Business-Type Activities:
Sewer - (1,224,196) (1,224,196) -
Water - (988,736) (988,736) -
Total Business-Type Activities - (2,212,932) (2,212,932) -
Total Primary Government (45,440,450) (2,212,932) (47,653,382) -
Discretely Presented Component Unit (DCU)
South County Regional Wastewater
Authority - - - (228,096)
General Revenues:
Taxes:
Property taxes 17,016,855 - 17,016,855 -
Sales taxes 18,584,534 - 18,584,534 -
Transient occupancy taxes 1,105,300 - 1,105,300 -
Franchise taxes 1,732,613 - 1,732,613 -
Utility users tax 4,400,681 - 4,400,681 -
Real property transfer taxes 629,472 - 629,472 -
Investment earnings 502,770 (157,277) 345,493 -
Miscellaneous 644,291 - 644,291 -
Transfers (641,121) 641,121 -
Total General Revenues 43,975,395 483,844 44,459,239 -
Changes in Net Position (1,465,055) (1,729,088) (3,194,143) (228,096)
Net Position - Beginning, as restated (Note 16)166,381,360 184,046,988 350,428,348 105,235,603
Net Position - Ending 164,916,305$ 182,317,900$ 347,234,205$ 105,007,507$
Net (Expense) Revenue and Changes in Net Position
City of Gilroy
Statement of Activities (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
21
This page intentionally left blank.
22
FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
23
This page intentionally left blank.
24
GOVERNMENTAL FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
25
This page intentionally left blank.
26
Capital
Projects
Fund
Public Other
General Facilities Governmental
Fund Impact Funds Total
ASSETS
Cash and investments 25,208,601$ 861,563$ 59,129,272$ 85,199,436$
Receivables:
Accounts 44,752 - 34,381 79,133
Due from other governments 5,881,343 - 337,112 6,218,455
Interest 110,116 - 773,536 883,652
Loans - - 3,214,755 3,214,755
Advances from other funds - - 2,366,705 2,366,705
Inventory 47,874 - - 47,874
Land held for resale - - 706,754 706,754
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - 920,291 920,291
Total assets 31,292,686$ 861,563$ 67,482,806$ 99,637,055$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 540,322$ 1,304$ 1,499,919$ 2,041,545$
Accrued liabilities 2,283,839 - 187,139 2,470,978
Deposits payable 2,817,174 - 35,299 2,852,473
Unearned revenue 6,018,108 - 238,365 6,256,473
Advances to other funds - 6,257,747 - 6,257,747
Due to the component unit - - 1,132,239 1,132,239
Total liabilities 11,659,443 6,259,051 3,092,961 21,011,455
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - 722,123 722,123
Total deferred inflows of resources - - 722,123 722,123
Fund balances:
Nonspendable 47,874 - - 47,874
Restricted - - 58,391,239 58,391,239
Assigned - - 5,276,537 5,276,537
Unassigned (deficit)19,585,369 (5,397,488) (54) 14,187,827
Total fund balances 19,633,243 (5,397,488) 63,667,722 77,903,477
Total liabilities, deferred inflows
of resources, and fund balances 31,292,686$ 861,563$ 67,482,806$ 99,637,055$
City of Gilroy
Balance Sheet
June 30, 2021
Governmental Funds
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
27
Total Fund Balances - Total Governmental Funds 77,903,477$
Nondepreciable, net of $1,758,826 reported in Internal Service Fund 26,863,563$
Depreciable, net of $4,628,891 reported in Internal Service Fund 176,867,449 203,731,012
Bonds payable (55,799,646)$
Premium on bonds payable (3,177,681)
Loans payable (765,917)
Interest payable (483,917)
Compensated absences, net of $91,484 reported in Internal Service Fund (1,847,160) (62,074,321)
Pension related deferred outflows of resources 11,692,359$
Aggregate net pension liability (76,563,531)
Pension related deferred inflows of resources (724,406) (65,595,578)
OPEB related deferred outflows of resources 3,067,255$
Aggregate net OPEB liability (15,490,865)
OPEB related deferred inflows of resources (1,814,525) (14,238,135)
722,123
24,467,727
Net Position of Governmental Activities 164,916,305$
City of Gilroy
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet to the
June 30, 2021
Government-Wide Statement of Net Position
Amounts reported for governmental activities in the Statement of Net Position were reported differently because:
Long-term liabilities are not due and payable in the current period and accordingly are not reported as fund liabilities. All
liabilities, both current and long-term, are reported in the Statement of Net Position:
Capital assets used in governmental activities were not current financial resources. Therefore, they were not reported in
the Governmental Funds Balance Sheet.
Internal Service Funds were used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as insurance and equipment
replacement to individual funds. The assets and liabilities of the Internal Service Funds were included in the
governmental activities in the Government-Wide Statement of Net Position.
Revenue reported as unavailable revenue in the governmental funds when it is not received soon enough after year-end to
be considered available. The availability criteria does not apply to the Government-Wide Financial Statements and,
therefore, the revenue is recognized when eligibility requirements are met and earned.
Net pension liabilities and the related deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources are not due and
payable in the current period or not available for current expenditures and are not reported in the governmental fund
financial statements:
Net OPEB liabilities and the related deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources are not due and
payable in the current period or not available for current expenditures and are not reported in the governmental fund
financial statements:
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
28
Capital
Projects
Fund
Public Other
General Facilities Governmental
Fund Impact Funds Total
Revenues:
Taxes 43,223,009$ -$ 2,693,488$ 45,916,497$
Intergovernmental 244,556 - 6,367,718 6,612,274
Charges for services 7,947,218 4,325,852 5,211,797 17,484,867
Licenses and permits 2,278,304 - - 2,278,304
Fines and forfeitures 231,688 - - 231,688
Investment income (loss)(25,861) 4,624 379,689 358,452
Miscellaneous 1,979,322 281,104 606,843 2,867,269
Total revenues 55,878,236 4,611,580 15,259,535 75,749,351
Expenditures:
Current:
General government 5,696,954 - 234,068 5,931,022
Public safety 34,888,755 - 967,428 35,856,183
Recreation services 1,702,666 - - 1,702,666
Community development 3,990,556 - 1,533,356 5,523,912
Public works 4,534,371 8,429
2,688,922 7,231,722
Capital outlay 213,465
- 6,029,592 6,243,057
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - 2,817,325 2,817,325
Interest and fiscal charges - 91,343 2,693,031 2,784,374
Total expenditures 51,026,767 99,772 16,963,722 68,090,261
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 4,851,469 4,511,808 (1,704,187) 7,659,090
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - 16,459,825 16,459,825
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - (17,555,000) (17,555,000)
Transfers in 334,031 40,763 23,931,305 24,306,099
Transfers out (397,146) (3,591,375) (20,965,283) (24,953,804)
Total other financing sources (uses)(63,115) (3,550,612) 1,870,847 (1,742,880)
Net Change in Fund Balances 4,788,354 961,196 166,660 5,916,210
Fund balances:
Beginning of year, as restated (note 16) 14,844,889 (6,358,684) 63,501,062 71,987,267
End of year 19,633,243$ (5,397,488)$ 63,667,722$ 77,903,477$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
29
Net Change in Fund Balances - Total Governmental Funds 5,916,210$
Capital outlay, net of $1,121,175 in Internal Service Fund
and $1,877,390 which was expensed 4,365,667$
Depreciation, net of $707,518 in Internal Service Funds (10,882,545)
Net effect on disposal of capital assets (525,457) (7,042,335)
46,153
(16,459,825)
Bonds payable - scheduled debt service 2,725,813$
Bonds payable - refunded debt service 17,555,000
Loans payable 91,512 20,372,325
157,592
545,362
19,497
(2,287,597)
(682,770)
(2,049,667)
Change in Net Position of Governmental Activities (1,465,055)$
Internal Service Funds are used by management to charge the costs of certain activities, such as insurance and equipment
replacement, to individual funds. The net revenue of the Internal Service Funds is reported in governmental activities.
Certain pension expenses reported in the Statement of Activities do not require the use of current financial resources and,
therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds.
Certain OPEB expenses reported in the Statement of Activities do not require the use of current financial resources and,
therefore, are not reported as expenditures in governmental funds.
Compensated absences were reported in the Government-Wide Statement of Activities, but they did not require the use of
current financial resources. Therefore, compensated absences were not reported as expenditures in the governmental
funds.
Net change in revenues that was considered unavailable in the governmental funds. These items have been reported as
revenue in the Statement of Activities.
Amortization of bond discount was recognized in interest expense on the Government-Wide Statement of Activities, but
did not require the use of current financial resources. Therefore amortization of bond discount was not reported as an
expenditure in the governmental funds.
Proceeds from the issuance of long-term debt is not a revenue in the Statement of Activities, but is reported as a liability on
the Government-Wide Statement of Net Position.
Principal repayment on long-term debt is not an expense in the Statement of Activities, but is considered an expenditure in
governmental funds.
Interest accrued on long-term debt is reported in the Statement of Activities, but does not require the use of current
financial resources. Therefore, accrued interest is not reported as an expenditure in governmental funds. This amount
represents the change in accrued interest from the prior year.
Capital assets used in governmental activities are not financial resources and therefore are not reported in governmental
funds.
Governmental activities in the Statement of Activities were reported differently because:
City of Gilroy
Reconciliation of the Governmental Funds Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
in Fund Balances to the Government-Wide Statement of Activities
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
30
PROPRIETARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
31
Governmental
Activities
Total Internal
Enterprise Service
Sewer Water Funds Funds
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and investments 18,837,132$ 26,944,329$ 45,781,461$ 19,933,257$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 55,108,183 - 55,108,183 2,000,000
Accounts Receivable 1,757,205 1,941,822 3,699,027 17,252
Inventory - 310,497 310,497 43,575
Prepaid items - - - 12,084
Due from DCU 843,753 - 843,753 -
Total current assets 76,546,273 29,196,648 105,742,921 22,006,168
Noncurrent assets:
Advances to other funds (Note 3) - - - 3,891,042
Equity investment in DCU (Note 7) 65,461,335 - 65,461,335 -
Capital assets:
Capital assets, not depreciated - 108,139 108,139 1,758,826
Capital assets, depreciated, net 31,611,884 54,195,191 85,807,075 4,628,891
Total noncurrent assets 97,073,219 54,303,330 151,376,549 10,278,759
Total assets 173,619,492 83,499,978 257,119,470 32,284,927
DEFERRED OUTFLOWS OF RESOURCES
Deferred amount on refunding 62,127 - 62,127 -
Deferred outflows of resources related to pension 1,116,886 1,050,991 2,167,877 -
Deferred outflows of resources related to OPEB 293,693 351,986 645,679 -
Total deferred outflows of resources 1,472,706 1,402,977 2,875,683 -
June 30, 2021
Proprietary Funds
Statement of Net Position
City of Gilroy
Business-Type Activities
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
32
Governmental
Activities
Total Internal
Enterprise Service
Sewer Water Funds Funds
LIABILITIES
Current liabilities:
Accounts payable 42,697 539,488 582,185 782,829
Accrued liabilities 150,400 166,658 317,058 584,075
Deposits payable - 20,745 20,745 -
Interest payable 100,417 - 100,417 -
Due to DCU 409,782 - 409,782 -
Compensated absences, current portion 11,000 14,000 25,000 9,100
Claims payable, current portion - - - 1,440,000
Bond payable, current portion 2,380,000 - 2,380,000 -
Total current liabilities 3,094,296 740,891 3,835,187 2,816,004
Noncurrent liabilities:
Compensated absences 95,780 130,890 226,670 82,384
Claims payable - - - 4,918,812
Bond payable 55,485,509 - 55,485,509 -
Net pension liability 7,463,661 7,023,316 14,486,977 -
Net OPEB liability 1,483,268 1,777,671 3,260,939 -
Total noncurrent liabilities 64,528,218 8,931,877 73,460,095 5,001,196
Total liabilities 67,622,514 9,672,768 77,295,282 7,817,200
DEFERRED INFLOW OF RESOURCES
Deferred inflow of resources related to OPEB 173,743 208,228 381,971 -
Total deferred inflows of resources 173,743 208,228 381,971 -
NET POSITION
Net investment in capital assets 28,816,268 54,303,330 83,119,598 6,387,717
Unrestricted 78,479,673 20,718,629 99,198,302 18,080,010
Total net position 107,295,941$ 75,021,959$ 182,317,900$ 24,467,727$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Net Position (Continued)
Proprietary Funds
June 30, 2021
Business-Type Activities
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
33
This page intentionally left blank.
34
Governmental
Activities
Total Internal
Enterprise Service
Sewer Water Funds Funds
OPERATING REVENUES:
Charges for services 12,702,398$ 14,815,350$ 27,517,748$ 26,583,342$
Miscellaneous - 14,803 14,803 1,628,614
TOTAL OPERATING REVENUES 12,702,398 14,830,153 27,532,551 28,211,956
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Operations 10,853,866 13,589,177 24,443,043 24,180,510
Depreciation 1,505,087 1,368,486 2,873,573 707,518
Billing 678,651 678,571 1,357,222 -
Administration 720,726 799,364 1,520,090 282,999
Claims and judgments - - - 3,777,857
Insurance premiums - - - 1,463,945
TOTAL OPERATING EXPENSES 13,758,330 16,435,598 30,193,928 30,412,829
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)(1,055,932) (1,605,445) (2,661,377) (2,200,873)
NONOPERATING REVENUES (EXPENSES):
Investment income (loss) (29,535) (127,742) (157,277) 144,622
Interest expense (79,785) - (79,785) -
Share of DCU net loss (1,982,829) - (1,982,829) -
Total Nonoperating Income (Loss)(2,092,149) (127,742) (2,219,891) 144,622
NET INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS
AND CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS (3,148,081) (1,733,187) (4,881,268) (2,056,251)
TRANSFERS:
Transfers in (Note 3) 692,874 - 692,874 6,584
Transfers out (Note 3) - (51,753) (51,753) -
Capital contributions 1,894,350 616,709 2,511,059 -
TOTAL TRANSFERS AND
CAPITAL CONTRIBUTIONS 2,587,224 564,956 3,152,180 6,584
CHANGES IN NET POSITION (560,857) (1,168,231) (1,729,088) (2,049,667)
NET POSITION:
Beginning of the year 107,856,798 76,190,190 184,046,988 26,517,394
End of the year 107,295,941$ 75,021,959$ 182,317,900$ 24,467,727$
Proprietary Funds
Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position
City of Gilroy
Business-Type Activities
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
35
Governmental
Activities
Total Internal
Enterprise Service
Sewer Water Funds Funds
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Cash received from customers and users 12,630,231$ 14,806,003$ 27,436,234$ 28,227,904$
Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services (8,450,384) (11,026,870) (19,477,254) (22,582,480)
Cash paid to employees for services (2,889,586) (3,137,945) (6,027,531) (1,864,715)
Cash paid for insurance claims - - - (2,505,435)
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities 1,290,261 641,188 1,931,449 1,275,274
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Cash received from other funds 692,874 (51,753) 641,121 354,073
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Noncapital Financing Activities 692,874 (51,753) 641,121 354,073
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Proceeds from issuance of debt 52,702,750 - 52,702,750 -
Acquisition of capital assets 1,894,350 3,235,003 5,129,353 (1,121,175)
Principal paid (2,150,000) - (2,150,000) -
Interest paid (297,499) - (297,499) -
Net Cash (Used in) Capital and Related
Financing Activities 52,149,601 3,235,003 55,384,604 (1,121,175)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Capital contributions to DCU (1,433,612) - (1,433,612) -
Interest received (29,535) (127,742) (157,277) 144,622
Net Cash Provided by Investing Activities (1,463,147) (127,742) (1,590,889) 144,622
Net Change In Cash and Cash Equivalents 52,669,589 3,696,696 56,366,285 652,794
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:
Beginning of year 21,275,726 23,247,633 44,523,359 21,280,463
End of year 73,945,315$ 26,944,329$ 100,889,644$ 21,933,257$
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:
Cash and investments 18,837,132$ 26,944,329$ 45,781,461$ 19,933,257$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 55,108,183 - 55,108,183 2,000,000
Total cash and cash equivalents 73,945,315$ 26,944,329$ 100,889,644$ 21,933,257$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Cash Flows
Proprietary Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Business-Type Activities
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
36
Governmental
Activities
Total Internal
Enterprise Service
Sewer Water Funds Funds
Reconciliation of Operating Income (Loss) to
Net Cash Provided by (Used in) Operating Activities:
Operating income (loss) (1,055,932)$ (1,605,445)$ (2,661,377)$ (2,200,873)$
Adjustments to reconcile to net cash provided by
Operating activities:
Depreciation 1,505,087 1,368,486 2,873,573 707,518
Noncapital financing activities:
Share of DCU net loss (549,217) - (549,217) -
Changes in assets and liabilities:
(Increase)/decrease in accounts receivables (72,167) 12,775 (59,392) 15,948
(Increase)/decrease in inventory of materials - 160,074 160,074 (4,602)
(Increase)/decrease in prepaid items - - - 80,160
(Increase)/decrease in due from DCU 200,614 - 200,614 -
(Increase)/decrease in investment in DCU 88,478 - 88,478 -
(Increase)/decrease in deferred outflows of resources
related to pension 99 4,839 4,938 -
(Increase)/decrease in deferred outflows of resources
related to OPEB (217,035) (260,113) (477,148) -
Increase/(decrease) in accounts payable (10,058) (169,453) (179,511) 121,784
Increase/(decrease) in accrued liabilities (20,716) 8,089 (12,627) (152,513)
Increase/(decrease) in deposits payable - (36,925) (36,925) -
Increase/(decrease) in due to DCU 260,125 - 260,125 -
Increase/(decrease) in compensated absences (20,276) 2,469 (17,807) (28,515)
Increase/(decrease) in claims payable - - - 2,736,367
Increase/(decrease) in net pension liabilities 1,043,840 954,982 1,998,822 -
Increase/(decrease) in net OPEB liabilities 328,835 394,103 722,938 -
Increase/(decrease) in deferred inflows of resources (144,993) (137,055) (282,048) -
Increase/(decrease) in deferred inflows of resources
related to OPEB (46,423) (55,638) (102,061) -
Net Cash Provided by Operating Activities 1,290,261$ 641,188$ 1,931,449$ 1,275,274$
Noncash Financing, capital or Investing activities:
City share of DCU net loss (1,982,829)$ -$ -$ -$
Capital asset contributions 1,894,350$ 616,709$ 2,511,059$ -$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Cash Flows (Continued)
Proprietary Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Business-Type Activities
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
37
This page intentionally left blank.
38
FIDUCIARY FUND FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
39
This page intentionally left blank.
40
Custodial
Funds
ASSETS
Cash and investments 816,428$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 290,613
Total assets 1,107,041
NET POSITION
Restricted For:
Individuals, organizations and other governments 1,107,041
Total net position 1,107,041$
June 30, 2021
Statement of Fiduciary Net Position
City of Gilroy
Fiduciary Funds
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
41
Custodial
Funds
REVENUES:
Taxes 920,975$
Investment income 995
Total revenues 921,970
EXPENDITURES:
General administration 27,042
Payments on conduit bonds - principal 651,251
Payments on conduit bonds - interest 228,952
Total expenditures 907,245
CHANGE IN NET POSITION 14,725
NET POSITION:
Beginning of year, as restated (Note 16)1,092,316
End of year 1,107,041$
City of Gilroy
Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position
Fiduciary Funds
June 30, 2021
See accompanying Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
42
43
NOTES TO THE BASIC FINANCIAL STATEMENTS
44
This page intentionally left blank.
City of Gilroy
Index to the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
45
Page
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies ..................................................................................... 47
A. Description of the Reporting Entity ............................................................................................... 47
B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus ............................................................................... 48
C. Cash and Investments ..................................................................................................................... 50
D. Interfund Loans Receivable and Payable ....................................................................................... 51
E. Accounts and Due from Other Governments ................................................................................. 51
F. Loans Receivable ........................................................................................................................... 51
G. Inventories ...................................................................................................................................... 52
H. Land Held for Resale...................................................................................................................... 52
I. Capital Assets ................................................................................................................................. 52
J. Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources ....................................................................................... 52
K. Interest Payable .............................................................................................................................. 53
L. Unearned Revenue ......................................................................................................................... 53
M. Compensated Absences .................................................................................................................. 53
N. Net Pension Liability ...................................................................................................................... 53
O. Other Postemployment Benefits Liability ...................................................................................... 54
P. Claims Payable ............................................................................................................................... 54
Q. Net Position .................................................................................................................................... 54
R. Fund Balances ................................................................................................................................ 54
S. Spending Policy ............................................................................................................................. 55
T. Property Taxes ............................................................................................................................... 56
U. Use of Estimates ............................................................................................................................. 56
V. Implementation of New GASB Pronouncements .......................................................................... 57
Note 2 – Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability ................................................................................... 57
A. Encumbrances ................................................................................................................................ 57
B. Continuing Appropriations ............................................................................................................. 57
C. Deficit Fund Balances/Net Position ............................................................................................... 58
D. Excess of Expenditure Over Appropriations .................................................................................. 58
Note 3 – Cash and Investments .......................................................................................................................... 58
A. Demand Deposits ........................................................................................................................... 59
B. Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the
City's Investment Policy ................................................................................................................. 60
C. Fair Value Measurements ............................................................................................................... 60
D. Disclosures Relating to Interest Rate Risk ..................................................................................... 61
E. Disclosures Relating to Credit Risk ............................................................................................... 61
F. Concentration of Credit Risk .......................................................................................................... 61
G. Custodial Credit Risk ..................................................................................................................... 61
H. Investment in State Investment Pool .............................................................................................. 62
I. Investment Agreement ................................................................................................................... 62
Note 4 – Loans Receivable .................................................................................................................................. 63
City of Gilroy
Index to the Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
46
Page
Note 5 – Interfund Transactions ........................................................................................................................ 63
A. Advances to/from Other Funds ........................................................................................................ 63
B. Transfers ........................................................................................................................................... 64
C. Due to/from Component Unit .......................................................................................................... 64
Note 6 – Capital Assets ........................................................................................................................................ 65
Note 7 – Equity Investment in Discretely Presented Component Unit ........................................................... 67
Note 8 – Deferred Compensation ........................................................................................................................ 68
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities ........................................................................................................................... 68
A. Governmental Activities ................................................................................................................. 68
B. Business-Type Activities ................................................................................................................. 72
C. Debt without Government Commitment ......................................................................................... 74
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) ........................................................................................ 75
A. Summary ......................................................................................................................................... 75
B. General Information about the Pension Plans ................................................................................. 76
C. Net Pension Liability ....................................................................................................................... 78
D. Changes in the Net Pension Liability .............................................................................................. 80
E. Pension Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions .................... 81
Note 11 – Other Postemployment Healthcare Plan ........................................................................................... 82
Note 12 – Claims Payable .................................................................................................................................... 86
Note 13 – Risk Management................................................................................................................................ 86
Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies ...................................................................................................... 87
Note 15 – Classification of Fund Balances ......................................................................................................... 88
Note 16 – Prior Period Adjustments ................................................................................................................... 89
Note 17 – Subsequent Events .............................................................................................................................. 90
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
47
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies
The basic financial statements of the City of Gilroy, California, (the “City”) have been prepared in conformity with
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States (“U.S. GAAP”) as applied to governmental agencies.
The Governmental Accounting Standards Board (“GASB”) is the accepted standard setting body for establishing
governmental accounting and financial reporting principles. The following is a summary of the City’s significant
policies:
A. Description of the Reporting Entity
The City was incorporated in 1870 under the general laws of the State of California and became a charter city on
January 8, 1960. The City operates under the Council-Administrator form of government. As required by
accounting principles generally accepted in the United States of America, these financial statements present the City
and its component units, entities for which the City is considered to be financially accountable. The City is
considered to be financially accountable for an organization if the City appoints a voting majority of that
organization’s governing body and the organization is able to provide specific financial benefits to or impose
specific financial burdens on the City. The City is also considered to be financially accountable if an organization
is fiscally dependent (i.e., it is unable to adopt its budget, levy taxes, set rates or charges or issue bonded debt
without approval from the City). In certain cases, other organizations are included as component units if the nature
and significance of their relationship with the City are such that their exclusion would cause the City’s financial
statements to be misleading or incomplete.
The Gilroy Public Facilities Financing Authority is considered to be a blended component unit of the reporting
entity of the City because its sole purpose is to finance and construct the City’s public facilities. Blended
component units, although legally separate entities, are in substance, part of the City’s operations and so data
from these units are reported within the funds of the primary government. The Gilroy Public Facilities Financing
Authority does not issue separate component unit financial statements.
Discretely Presented Component Unit (“DCU”)
The South County Regional Wastewater Authority (“Authority”) was created on July 1, 1992 by the City of
Gilroy and City of Morgan Hill (“Member Agencies”). The purpose of the Authority is to plan and implement
regional solutions to the wastewater treatment and management problems resulting from the generation of
wastewater within the service areas of the Member Agencies. To achieve this purpose, the Authority constructs,
maintains and operates facilities for sewage treatment and wastewater reclamation. The City of Gilroy and the
City of Morgan Hill have a 58.1% and 41.9% capacity interest in the wastewater treatment plant, respectively
which is used to determine the capital contribution amounts by the Member Agencies and the pro-rata share of the
Authority’s income (loss).
The Authority is governed by a Board of Directors, which consists of three members from the Gilroy City
Council and two members from the Morgan Hill City Council. The Authority’s budget and annual contribution
requirements are approved by the Board of Directors of the Authority. The City’s management provides
accounting services, engineering services and administrative support to the Authority. Daily operations of the
Authority have been contracted directly to a private provider of services for wastewater management and
operations. The Authority is presented in a separate column to emphasize that it is legally separate from the City
but provides a financial benefit to the City. Debt issued by the Authority requires approval by the City, and the
City approves the budget of the Authority.
Complete financial statements of the Authority can be obtained from the City’s administrative offices.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
48
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
A. Description of the Reporting Entity (Continued)
The government-wide financial statements (i.e., the statement of net position and the statement of activities)
report information about the reporting government as a whole, except for its fiduciary activities. All fiduciary
activities are reported only in the fund financial statements. Governmental activities, which normally are
supported by taxes, intergovernmental revenues and other nonexchange transactions, are reported separately from
business-type activities, which rely to a significant extent on fees and charges for support. Likewise, the primary
government is reported separately from discretely presented component .
B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus
The accounts of the City are organized on the basis of funds, each of which is considered a separate accounting
entity. The operations of each fund are accounted for by providing a separate set of self-balancing accounts that
comprise its assets, liabilities, net position/fund balance, revenues and expenditures or expenses, as appropriate.
Fund accounting segregates funds according to their intended purpose and is used to aid management in
demonstrating compliance with finance-related legal and contractual provisions. The minimum number of funds
is maintained in accordance with legal and managerial requirements.
Government-Wide Financial Statements
The City’s Government-Wide Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Position and a Statement of
Activities. These statements present summaries of governmental and business-type activities for the City
accompanied by a total column. The DCU column in the government-wide statement of net position and
statement activities includes the financial data of the Authority. The City’s equity investment in the Authority is
reported in the Sewer Fund as an Equity Investment in the DCU and is adjusted annually using the equity method
of accounting.
Fiduciary activities of the City are not included in the Government-Wide statements.
These financial statements are presented on an “economic resources” measurement focus and the accrual basis
of accounting. Accordingly, all of the City’s assets and liabilities, including capital assets, as well as
infrastructure assets, and long-term liabilities, are included in the accompanying Statement of Net Position. The
Statement of Activities presents changes in Net Position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are
recognized in the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the
liability is incurred.
Certain types of transactions are reported as program revenues for the City in three categories:
Charges for services
Operating grants and contributions
Capital grants and contributions
Certain eliminations have been made in regards to interfund activities, payables and receivables. All internal
balances in the Statement of Net Position have been eliminated except those representing balances between the
governmental activities and the business-type activities, which are presented as internal balances and eliminated
in the total primary government column. In the Statement of Activities, internal service fund transactions have
been eliminated; however, those transactions between governmental and business-type activities have not been
eliminated.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
49
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus (Continued)
The following interfund activities have been eliminated:
Due to/from other funds
Advances to/from other funds
Transfers in/out
Governmental Fund Financial Statements
Governmental Fund Financial Statements include a Balance Sheet and a Statement of Revenues, Expenditures
and Changes in Fund Balances for all major governmental funds and nonmajor funds aggregated. An
accompanying schedule is presented to reconcile and explain the differences between fund balance as presented
in these statements to the net position presented in the Government-Wide Financial Statements. The City has
presented all major funds that met the applicable criteria.
All governmental funds are accounted for on a spending or "current financial resources" measurement focus and
the modified accrual basis of accounting. Accordingly, only current assets and current liabilities are included on
the Balance Sheet. The Statement of Revenues, Expenditures and Changes in Fund Balances presents increases
(revenues and other financing sources) and decreases (expenditures and other financing uses) in net current
assets. Under the modified accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in the accounting period in
which they become both measurable and available to finance expenditures of the current period.
Revenues are recognized as soon as they are both “measurable” and “available”. Revenues are considered to be
available when they are collectible within the current period or soon enough thereafter to pay liabilities of the
current period. For this purpose, the City considers revenues to be available if they are collected within 60 days
of the end of the current fiscal period. The primary revenue sources, which have been treated as susceptible to
accrual by the City, are property tax, sales tax, intergovernmental revenues and other taxes. Expenditures are
recorded in the accounting period in which the related fund liability is incurred.
The Reconciliation of the Fund Financial Statements to the Government-Wide Financial Statements is provided
to explain the differences created by the integrated approach of GASB Statement No. 34.
The City reports the following major governmental funds:
General Fund - The General Fund is used to account for resources traditionally associated with governments
which are not required by law or sound financial management to be accounted for in another fund.
Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund - This fund has been established to track expenditures related
to the construction of facilities for public use.
Proprietary Fund Financial Statements
Proprietary Fund Financial Statements include a Statement of Net Position, a Statement of Revenues, Expenses
and Changes in Net Position, and a Statement of Cash Flows for each major Proprietary Fund.
A separate column representing internal service funds is also presented in these statements. However, internal
service balances and activities have been combined with the governmental activities in the Government-Wide
Financial Statements. The City’s internal service funds include three individual funds which provide services
directly to other City funds. These areas of service include - Fleet and Facilities, Information Technology, and
Self-Insurance.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
50
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
B. Basis of Accounting and Measurement Focus (Continued)
Proprietary Fund Financial Statements (Continued)
Proprietary funds are accounted for using the "economic resources" measurement focus and the accrual basis of
accounting. Accordingly, all assets and liabilities (whether current or noncurrent) are included on the Statement
of Net Position. The Statement of Revenues, Expenses and Changes in Net Position presents increases (revenues)
and decreases (expenses) in total net position. Under the accrual basis of accounting, revenues are recognized in
the period in which they are earned while expenses are recognized in the period in which the liability is incurred.
In these funds, receivables have been recorded as revenue and provisions have been made for uncollectible
amounts.
Operating revenues in the proprietary funds are those revenues that are generated from the primary operations of
the fund. All other revenues are reported as nonoperating revenues. Operating expenses are those expenses that
are essential to the primary operations of the fund. All other expenses are reported as nonoperating expenses.
The City reports the following major enterprise fund:
Sewer Fund - This fund is used to account for sewage stations and collection systems provided by the City to
the public.
Water Fund - This fund is used to account for water services provided by the City to the public.
Fiduciary Fund Financial Statements
Fiduciary fund financial statements include a Statement of Fiduciary Net Position and a Statement of Changes in
Fiduciary Net Position. These funds have been established to account for assets received and held by the
City while acting in the capacity of an agent or custodian.
The City reports the following custodial funds:
Custodial Funds – These funds account for resources held by the City in custodial capacity for special
assessments collected to pay the bonded indebtedness for the Highway 152 Series Bonds and for the
revenues that come from fundraising and donations used to buy equipment for the Senior Center.
Discretely Presented Component Unit Financial Statements
The activities of the Authority closely resemble those of ongoing businesses in which the purpose is to conserve
and add to basic resources while meeting operating expenses from current revenues. The Authority provides
services on a continuous basis and its activities are substantially financed by revenues derived from user charges
and contributions from the member agencies. The Authority utilizes the accrual basis of accounting. Revenues
are recognized when earned and expenses are recognized as they are incurred.
C. Cash and Investments
The City pools its available cash for investment purposes. Highly liquid market investments with maturities of
one year or less at time of purchase are stated at amortized cost. All other investments are stated at fair value.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
51
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
C. Cash and Investments (Continued)
U.S. GAAP defines fair value, establishes a framework for measuring fair value and establishes disclosures about
fair value measurement. Investments, unless otherwise specified, recorded at fair value in the financial
statements, are categorized based upon the level of judgment associated with the inputs used to measure their fair
value.
The three levels of the fair value measurement hierarchy are described below:
Level 1 – Inputs are unadjusted, quoted prices for identical assets and liabilities in active markets at the
measurement date.
Level 2 – Inputs, other than quoted prices included in Level 1, that are observable for the assets and
liabilities through corroboration with market data at the measurement date.
Level 3 – Unobservable inputs that reflect management’s best estimate of what market participants would
use in pricing the assets and liabilities at the measurement date.
A statement of cash flows is presented for proprietary fund types. For purposes of reporting cash flows, the City
considers all highly liquid investments with maturities of three months or less when purchased and cash and
investments maintained in the City’s pool to be cash equivalents.
Disclosures for deposits and investment risks, as required and applicable, have been provided in Note 2:
Interest Rate Risk
Credit Risk
- Overall
- Custodial Credit Risk
- Concentration of Credit Risk
D. Interfund Loans Receivable and Payable
Activity between funds that are representative of lending/borrowing arrangements outstanding at the end of the
fiscal year are referred to as “due from/to other funds” (i.e., current portion of interfund loans) or advances
to/from other fund (i.e., non-current interfund loans). Any residual balances outstanding between the
governmental activities and business-type activities are reported in the government-wide financial statements as
“interfund balances”.
E. Accounts and Due from Other Governments
All accounts and due from other governments are shown net of any allowance for doubtful accounts, if
applicable, and estimated refunds due.
F. Loans Receivable
The accompanying financial statements reflect the recording of certain loans receivable that represent loans
made to various parties for homebuyer and rehabilitation loan programs. Where reasonably estimable, an
allowance for doubtful accounts has been recorded to reflect management’s best estimate of probable losses
associated with nonrepayment.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
52
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
G. Inventory
Inventories are stated at cost using the first-in, first-out (FIFO) method. Inventories recorded in governmental
funds are recorded as an expenditure when used (consumption method). Inventory balances represent expendable
supplies held for consumption. Reported expenditures reflect the purchase and consumption of supplies during
the year. Nonspendable fund balance has been reported in the governmental funds’ fund financial statements to
show that inventories do not constitute “available spendable resources,” even though they are a component of
fund balance.
H. Land Held for Resale
Land held for resale represents land, structures, and their related improvements acquired for resale. The current
land held for resale includes a multi-family residential project which was acquired via foreclosure process by the
Housing Trust Fund and converted to affordable rental units. The City intends to sell the property to a non-profit
affordable housing developer to rehabilitate the existing facility and maintain it as affordable housing units.
I. Capital Assets
Capital assets are recorded at cost where historical records are available and at an estimated historical cost where
no historical records exist. Contributed capital assets are valued at acquisition value at the date of the
contribution. Generally, capital asset purchases in excess of $10,000 are capitalized if they have an expected
useful life of more than one year. Capital assets include all public domain (infrastructure) assets consisting of
certain improvements including roads, streets, sidewalks, medians and storm drains.
The following schedule summarizes capital asset useful lives:
Buildings and improvements 40 years
Machinery and equipment 5 - 25 years
Furniture and fixtures 10 - 20 years
Vehicles 8 years
Infrastructure 5 - 70 years
Depreciation has been provided using the straight-line method over the estimated useful life of the asset in the
government-wide financial statements and in the fund financial statements of the proprietary funds.
J. Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources
The statement of financial position reports separate sections for deferred outflows of resources and deferred
inflows of resources, when applicable.
Deferred Outflows of Resources represent outflows of resources (consumption of net position) that apply to
future periods and that, therefore, will not be recognized as an expense until that time. The City reports
pension contribution after measurement date and deferred loss related to pension, OPEB and debt refunding
in this category.
Deferred Inflows of Resources represent inflows of resources (acquisition of net position) that apply to future
periods and that, therefore, are not recognized as revenue until that time. The City reports unavailable
revenues and deferred gain related to pension and OPEB in this category.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
53
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
K. Interest Payable
In the government-wide financial statements, interest payable on long-term debt is recognized as the liability is
incurred for governmental activities and business-type activities. In the fund financial statements, only
proprietary fund and private-purpose trust fund types recognize the interest payable when the liability is incurred.
L. Unearned Revenue
Unearned revenue is reported for transactions for which revenue has been received but has not yet been earned.
Unearned revenues primarily consist of prepaid charges for services and grant allocations, primarily for
American Rescue Plan Act funding, which have not yet been spent.
M. Compensated Absences
All full-time employees accumulate vacation benefits in varying annual amounts. Sick leave benefits accrue at
the rate of one day per month for all full-time employees (except fire shift employees who accrue 12 hours of
sick leave per month) regardless of their length of service to the City. Upon termination or retirement, employees
are paid for all unused vacation time and overtime. No cash payment is made for unused sick leave upon
termination or retirement.
A liability is recorded for unused vacation and similar compensatory leave balances since the employees’
entitlement to these balances are attributable to services already rendered and it is probable that virtually all of
these balances will be liquidated by either paid time off or payments upon termination or retirement.
If material, a proprietary fund liability is accrued for all leave benefits relating to the operations of the
proprietary funds. A current liability is accrued in the governmental funds for material leave benefits due on
demand to governmental fund employees that have terminated prior to year-end. All other amounts are recorded
in the government-wide financial statements. These noncurrent amounts will be recorded as fund expenditures in
the year in which they are paid or become due.
N. Net Pension Liability
For purposes of measuring the net pension liability, deferred outflows and inflows of resources related to
pensions, and pension expense, information about the fiduciary net position and additions to/deductions from the
fiduciary net position have been determined on the same basis as they are reported by the CalPERS Financial
Office. For this purpose, benefit payments (including refunds of employee contributions) are recognized when
currently due and payable in accordance with the benefit terms. Investments are reported at fair value.
The following timeframes are used for pension reporting:
Valuation Date June 30, 2019
Measurement Date June 30, 2020
Measurement Period July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020
Gains and losses related to changes in total pension liability and fiduciary net position are recognized in pension
expense systematically over time. The first amortized amounts are recognized in pension expense for the year the
gain or loss occurs. The remaining amounts are categorized as deferred outflows and deferred inflows of
resources related to pensions and are to be recognized in future pension expense. The amortization period differs
depending on the source of the gain or loss. The difference between projected and actual earnings is amortized
straight-line over 5 years. All other amounts are amortized straight-line over the average expected remaining
service lives of all members that are provided with benefits (active, inactive, and retired) as of the beginning of
the measurement period.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
54
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
O. Other Postemployment Benefits Liability
For purposes of measuring the OPEB liability, deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources
related to OPEB and OPEB expense, information about the City's OPEB plan have been determined by an
independent actuary. For this purpose, benefit payments are recognized when currently due and payable in
accordance with the benefit terms.
Generally accepted accounting principles require that the reported results must pertain to liability and asset
information within certain defined timeframes. For this report, the following timeframes are used:
Valuation Date June 30, 2019
Measurement Date June 30, 2020
Measurement Period July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020
P. Claims Payable
The City records a liability for litigation, judgments and claims when it is probable that an asset has been
impaired or a liability has been incurred prior to year-end and the probable amount of loss (net of any insurance
coverage) can be reasonably estimated. This liability is recorded in the internal service fund that accounts for the
City’s self-insurance activity.
Q. Net Position
In the government-wide financial statements and proprietary fund financial statements, net position is classified as
follows:
Net Investment in Capital Assets – This component of net position consists of capital assets, net of
accumulated depreciation and related deferred charges on refunding, reduced by the outstanding balances of
debt that are attributable to the acquisition, construction, or improvement of those items, net of unspent debt
proceeds.
Restricted – This component of net position consists of restricted assets reduced by liabilities and deferred
inflows of resources related to those assets. Separate line items are used to distinguish among major
categories of restrictions and are further displayed as expendable or nonexpendable based on the nature of
the restriction.
Unrestricted – This component of net position is the amount of the assets, deferred outflows of resources,
liabilities, and deferred inflows of resources that are not included in the determination of net investment in
capital assets or the restricted component of net position.
R. Fund Balances
In the governmental fund financial statements, fund balances are classified as follows:
Nonspendable fund balance includes amounts that cannot be spent because they are either (a) not in
spendable form or (b) legally or contractually required to be maintained intact. The City’s nonspendable
fund balance represents inventory, prepaid expenses, land held for resale, and loans receivable unless the
proceeds from the collection of those loans receivable or from sale of the properties is restricted, committed,
or assigned.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
55
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
R. Fund Balances (Continued)
Restricted fund balance includes resources that are subject to externally enforceable legal restrictions. It
includes amounts that can be spent only for the specific purposes stipulated by constitution, external resource
providers, or through enabling legislation.
Committed fund balance includes amounts that can be used only for the specific purposes determined by a
formal action of the City’s highest level of decision-making authority. The City Council, as the City’s
highest level of decision-making authority, may commit, through a resolution, fund balance for specific
purposes pursuant to constraints imposed by such formal actions taken. Committed amounts cannot be used
for any other purpose unless the City Council removes or changes the specific use through the same type of
formal action taken to establish the commitment.
Assigned fund balance consists of funds that are set aside for specific purposes by the City’s highest level of
decision-making authority or a body or official that has been given the authority to assign funds. The City
has not adopted a policy on the authority to assign amounts for specific purposes.
Unassigned fund balance is the residual classification for the City’s fund balance and includes all spendable
amounts not contained in the other classifications. This category also provides the resources necessary to
meet unexpected expenditures and revenue shortfalls. The General Fund is the only fund that reports a
positive unassigned fund balance amount. In other governmental funds, it is not appropriate to report a
positive unassigned fund balance amount. However, in governmental funds other than General Fund, if
expenditures incurred for specific purposes exceed the amounts that are restricted, committed or assigned to
those purposes, it may be necessary to report a negative unassigned fund balance in that fund.
S. Spending Policy
Government-Wide Financial Statements and the Proprietary Fund Financial Statements
When expenses are incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted components of net position
are available, the City’s policy is to apply the restricted component of net position first, then the unrestricted
component of net position as needed.
Governmental Fund Financial Statements
When expenditures are incurred for purposes for which both restricted and unrestricted fund balances are
available, the City’s policy is to apply restricted fund balances first, then unrestricted fund balances as needed.
When expenditures are incurred for purposes where only unrestricted fund balances are available, the City uses
the unrestricted resources in the following order, except for instances wherein an ordinance specifies the fund
balance:
Committed
Assigned
Unassigned
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
56
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
T. Property Taxes
Property taxes in the State of California are administered for all local agencies at the County level, and consist of
secured, unsecured and utility tax rolls. The following is a summary of major policies and practices relating to
property taxes:
Property Valuations - are established by the Assessor of the County of Santa Clara for the secured and
unsecured property tax rolls; the utility property tax roll is valued by the State Board of Equalization. Under
the provisions of Article XIIIA of the State Constitution (Proposition 13 adopted by the voters on
June 6, 1978), properties are assessed at 100% of full value. From this base of assessment, subsequent annual
increases in valuation are limited to a maximum of 2%. However, increases to full value are allowed for
property improvements or upon change in ownership. Personal property is excluded from these limitations
and is subject to annual reappraisal.
Tax Levies - are limited to 1% of full market value which results in a tax rate of $1.00 per $100 assessed
valuation, under the provisions of Proposition 13. Tax rates for voter-approved indebtedness are excluded from
this limitation.
Tax Levy Dates - are attached annually on March 1 preceding the fiscal year for which the taxes are levied.
The fiscal year begins July 1 and ends June 30 of the following year. Taxes are levied on both real and
unsecured personal property as it exists at that time. Liens against real estate, as well as the tax on personal
property, are not relieved by subsequent renewal or change in ownership.
Tax Collections - are the responsibility of the County Tax Collector. Taxes and assessments on secured and
utility rolls which constitute a lien against the property may be paid in two installments. The first is due on
November 1 of the fiscal year and is delinquent if not paid by December 10, and the second is due on March
1 of the fiscal year and is delinquent if not paid by April 10. Unsecured personal property taxes do not
constitute a lien against real property unless the taxes become delinquent. Payment must be made in one
installment, which is delinquent if not paid by August 31 of the fiscal year. Significant penalties are imposed
by the County for late payments.
Tax Levy Apportionments - Due to the nature of the City-wide maximum levy, it is not possible to identify
general purpose tax rates for specific entities. Under State legislation adopted subsequent to the passage of
Proposition 13, apportionments to local agencies are made by the County Auditor-Controller based
primarily on the ratio that each agency represented of the total City-wide levy for the three years prior to
fiscal year 1979.
Property Tax Administration Fees - The State of California fiscal year 1990-91 Budget Act authorized
counties to collect an administrative fee for collection and distribution of property taxes. Property taxes are
recorded as net of administrative fees withheld during the fiscal year.
U. Use of Estimates
The preparation of financial statements requires management to make certain estimates and assumptions that
affect the reported amounts of assets and liabilities, and disclosure of contingent assets and liabilities, at the date of
the financial statements, as well as the reported amounts of revenue and expenses during the reporting period.
Actual results could differ from those estimates.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
57
Note 1 – Summary of Significant Accounting Policies (Continued)
V. Implementation of New GASB Pronouncements
During fiscal year ended June 30, 2021, the City implemented the following new GASB Pronouncement:
GASB Statement No. 84 Fiduciary Activities. This statement establishes standards relating accounting and
financial reporting for identifying and financial reporting of fiduciary activities. Those provisions are effective
for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019, as amended by GASB Statement No. 95. Application
of this statement was effective starting in fiscal year ending June 30, 2021. See Note 16 for details.
GASB Statement No. 90, Majority Equity Interests. This statement defines a majority equity interest and
specifies that a majority equity interest in a legally separate organization should be reported as an investment if a
government’s holding of the equity interest meets the definition of an investment. Those provisions are effective
for reporting periods beginning after December 15, 2019. The City’s equity investment in the Authority is
reported in the Sewer Fund. The application of this statement did not have a material effect on the City’s
financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
GASB Statement No. 98. The Annual Comprehensive Financial Report. This Statement establishes the term
annual comprehensive financial report and its acronym ACFR. That new term and acronym replace instances of
comprehensive annual financial report and its acronym in generally accepted accounting principles for state and
local governments. Those provision are effective for fiscal years ending after December 15, 2021. The City has
elected early implementation of this statement. Application of this statement was primarily qualitative and did
not have a material financial effect on the City’s financial statements for the fiscal year ending June 30, 2021.
Note 2 – Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability
A. Encumbrances
Encumbrances are estimations of costs related to unperformed contracts for goods and services. These
commitments are recorded for budgetary control purposes in the General, Special Revenue, and similar
governmental funds. Encumbrances outstanding at fiscal year-end are reported as committed or assigned fund
balance. They represent the estimated amount of the expenditure ultimately to result if unperformed contracts in-
process at fiscal year-end are completed. They do not constitute expenditures or estimated liabilities. There were
no significant amounts of encumbrances outstanding as of June 30, 2021.
B. Continuing Appropriations
The unexpended and unencumbered appropriations that are available and recommended for continuation are
approved by the City Council for carryover to the following fiscal year. These commitments are reported as
committed or assigned fund balance.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
58
Note 2 – Stewardship, Compliance and Accountability (Continued)
C. Deficit Fund Balances/Net Position
The following funds contained a deficit fund balance/net position as of June 30, 2021:
Funds Amount
Major Capital Projects Fund:
Public Facilities Impact Fund (5,397,488)$
In the Government-Wide Financial Statements, the City had a deficit unrestricted net position at June 30, 2021
for its governmental activities of $(42,545,831) of which, $(76,563,531) and $(15,490,865) were attributed to
aggregate net pension liabilities and net other postemployment benefits liability, respectively.
D. Excess of Expenditure Over Appropriations
The following funds contained excess of expenditures over final appropriations for the year ended June 30, 2021:
Funds Appropriations Expenditures Excess
Nonmajor Funds:
Special Revenue Funds:
Community Development
Block Grant Fund 488,807$ 1,262,063$ (773,256)$
Housing Trust Fund 150,883 524,084 (373,201)
Capital Projects Funds:
Sewer Development Fund 584,601 1,375,571 (790,970)
Note 3 – Cash and Investments
The City maintains a cash and investment pool, which includes cash balances and authorized investments of all
funds.
Statement of
Governmental Business-type Discretely Fiduciary
Activities Activities Presented Net Position Total
Cash and investments 105,132,693$ 45,781,461$ 8,893,106$ 816,428$ 160,623,688$
Cash and investment with fiscal agent 2,920,291 55,108,183 - 290,613 58,319,087
Total cash and investments 108,052,984$ 100,889,644$ 8,893,106$ 1,107,041$ 218,942,775$
Government-Wide Statement of Net Position
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
59
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
Cash and investment at June 30, 2021 consisted of the following:
Cash and cash equivalents:
Demand deposits 3,587,296$
Petty cash 4,955
Total cash and cash equivalents 3,592,251
Investments:
Local Agency Investment Fund 157,035,876
Investments with Fiscal Agent:
Investment Agreement 2,621,000
Money Market Mutual Fund 55,693,648
Total investments 215,350,524
Total cash and investments 218,942,775$
A. Demand Deposits
The carrying amount of the City’s demand deposits were $3,587,296 at June 30, 2021. Bank balances before
reconciling items were $6,364,431 at that date, the total amount of which was insured or collateralized with
securities held by the pledging financial institutions in the City’s name as discussed below.
The California Government Code requires California banks and savings and loan associations to secure the
City’s cash deposits by pledging securities as collateral. This Code states that collateral pledged in this manner
shall have the effect of perfecting a security interest in such collateral superior to those of a general creditor.
Thus, collateral for cash deposits is considered to be held in the City's name.
The market value of pledged securities must equal at least 110% of the City's cash deposits. California law also
allows institutions to secure City deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of
the City’s total cash deposits. The City may waive collateral requirements for cash deposits, which are fully
insured up to $250,000 by the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation (“FDIC”). The City, however, has not
waived the collateralization requirements.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
60
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
B. Investments Authorized by the California Government Code and the City's Investment Policy
The table below identifies the investment types that are authorized by the City's investment policy and the
California Government Code. The table also identifies certain provisions of the California Government Code (or
the City's investment policy, if more restrictive) that address interest rate risk, credit risk, and concentration of
credit risk. This table below does not identify investment types that are authorized and held by bond trustees that
are governed by the provisions of debt agreements of the City, rather than the general provisions of the California
Government Code or the City's investment policy.
Maximum Maximum
Maximum Percentage of Investment in One
Authorized Investment Type Maturity Portfolio Issuer
Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF)N/A None None
U.S. Government Sponsored Agency Securities N/A None None
Insured Certificate of Deposit (CD's)N/A 15%$250,000
Banker's Acceptances N/A 15%None
Commercial Paper N/A 10%None
Passbook Savings or Money Market Demand Deposits N/A None None
Money Market Mutual Funds N/A 5%None
Liquidity:
*Securities or bonds purchased under a prior investment policy may be held or sold but additional purchases shall not be made.
N/A- Not applicable
C. Fair Value Measurements
At June 30, 2021, investments are reported at fair value. Investments in investment contracts are valued at cost
and exempt from the fair value hierarchy. Investments that are measured at fair value using the net asset value
(NAV) per share are not classified in the fair value hierarchy. The City values investments in money market
mutual funds at NAV based on amortized cost The following table presents the fair value measurement of
investments on a recurring basis and the levels within GASB 72 fair value hierarchy in which the fair value
measurements fall at June 30, 2021:
Primary Government Total N/A
Local Agency Investment Fund 157,035,876$ 157,035,876$
Investment Agreement 2,621,000 2,621,000
Total Investments 159,656,876$ 159,656,876$
Investments measured at the net asset value (NAV)
Money Market Mutual Funds 55,693,648$
Total investments measured at the net asset value (NAV)55,693,648$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
61
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
D. Disclosures Relating to Interest Rate Risk
Interest rate risk is the risk that changes in market interest rates will adversely affect the fair value of an
investment. Generally, the longer the maturity of an investment, the greater the sensitivity of its fair value to
changes in market interest rates. One of the ways that the City manages its exposure to interest rate risk is by
purchasing a combination of shorter term and longer-term investments and timing cash flows from maturities so
that a portion of the portfolio is maturing or coming close to maturity evenly over time as necessary to provide
the cash flow and liquidity needed for operations. Information about the sensitivity of the fair values of the City's
investments to market interest rate fluctuations is as follows:
12 Months
Investment Type Total or less 12-24
Local Agency Investment Fund 157,035,876$ 157,035,876$ -$
Investment Agreement 2,621,000 - 2,621,000
Money Market Mutual Funds 55,693,648 55,693,648 -
Total 215,350,524$ 212,729,524$ 2,621,000$
Remaining Maturity (in Months)
E. Disclosures Relating to Credit Risk
Generally, credit risk is the risk that an issuer of an investment will not fulfill its obligation to the holder of the
investment. This is measured by the assignment of a rating by a nationally recognized statistical rating
organization. Presented below is the minimum rating required by (where applicable) the California Government
Code, the City’s investment policy or debt agreements, and the actual rating by Standard & Poor’s as of year-end
for each investment type.
Minimum
Legal
Investment Type Total Rating
Local Agency Investment Fund 157,035,876$ N/A
Investment Agreement 2,621,000 A1
Money Market Mutual Funds 55,693,648 N/A
Total 215,350,524$
F. Concentration of Credit Risk
The investment policy of the City contains no limitations on the amount that can be invested in any one issuer
beyond that stipulated by the California Government Code. There are no investments in any one issuer (other
than U.S. Treasury securities, mutual funds and external investment pools) that represent 5% or more of total City
investments. The money market funds held with fiscal agents are related to bond issuances and reserves and not
subject to the limitation set by the code.
G. Custodial Credit Risk
Custodial credit risk for deposits is the risk that, in the event of the failure of a depository financial institution, a
government will not be able to recover its deposits or will not be able to recover collateral securities that are in
the possession of an outside party.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
62
Note 3 – Cash and Investments (Continued)
G. Custodial Credit Risk (Continued)
The custodial credit risk for investments is the risk that, in the event of the failure of the counterparty (e.g., broker-
dealer) to a transaction, a government will not be able to recover the value of its investment or collateral
securities that are in the possession of another party. The California Government Code and the City’s investment
policy do not contain legal or policy requirements that would limit the exposure to custodial credit risk for
deposits or investments, other than the following provision for deposits: The California Government Code
requires that a financial institution secure deposits made by state or local governmental units by pledging
securities in an undivided collateral pool held by a depository regulated under state law (unless so waived by the
governmental unit). The market value of the pledged securities in the collateral pool must equal at least 110% of
the total amount deposited by the public agencies. California law also allows financial institutions to secure City
deposits by pledging first trust deed mortgage notes having a value of 150% of the secured public deposits.
For investments identified herein as held by fiscal agent, the trustee selects the investment under the terms of the
applicable trust agreement, acquires the investment and holds the investment on behalf of the reporting
government.
H. Investment in State Investment Pool
The City is a voluntary participant in the Local Agency Investment Fund (“LAIF”) that is regulated by California
Government Code Section 16429 under the oversight of the Treasurer of the State of California. The fair value of
the City’s investment in this pool is reported in the accompanying financial statements at amounts based upon the
City’s pro-rata share of the fair value provided by LAIF for the entire LAIF portfolio (in relation to the amortized
cost of that portfolio).
The balance available for withdrawal is based on the accounting records maintained by LAIF, which are recorded
on an amortized cost basis. The City investments in LAIF at June 30, 2021 included a portion of pool funds
invested in Structured Notes and Asset-Backed Securities.
Structured Notes: debt securities (other than asset-backed securities) whose cash flow characteristics (coupon
rate, redemption amount, or stated maturity) depend upon one or more indices and/or that have embedded
forwards or options.
Asset-Backed Securities: generally, mortgage-backed securities that entitle their purchasers to receive a share
of the cash flows from a pool of assets such as principal and interest repayments from a pool of mortgages
(for example, Collateralized Mortgage Obligations) or credit card receivables.
As of June 30, 2021, the City had $148,198,237 invested in LAIF, which had invested 2.31% of the pool
investment funds in Structured Notes and Asset-Backed Securities.
I. Investment Agreement
The City has entered into nonparticipating investment contracts (GICs), which are authorized under bond
documents as outlined in the City's investment policy or the debt agreement. GICs are non-marketable interest-
bearing agreements with or guaranteed by certain financial institutions. The agreements provide for a guaranteed
return on principal over a specified period. A GIC is a general obligation instrument issued by a financial
institution, subject to applicable legal restrictions. The Fund's investments in GIC's represent proceeds from bond
issues that have been set aside (held for the benefit of the bondholders) as debt service reserves. The investment
contract is held long-term and bears interest rate of 3.31%. Investment contract is collateralized by investments,
with $2,621,000 collateralized at 104%.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
63
Note 4 – Loans Receivable
At June 30, 2021 loans receivable consisted of the following:
Government Wide
Financial
Statements
Governmental
Activities
Down payment assistance 1,637,094$
Housing improvement to non-profits 450,000
Involuntary liens 131,345
Affordable housing development loans 790,000
Housing rehabilitation 206,316
Total loans receivable 3,214,755$
The City made deferred loans to senior citizens, the physically handicapped, and low to moderate income residents
for the purposes of rehabilitation and down payment assistance. These loans are repaid at the end of a 30 year term or
when the title to the property changes. The City also made deferred loans to third party housing non profits to fund
housing projects which are due the earlier of 55 years after completion of the projects or December 31, 2074. Where
reasonably estimable, an allowance for doubtful accounts has been recorded to reflect management’s best estimate of
probable losses associated with nonrepayment. Estimates of any additional potential losses associated with
nonrepayment cannot be reasonably estimated at this time.
Note 5 - Interfund Transactions
A. Advances to/from Other funds
The following is a summary of advances to and from other funds as of June 30, 2021:
Advances to Other Funds
Nonmajor
Governmental
Funds
Internal Service
Fund Total
Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund 2,366,705$ 3,891,042$ 6,257,747$
Total 2,366,705$ 3,891,042$ 6,257,747$
Advances from Other Funds
In February 2008, the City purchased the Gilroy Gardens Property (Property), which includes a horticultural
education and theme park, for approximately $13.7 million. At the same time, the City entered into a single
tenant lease of the Property with the seller, Gilroy Gardens Family Theme Park, Inc. To fund the acquisition, the
Public Facilities Fund borrowed from certain funds which is accounted for as a long-term advance for a period of
twenty years. The annual loan activity is budgeted through revenue and expenditure transactions. The loan
interest is at the City’s annual average portfolio yield. The original loan amounts were as follows: Storm Drains
Fund ($1.2 million), the Sewer Development Fund ($5.0 million), the Fleet Services Fund ($4.3 million), the
Equipment Outlay Fund ($2.2 million) and the Water Fund ($1.0 million). As of June 30, 2021, the Water Fund
loan has been paid off in full.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
64
Note 5 – Interfund Transactions (Continued)
B. Transfers
During the year ended June 30, 2021, the City had the following transfers:
Public Facilities Nonmajor Water
Impact Capital Governmental Enterprise
Transfers In General Fund1 Projects Fund2 Funds3 Fund4 Total
General Fund -$ -$ 282,278$ 51,753$ 334,031$
Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund 40,763 - - - 40,763
Nonmajor Governmental Funds 351,383 3,591,375 19,988,547 - 23,931,305
Sewer Enterprise Fund - - 692,874 - 692,874
Internal Service Fund 5,000 - 1,584 - 6,584
Total 397,146$ 3,591,375$ 20,965,283$ 51,753$ 25,005,557$
Transfers Out
1General Fund support of certain capital projects, safety related grants, and IT services.
2Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund supports various debt instruments.
3Other Governmental Funds support of grant personnel costs, debt retirements and sewer development project costs.
4Enterprise Fund transfers to the General Fund to support fringe benefit costs and subsidize environmental costs.
C. Due to/from Component Unit
The following is a summary of due to and from the Authority as of June 30, 2021:
Due to component unit South Regional
Wastewater
Authority
Nonmajor Governmental Funds 1,132,239$
Sewer Enterprise Fund 409,782
1,542,021$
The amounts owed by the City to the Authority are primarily for outstanding operating and capital contributions
at year end.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
65
Note 6 – Capital Assets
Governmental Activities
The following is a summary of changes in capital assets for the governmental activities for the year ended
June 30, 2021:
Balance Balance
July 1, 2020 Additions Deletions Reclassifications June 30, 2021
Capital assets not being depreciated:
Land 21,334,900$ -$ -$ -$ 21,334,900$
Construction in progress 8,757,417 5,114,280 (525,457) (6,058,751) 7,287,489
Total capital assets not being depreciated 30,092,317 5,114,280 (525,457) (6,058,751) 28,622,389
Capital assets being depreciated:
Building and improvements 121,325,914 - - 3,792,566 125,118,480
Equipment and furniture 11,054,544 77,527 - - 11,132,071
IT equipment and software 2,896,751 - (254,600) - 2,642,151
Vehicle 13,239,496 295,035 - - 13,534,531
Infrastructure 282,689,581 - (258,536) 2,266,185 284,697,230
Total capital assets being depreciated 431,206,286 372,562 (513,136) 6,058,751 437,124,463
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Building and improvements (43,471,009) (2,994,267) - - (46,465,276)
Equipment and furniture (8,314,182) (481,734) - - (8,795,916)
IT equipment and software (2,580,947) (97,479) 254,600 - (2,423,826)
Vehicle (8,906,650) (535,295) - - (9,441,945)
Infrastructure (181,278,408) (7,481,288) 258,536 - (188,501,160)
Total accumulated depreciation (244,551,196) (11,590,063) 513,136 - (255,628,123)
Total capital assets being depreciated, net 186,655,090 (11,217,501) - 6,058,751 181,496,340
Total governmental activities 216,747,407$ (6,103,221)$ (525,457)$ -$ 210,118,729$
Depreciation expense was charged to functions/programs of governmental activities for the year ended June 30, 2021
as follows:
General government 854,655$
Public safety 1,238,339
Public works 7,629,384
Community development 1,160,167
Internal service fund 707,518
Total depreciation expense 11,590,063$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
66
Note 6 – Capital Assets (Continued)
Business-Type Activities
The following is a summary of changes in capital assets for the business-type activities for the year ended
June 30, 2021:
Balance Balance
June 30, 2020 Additions Deletions Reclassifications June 30, 2021
Capital assets not being depreciated:
Construction in progress 7,603,111$ 594,092$ (3,212,385)$ (4,876,679)$ 108,139$
Total capital assets not being depreciated 7,603,111 594,092 (3,212,385) (4,876,679) 108,139
Capital assets being depreciated:
Land improvements 427,852 - - - 427,852
Equipment and furniture 212,630 - - - 212,630
Vehicles 213,353 - - - 213,353
Infrastructure 150,887,033 - - 4,876,679 155,763,712
Total capital assets being depreciated 151,740,868 - - 4,876,679 156,617,547
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Land improvements (427,853) - - - (427,853)
Equipment and furniture (194,158) (2,737) - - (196,895)
Vehicles (4,741) (14,224) - - (18,965)
Infrastructure (67,310,147) (2,856,612) - - (70,166,759)
Total accumulated depreciation (67,936,899) (2,873,573) - - (70,810,472)
Total capital assets being depreciated, net 83,803,969 (2,873,573) - 4,876,679 85,807,075
Total business-type activities 91,407,080$ (2,279,481)$ (3,212,385)$ -$ 85,915,214$
Depreciation expense was charged to the business-type activities as follows:
Sewer 1,505,087$
Water 1,368,486
Total depreciation expense 2,873,573$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
67
Note 6 – Capital Assets (Continued)
Discretely Presented Component Unit
The following is a summary of changes in capital assets for the DCU for the year ended June 30, 2021:
Balance Balance
June 30, 2020 Additions Deletions Reclassifications June 30, 2021
Capital assets not being depreciated:
Land 13,396,202$ -$ -$ -$ 13,396,202$
Construction in progress 11,711,219 2,963,611 - (259,739) 14,415,091
Total capital assets not being depreciated 25,107,421 2,963,611 - (259,739) 27,811,293
Capital assets being depreciated:
Building and improvements 72,223,229 - - 34,520 72,257,749
Land improvements 10,681,371 - - - 10,681,371
Equipment and furnitures 19,964,163 - - - 19,964,163
Vehicles 1,295,492 209,709 - - 1,505,201
Infrastructure 35,649,317 - - 225,219 35,874,536
Total capital assets being depreciated 139,813,572 209,709 - 259,739 140,283,020
Less accumulated depreciation for:
Building and improvements (39,520,098) (1,690,608) - - (41,210,706)
Land improvements (5,717,579) (190,342) - - (5,907,921)
Equipment and furniture (7,146,107) (998,977) - - (8,145,084)
Vehicles (1,108,125) (31,336) - - (1,139,461)
Infrastructure (15,005,973) (1,640,151) - - (16,646,124)
Total accumulated depreciation (68,497,882) (4,551,414) - - (73,049,296)
Total capital assets being depreciated, net 71,315,690 (4,341,705) - 259,739 67,233,724
Total governmental activities 96,423,111$ (1,378,094)$ -$ -$ 95,045,017$
Note 7 – Equity Investment in DCU
The City and the City of Morgan Hill are members of the South County Regional Wastewater Authority, a joint
powers authority (“Authority”), that provides for the construction, ownership, maintenance and operation of a
domestic sewer treatment plant. The agreement provides for the participants’ capacity right to use the system. The
participants are also obligated to share in the annual direct operating costs of the Authority. The City maintains the
accounting records for the Authority. The City’s equity investment in the DCU is reported on the statement of net
position of the City’s sewer enterprise fund as an “equity investment in DCU” in the amount of $65,461,335 as
required under the equity method of accounting for investments. The financial statements of the Authority can be
obtained from the City’s finance department.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
68
Note 8 – Deferred Compensation
The City maintains a deferred compensation plan under Section 457 of the Internal Revenue Code (IRC) for the
benefit of its employees. The plan allows the employees to defer or postpone the taxation of a designated amount of
earnings set aside for retirement.
The City has a fiduciary responsibility to safeguard the assets of the program and to ensure that the plan is properly
maintained by the plan administrator. Generally speaking, assets are available to participants only upon termination
of employment with the City, retirement, death or disability. The City has placed the plan assets into a trust for the
exclusive benefit of plan participants and their beneficiaries. Accordingly, all plan assets have been excluded from
the accompanying financial statements, except for those plan assets for which the City provides record keeping
services.
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities
A. Governmental Activities
The following is a summary of changes in the City’s long-term liabilities for the fiscal year ended June 30, 2021:
Balance Balance Due within Due in more
June 30, 2020 Additions Deletions June 30, 2021 One Year than One Year
Governmental Activities:
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds:
2010 Series 17,555,000$ -$ (17,555,000)$ -$ -$ -$
2013 Series 18,155,000 - (945,000) 17,210,000 990,000 16,220,000
2020A Series - 13,740,000 (790,000) 12,950,000 715,000 12,235,000
Unamortized premium 1,003,218 2,719,825 (545,362) 3,177,681 - 3,177,681
Loan payable 857,429 - (91,512) 765,917 92,433 673,484
Direct borrowings and placement
General Obligation Bonds:
Library 2019A Series 8,342,578 - (326,786) 8,015,792 337,143 7,678,649
Library 2019B Series 18,287,881 - (664,027) 17,623,854 685,553 16,938,301
Total long-term debt 64,201,106 16,459,825 (20,917,687) 59,743,244 2,820,129 56,923,115
Other long-term liabilities
Claims payable 3,622,445 6,514,224 (3,777,857) 6,358,812 1,440,000 4,918,812
Compensated absences 1,986,656 1,529,069 (1,577,081) 1,938,644 249,279 1,689,365
Total long-term liabilities 69,810,207$ 24,503,118$ (26,272,625)$ 68,040,700$ 4,509,408$ 63,531,292$
Classification
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
69
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
A. Governmental Activities (Continued)
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds (LRBs) 2010 Series
On July 27, 2010, the City refinanced its 2009 Bond Anticipation Notes (“BANs”) and issued Refunding
Revenue Bonds, in the amount of $24,475,000. The proceeds from the issue were used to redeem the 2009
BANs.
Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually on May 1 and November 1 of each year commencing on
May 1, 2011, and the Bonds mature on November 1, 2033. The principal balance of outstanding bonds of
$17,555,000 was paid off during the year from the Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds, 2020A Series.
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds (LRBs) 2013 Series
On July 25, 2013, the City refinanced its 2010 BANs by issuing Refunding Revenue Bonds, in the amount of
$23,120,000. The proceeds from the issue were used to redeem the 2010 BANs.
Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually at rates ranging from 3.00% to 5.25% on May 1 and November 1
of each year commencing on November 1, 2013, and the Bonds mature on November 1, 2033. The principal
balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2021 was $17,210,000.
The reserve requirement at June 30, 2021 was $920,222, and the actual reserve was $920,286.
The annual debt service requirements to maturity for the Refunding LRBs 2013 Series are as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 990,000$ 848,019$ 1,838,019$
2023 1,035,000 805,156 1,840,156
2024 1,080,000 760,044 1,840,044
2025 1,130,000 710,444 1,840,444
2026 1,175,000 662,875 1,837,875
2027-2031 6,755,000 2,435,803 9,190,803
2032-2034 5,045,000 466,350 5,511,350
Total 17,210,000$ 6,688,691$ 23,898,691$
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds (LRBs) 2020A Series
On August 1, 2020, the Gilroy Public Facilities Financing Authority issued its Series 2020A Lease Revenue
Refunding Bonds in the amount of $13,740,000. The bonds were issued at a premium of $2,719,825 which was
deferred and will be amortized over the life of the bonds. The proceeds from the issuance were used to refund
the outstanding Series 2010 Refunding LRBs and to pay the costs incurred in connection with the issuance of the
2020A bonds.
Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually at rates ranging from 1.21% to 2.08% on May 1 and November 1
of each year commencing on November 1, 2020, and the Bonds mature on November 1, 2033. The principal
balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2021 was $12,950,000.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
70
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
A. Governmental Activities (Continued)
Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds (LRBs) 2020A Series (Continued)
The annual debt service requirements to maturity for the Refunding Lease Revenue Bonds 2020A Series are as
follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 715,000$ 629,625$ 1,344,625$
2023 755,000 592,875 1,347,875
2024 795,000 554,125 1,349,125
2025 840,000 513,250 1,353,250
2026 880,000 470,250 1,350,250
2027-2031 5,180,000 1,619,500 6,799,500
2032-2034 3,785,000 290,125 4,075,125
Total 12,950,000$ 4,669,750$ 17,619,750$
Loan Payable
The City entered into a loan agreement with the California Energy Commission (CEC) to provide funds to install
equipment for energy conservation. Under the original loan agreement the City was authorized to borrow up to
$1,812,722 with interest at 1% per annum, semiannual payments to be paid commencing December following the
year the project was completed. The City borrowed a total of $1,201,155 with semiannual payments of interest
and principal of $49,931 with the first payment occurring on December 27, 2016. The principal balance of
outstanding at June 30, 2021 was $765,917.
The annual debt service requirements to maturity for the loan is as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 92,433$ 7,429$ 99,862$
2023 93,359 6,503 99,862
2024 94,281 5,581 99,862
2025 95,240 4,622 99,862
2026 96,195 3,667 99,862
2027-2029 294,409 5,180 299,589
Total 765,917$ 32,981$ 798,898$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
71
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
A. Governmental Activities (Continued)
General Obligation Bonds (Gilroy Community Library Project) 2019 Refunding Bonds, Series A
On June 26, 2019, the City issued General Obligation Refunding Bonds 2019 Series A through a private
placement, in the amount of $8,633,538. The proceeds from the issue were used to currently refund the General
Obligation Bonds Series 2009. The City’s refunding of the 2009 General Obligation Bonds resulted in an
economic gain (difference between the present value of the old and new debt) of $1,447,576 and an aggregate
savings in debt service between the refunding debt and the refunded debt of $1,966,116.
Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually at 3.12% on February 1 of each year commencing on
February 1, 2021. The Bonds mature on February 1, 2039. The bonds are payable solely from ad valorem
property taxes levied by the City and collected by the County. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at
June 30, 2021 was $8,015,792.
The annual debt service requirements to maturity for the General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2019 Series A are
as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 337,143$ 250,093$ 587,236$
2023 347,829 239,574 587,403
2024 358,853 228,722 587,575
2025 370,226 217,525 587,751
2026 381,960 205,974 587,934
2027-2031 2,099,251 843,378 2,942,629
2032-2036 2,453,691 494,468 2,948,159
2037-2039 1,666,839 105,092 1,771,931
Total 8,015,792$ 2,584,826$ 10,600,618$
General Obligation Bonds (Gilroy Community Library Project) 2019 Refunding Bonds, Series B
On November 5, 2019, the City issued General Obligation Refunding Bonds 2019 Series B through a private
placement, in the amount of $19,087,551. The proceeds from the issue were used to currently refund the General
Obligation Bonds Series 2010. The City’s refunding of the 2010 General Obligation Bonds resulted in an
economic gain (difference between the present value of the old and new debt) of $3,430,633 and an aggregate
savings in debt service between the refunding debt and the refunded debt of $2,525,981.
Interest on the bonds is payable semiannually at a rate of 3.19% on February 1 of each year commencing on
February 1, 2020. The Bonds mature on February 1, 2040. The bonds are payable solely from ad valorem
property taxes levied by the City and collected by the County. The principal balance of outstanding bonds at
June 30, 2021 was $17,623,854.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
72
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
A. Governmental Activities (Continued)
General Obligation Bonds (Gilroy Community Library Project) 2019 Refunding Bonds, Series B
(Continued)
The annual debt service requirements to maturity for the General Obligation Refunding Bonds, 2019 Series B are
as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 685,553$ 562,201$ 1,247,754$
2023 707,776 540,332 1,248,108
2024 730,720 517,754 1,248,474
2025 754,408 494,444 1,248,852
2026 778,864 470,378 1,249,242
2027-2031 4,289,817 1,962,699 6,252,516
2032-2036 5,031,701 1,232,651 6,264,352
2037-2040 4,645,015 376,347 5,021,362
Total 17,623,854$ 6,156,806$ 23,780,660$
B. Business-Type Activities
Balance Balance Due within Due in more
June 30, 2020 Additions Deletions June 30, 2021 One Year than One Year
Other debt:
2010 Wastewater Revenue Bonds 7,080,000$ -$ (2,260,000)$ 4,820,000$ 2,380,000$ 2,440,000$
2021 Wastewater Revenue Bonds - 47,080,000 - 47,080,000 - 47,080,000
Unamortized premium 465,517 5,732,751 (232,759) 5,965,509 - 5,965,509
7,545,517 52,812,751 (2,492,759) 57,865,509 2,380,000 55,485,509
Other long-term liabilities
Compensated absences 269,477 198,500 (216,307) 251,670 25,000 226,670
7,814,994$ 53,011,251$ (2,709,066)$ 58,117,179$ 2,405,000$ 55,712,179$
Classification
2010 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds
On March 1, 2010, the City issued revenue refunding bonds in the amount of $23,375,000. The bonds were issued
to refinance an existing installment payment obligation of the City. The City had originally structured the sewer
revenue bonds through the Authority. The structure consisted of a pledge of an installment sale from the City to
the Authority as the collateral for the revenue bonds issued by the Authority.
As part of the March 2010 refunding, the City issued new debt to refund the Authority bonds. The outstanding
balance of the new debt is reported in the Sewer Fund. The City’s covenants require the City to maintain
sufficient net sewer revenues to pay the outstanding debt. The Authority does not have responsibility to set rates
to meet these covenants.
The bonds are payable from the net revenues of the City’s Sewer Fund pledged as security for the debt. Interest on
the bonds is payable at rates ranging from 3.0% to 5.0%. Principal payments range from $1,465,000 to
$2,440,000 payable on August 1 of each year beginning in 2011 and maturing in 2022. The principal balance of
outstanding bonds at June 30, 2021 was $4,820,000.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
73
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
B. Business-Type Activities (Continued)
2010 Wastewater Revenue Refunding Bonds (Continued)
Covenants within the bonds require the City to maintain insurance on the facility, establish wastewater rates,
exclusive of sewer development fees, which are sufficient to pay the City’s share of the operating costs of the
Authority, maintain reserves, provide net revenues equal to at least 1.2 times the annual debt service amounts.
The reserve requirement at June 30, 2021 was $2,621,000, and the actual reserve was $2,664,381.
The annual debt service requirements (principal and interest) to maturity for the 2010 Wastewater Revenue
Refunding Bonds are as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 2,380,000$ 181,500$ 2,561,500$
2023 2,440,000 61,000 2,501,000
Total 4,820,000$ 242,500$ 5,062,500$
2021A Wastewater Revenue Bonds
On June 30, 2021, the Gilroy Public Facilities Financing Authority issued revenue bonds in the amount of
$47,080,000. The bonds were issued to finance the City’s portion of certain improvements to the Authority’s
treatment facility.
The bonds are payable from revenues consisting primarily of installment payments payable by the City under an
installment purchase agreement. The obligation of the city to make installment payments is a special obligation
of the City payable solely from and secured by a pledge of net wastewater revenues of the City’s wastewater
system on a parity with the City’s obligation to pay installment payments that secure the 2010 Wastewater
Revenue Bonds. Interest on the bonds is payable at rates ranging from 3.0% to 4.0%. Principal payments range
from $725,000 to $2,210,000 payable on August 1 of each year beginning in 2021 and maturing in 2057. The
principal balance of outstanding bonds at June 30, 2021 was $47,080,000.
The annual debt service requirements (principal and interest) to maturity for the 2021A Wastewater Revenue
Bonds are as follows:
Year ending
June 30, Principal Interest Total
2022 -$ 898,801$ 898,801$
2023 - 1,533,500 1,533,500
2024 725,000 1,519,000 2,244,000
2025 755,000 1,489,400 2,244,400
2026 785,000 1,458,600 2,243,600
2027-2031 4,430,000 6,785,900 11,215,900
2032-2036 5,415,000 5,804,000 11,219,000
2037-2041 6,455,000 4,773,075 11,228,075
2042-2046 7,490,000 3,728,850 11,218,850
2047-2051 8,705,000 2,516,175 11,221,175
2052-2056 10,110,000 1,107,750 11,217,750
2057 2,210,000 33,150 2,243,150
Total 47,080,000$ 31,648,201$ 78,728,201$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
74
Note 9 – Long-Term Liabilities (Continued)
C. Debt without Government Commitment
Community Facilities District No. 2000-1, Highway 152, Special Tax Bonds
In December 2002, Community Facilities District No. 2000-1 pursuant to Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act
of 1982, issued $7,185,000 of Special Tax Bonds to finance the costs associated with the construction of public
facilities for interchange improvements at State Highway 152 and U.S. Highway 101 and for widening and
improving Highway 152.
In September 2006, Community Facilities District No. 2000-1 pursuant to Mello-Roos Community Facilities Act
of 1982, issued $8,670,000 of Special Tax Bonds to finance the costs associated with the construction of public
facilities for interchange improvements at State Highway 152 and U.S. Highway 101 and for the widening and
improving Highway 152.
These bonds were refunded in July 2018 with proceeds from the issuance in a private placement of Community
Facilities District No. 2000-1 (Highway 152) Special Tax Refunded Bonds, Series 2018 in the aggregate
principal amount of $7,815,860. These bonds do not constitute a debt or obligation of the City because they are
payable solely from the Special Tax revenue assessed on the underlying parcels. The City is not liable for
repayment but acts as an agent for the property owners in collecting the assessments, forwarding the collections
to bondholders, and initiating foreclosure proceedings, if appropriate. The outstanding principal balance as of
June 30, 2021 was $6,560,907.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
75
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS)
A. Summary
The following is the summary of net pension liabilities and the related deferred outflow of resources and deferred
inflow of resources at June 30, 2021 and pension expenses for the year then ended:
Governmental Business-Type
Activities Activities Total
Deferred outflows of resources:
Pension contribution after measurement date:
Miscellaneous 2,295,299$ 1,476,762$ 3,772,061$
Safety 6,718,586 - 6,718,586
Total contribution after measurement date 9,013,885 1,476,762 10,490,647
Changes in assumptions:
Safety 629,611 - 629,611
Total changes in assumptions 629,611 - 629,611
Difference between expected and actual experience:
Miscellaneous 751,253 483,346 1,234,599
Total difference between expected and actual experience 751,253 483,346 1,234,599
Difference between projected and actual earnings on plan
investments:
Miscellaneous 322,932 207,769 530,701
Safety 974,678 - 974,678
Total difference between projected and actual earnings on plan
investments 1,297,610 207,769 1,505,379
Total deferred outflows of resources 11,692,359$ 2,167,877$ 13,860,236$
Aggregate net pension liabilities:
Miscellaneous 22,516,797$ 14,486,977$ 37,003,774$
Safety 54,046,734 - 54,046,734
Total aggregate net pension liabilities 76,563,531$ 14,486,977$ 91,050,508$
Deferred inflows of resources:
Changes in assumptions:
Safety 158,399$ -$ 158,399$
Total changes in assumptions 158,399 - 158,399
Difference between expected and actual experience:
Safety 566,007 - 566,007
Total difference between expected and actual experience 566,007 - 566,007
Total deferred inflows of resources 724,406$ -$ 724,406$
Pension expense:
Miscellaneous 3,648,708$ 2,347,525$ 5,996,233$
Safety 8,503,723 - 8,503,723
Total net pension expense 12,152,431$ 2,347,525$ 14,499,956$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
76
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
B. General Information about the Pension Plans
Plan Descriptions
The City participates in the 2.5% at 55 (Miscellaneous Tier I), 2.0% at 62 (Miscellaneous Tier II PEPRA), 3.0%
at 50 (Police Safety Tier I), 2.0% at 50 (Police Safety Tier II), 2.7% at 57 (Police Safety Tier III PEPRA), 3% at
55 (Fire Safety Tier I), 2% at 55 (Fire Safety Tier II) and 2% at 57 (Fire Safety Tier III PEPRA) agent multiple-
employer defined benefit plans. The City’s defined benefit pension plans provide retirement and disability
benefits, annual cost-of-living adjustments and death benefits to plan members and beneficiaries. The Plans are
part of the Public Agency portion of the California Public Employees Retirement System (CalPERS), an agent
multiple-employer plan administered by CalPERS, which acts as a common investment and administrative
agent for participating public employers within the State of California. A menu of benefit provisions as well as
other requirements are established by state statutes within the Public Employees’ Retirement Law.
The City selects optional benefit provisions from the benefit menu by contract with CalPERS and adopts those
benefits through City ordinance. CalPERS issues a separate annual comprehensive financial report. Copies of
CalPERS’s annual financial report may be obtained from the CalPERS Executive Office, 400 P Street,
Sacramento, CA 95814.
All full-time employees of the City are eligible to participate in the Plans. Part-time employees and temporary
employees who work an average of 20 hours per week and over 1,000 hours per year are also eligible to
participate. Upon 5 years of service, miscellaneous employees and public safety employees who retire at or after
age 50 are entitled to receive an annual retirement benefit.
The benefit is payable monthly for life, in an amount that varies from each Tier, of the employees’ single highest
year’s salary for each year of credited service. The Plans also provide death and disability benefits.
Benefits Provided
CalPERS provides service retirement and disability benefits, annual cost of living adjustments and death benefits
to plan members, who must be public employees and beneficiaries. Benefits are based on years of credited
service, equal to one year of full-time employment. Members with five years of total service are eligible to retire
at age 50 to 62 with statutorily reduced benefits. For employees hired into a plan with the 1.5% at 65 formula,
eligibility for service retirement is age 55 with at least five years of services. PEPRA miscellaneous members
become eligible for service retirement upon attainment of age 52 with at least five years of service. All members
are eligible for nonduty disability benefits after five years of service. The death benefit is one of the following:
the Basic Death Benefit, the 1957 Survivor Benefit or the Optional Settlement 2W Death Benefit.
Safety members can receive a special death benefit if the member dies while actively employed and the death is
job-related. Fire members may receive the alternate death benefit in lieu of the Basic Death Benefit or the 1957
Survivor Benefit if the member dies while actively employed and has at least 20 years of total CalPERS service.
The cost-of-living adjustments for each plan are applied as specified by the Public Employees’ Retirement Law.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
77
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
B. General Information about the Pension Plans (Continued)
Benefits Provided (Continued)
The Plans’ provisions and benefits in effect at the measurement date of June 30, 2020 are summarized as
follows:
Hire date
Prior to
January 1, 2013
On or after
January 1, 2013
Benefit formula 2.5% @ 55 2% @ 62
Benefit vesting schedule 5 years of service 5 years of service
Benefit payments Monthly for life Monthly for life
Retirement age 50 52
Benefit per year of service, as a percentage of salary 2.0% to 3.0% 1.0% to 2.5%
Required employee contribution rates 8.000%7.000%
Required contribution during measurement period 11.363%11.363%
Miscellaneous
Hire Date
Prior to
January 5, 2011
Prior to
January 1, 2013
On or After
January 1, 2013
Benefit formula 3% @ 50 2% @ 50 2.7% @ 57
Benefit vesting schedule 3 years of service 3 years of service 3 years of service
Benefit payments Monthly for life Monthly for life Monthly for life
Retirement age 50-55 50-55 50-57
Benefit per year of service, as a percentage of salary 3.000% 2.00%-2.70% 2.00%-2.70%
Required employee contribution rates 9.000%9.000%13.000%
Required contribution during measurement period 21.412%21.412%21.412%
Safety - Police
Hire Date
Prior to
January 5, 2011
Prior to
January 1, 2013
On or After
January 1, 2013
Benefit formula 3% @ 55 2% @ 55 2% @ 57
Benefit vesting schedule 3 years of service 3 years of service 3 years of service
Benefit payments Monthly for life Monthly for life Monthly for life
Retirement age 50-55 50-55 50-57
Benefit per year of service, as a percentage of salary 2.4%-3.0% 1.426%-2.0% 1.426%-2.0%
Required employee contribution rates 9.000%7.000%10.500%
Required contribution during measurement period 21.412%21.412%21.412%
Safety - Fire
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
78
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
B. General Information about the Pension Plans (Continued)
Employees Covered
At the measurement date of June 30, 2020, the following employees were covered by the benefit terms for all
Plans:
Inactives currently receiving benefits 116
Inactives entitled to but not yet receiving benefits 30
Active employees 124
Total 270
Contributions
Section 20814(c) of the California Public Employees’ Retirement Law requires that the employer contribution
rates for all public employers are determined on an annual basis by the actuary and shall be effective on the July
1 following notice of a change in the rate. The total plan contributions are determined through CalPERS’s annual
actuarial valuation process. The actuarially determined rate is the estimated amount necessary to finance the costs
of benefits earned by employees during the year, with an additional amount to finance any unfunded accrued
liability. The City is required to contribute the difference between the actuarially determined rate and the
contribution rate of employees. City contribution rates may change if plan contracts are amended. Payments
made by the employer to satisfy contribution requirements that are identified by the pension plan terms as plan
member contributions requirements are classified as plan member contributions.
C. Net Pension Liability
Actuarial Methods and Assumptions Used to Determine Total Pension Liability
The June 30, 2019 valuation was rolled forward to determine the June 30, 2020 total pension liability, based on
the following actuarial methods and assumptions:
Actuarial Cost Method
Actuarial Assumptions:
Discount Rate
Inflation
Salary Increases
Mortality Rate Table1
Post Retirement Benefit Increase
Entry Age Normal in accordance with the requirement of GASB
Statement No. 68
7.15%
2.50%
Varies by Entry Age and Service
1The mortality table used was developed based on CalPERS-specific data. The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2017
CalPERS Experience Study for the period from 1997 to 2015. Pre-retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates include 15 years of
projected mortality improvement using 90% of Scale MP-2016 published by the Society of Actuaries. For more details on this table,
please refer to the CalPERS Experience Study and Review of Actuarial Assumptions report from December 2017 that can be found
on the CalPERS website.
Derived using CalPERS’ membership data for all funds.
The lesser of contract COLA or 2.50% until Purchasing Power
Protection Allowance floor on purchasing power applies, 2.50%
thereafter
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
79
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
C. Net Pension Liability (Continued)
Long-Term Expected Rate of Return
The long-term expected rate of return on pension plan investments was determined using a building-block
method in which expected future real rates of return (expected returns, net of pension plan investment expense
and inflation) are developed for each major asset class.
In determining the long-term expected rate of return, CalPERS took into account both short-term and long-term
market return expectations as well as the expected pension fund cash flows. Using historical returns of all the
funds’ asset classes, expected compound (geometric) returns were calculated over the short-term (first 10 years)
and the long-term (11+ years) using a building-block approach. Using the expected nominal returns for both
short-term and long-term, the present value of benefits was calculated for each fund. The expected rate of return
was set by calculating the rounded single equivalent expected return that arrived at the same present value of
benefits for cash flows as the one calculated using both short-term and long-term returns. The expected rate of
return was then set equal to the single equivalent rate calculated above and adjusted to account for assumed
administrative expenses.
The expected real rates of return by asset class are as follows:
Current Target Real Return Real Return
Asset Class1 Allocation Years 1 - 102 Years 11+3
Global equity 50.00%4.80%5.98%
Fixed income 28.00%1.00%2.62%
Inflation assets 0.00%0.77%1.81%
Private equity 8.00%6.30%7.23%
Real assets 13.00%3.75%4.93%
Liquidity 1.00%0.00%-0.92%
2 An expected inflation of 2.0% used
3 An expected inflation of 2.92% used
1 In the CalPER's ACFR, Fixed Income is included in Global Debt Securities; Liquidity is included in Short-term Investments;
Inflation Assets are included in both Global Equity Securities and Global Debt Securities.
Discount Rate
The discount rate used to measure the total pension liability was 7.15%. The projection of cash flows used to
determine the discount rate assumed that contributions from plan members will be made at the current member
contribution rates and that contributions from employers will be made at statutorily required rates, actuarially
determined. Based on those assumptions, the Plan’s fiduciary net position was projected to be available to make all
projected future benefit payments of current plan members. Therefore, the long-term expected rate of return on
plan investments was applied to all periods of projected benefit payments to determine the total pension liability.
Subsequent Events
There were no subsequent events that would materially affect the results in this disclosure.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
80
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
D. Changes in the Net Pension Liability
The following table shows the changes in net pension liability for the City’s miscellaneous plan recognized over
the measurement period.
Total Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Net Pension
Liability Position Liability/(Asset)
(a) (b) (c) = (a) - (b)
Balance at June 30, 2019 (Valuation Date) 116,325,023$ 81,865,434$ 34,459,589$
Changes Recognized for the Measurement Period:
Service Cost 2,360,748 - 2,360,748
Interest on the total pension liability 8,220,201 - 8,220,201
Difference between expected and actual experience 670,381 - 670,381
Plan to plan resource movement - 1,029 (1,029)
Contributions from the employer - 3,645,000 (3,645,000)
Contributions from employees - 1,076,549 (1,076,549)
Net investment income - 4,099,977 (4,099,977)
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (6,415,856) (6,415,856) -
Administrative expenses - (115,410) 115,410
Net Changes during July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 4,835,474 2,291,289 2,544,185
Balance at June 30, 2020 (Measurement Date) 121,160,497$ 84,156,723$ 37,003,774$
Increase (Decrease)
Miscellaneous Plan
Total Pension Plan Fiduciary Net Net Pension
Liability Position Liability/(Asset)
(a) (b) (c) = (a) - (b)
Balance at June 30, 2019 (Valuation Date) 171,850,808$ 120,137,570$ 51,713,238$
Changes Recognized for the Measurement Period:
Service Cost 4,116,535 - 4,116,535
Interest on the total pension liability 12,139,906 - 12,139,906
Difference between expected and actual experience (85,114) - (85,114)
Plan to plan resource movement - (1,029) 1,029
Contributions from the employer - 6,320,224 (6,320,224)
Contributions from employees - 1,575,349 (1,575,349)
Net investment income - 6,112,651 (6,112,651)
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (8,070,115) (8,070,115) -
Administrative expenses - (169,364) 169,364
Net Changes during July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 8,101,212 5,767,716 2,333,496
Balance at June 30, 2020 (Measurement Date) 179,952,020$ 125,905,286$ 54,046,734$
Safety
Increase (Decrease)
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
81
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
D. Changes in the Net Pension Liability (Continued)
Sensitivity of the Net Pension Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate
The following presents the net pension liability of the City for all Plans, calculated using the discount rate for
each Plan, as well as what the City’s net pension liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that
is one percentage point lower or one percentage point higher than the current rate:
Discount Rate Current Discount Discount Rate
- 1% (6.15%) Rate (7.15%) + 1% (8.15%)
Miscellaneous Plan 51,845,285$ 37,003,774$ 24,639,213$
Safety Plan 78,083,445$ 54,046,734$ 34,186,110$
Plan's Net Pension Liability/(Asset)
Pension Plans Fiduciary Net Position
Detailed information about each pension plan’s fiduciary net position is available in the separately issued
CalPERS financial reports.
E. Pension Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions
For the year ended June 30, 2021, the City recognized pension expense in the amounts of $5,996,233 and
$8,503,723 for the miscellaneous plan and safety plan, respectively.
As of measurement date of June 30, 2020, the City has deferred outflows and deferred inflows of resources
related to pensions as follows:
Deferred outflows Deferred inflows
of Resources of Resources
Contribution made after the measurement date 3,772,061$ -$
Difference between expected and actual experience 1,234,599 -
Net difference between projected and actual earning on
pension plan investments 530,701 -
Total 5,537,361$ -$
Miscellaneous Plan
Deferred outflows Deferred inflows
of Resources of Resources
Contribution made after the measurement date 6,718,586$ -$
Change in assumptions 629,611 (158,399)
Difference between expected and actual experience - (566,007)
Net difference between projected and actual earnings
on pension plan investments 974,678 -
Total 8,322,875$ (724,406)$
Safety Plan
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
82
Note 10 – Defined Benefit Pension Plans (CalPERS) (Continued)
E. Pension Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to Pensions (Continued)
The $3,772,061 reported in the Miscellaneous Plans and $6,718,586 reported in the Safety Plans as deferred
outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date will be recognized as a
reduction of the net pension liability in the year ending June 30, 2022. Other amounts reported as deferred
outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to pensions will be recognized as pension
expense as follows:
Measurement
Period Miscellaneous Safety
Ending June 30 Plan Plan
2021 645,442$ (381,683)$
2022 391,255 173,524
2023 394,163 595,502
2024 334,440 492,540
1,765,300$ 879,883$
Deferred Outflows/(Inflows)
of Resources
Note 11 – Other Postemployment Healthcare Plan
Governmental Business-Type
Activities Activities Total
Deferred outflows of resources:
Employer contributions made
subsequent to the measurement date 461,896$ 97,232$ 559,128$
Changes in assumption 2,605,359 548,447 3,153,806
Total deferred outflows of resources 3,067,255$ 645,679$ 3,712,934$
Total OPEB liability 15,490,865$ 3,260,939$ 18,751,804$
Total OPEB liability 15,490,865$ 3,260,939$ 18,751,804$
Deferred inflows of Resources:
Change in assumption 843,448$ 177,552$ 1,021,000$
Difference between expected and actual experience 971,077 204,419 1,175,496
Total deferred inflows of resources 1,814,525$ 381,971$ 2,196,496$
OPEB Expense 1,144,667$ 240,960$ 1,385,627$
Plan Description
The City’s Retiree Healthcare Plan (Plan) is a single-employer defined benefit healthcare plan administered by the
City. The plan provides healthcare benefits to eligible retirees and their dependents through the California Public
Employee’s Retirement System healthcare program (PEMHCA) and a post-employment retention/recognition
incentive benefit program (RRIB) which requires proof of medical coverage. Benefit provisions are established and
may be amended through agreements and memorandums of understanding between the City, its management
employees and unions representing City employees.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
83
Note 11 – Other Postemployment Healthcare Plan (Continued)
Plan Description (Continued)
For all retirees under the plan, the City contributes the PEMHCA minimum contribution on the unequal method for
eligible retirees and surviving spouses. The PEMHCA minimum amount is $139 in 2020 and $145 in 2021. No
dental, vision or life insurance benefits are provided.
The RRIB incentive benefit is for certain bargaining units’ retirees that retired prior to July 1, 2014 (police and fire
employees), July 1, 2015 (management employees) or November 1, 2015 (AFSCME, miscellaneous employees).
Prior employees that retired on or before these dates and were fifty (50) or more years of age (police and fire
employees) or fifty-five (55) or more years of age (AFSCME and management employees) and previously retired
from City service with a minimum of fifteen (15) years of service with the City are eligible to receive this
postretirement benefit until reaching the age of sixty-five (65). Additional tiers of years of service were added to the
plan to qualify for benefits. This supplemental pension plan has been discontinued for new participants after the dates
noted above.
The employer contribution under RRIB provides a temporary monthly annuity (to age 65) up to $300 per month
based on service at retirement to eligible retirees. All classes of employees are covered, if eligible.
The City offers a Health Reimbursement Plan (PEMHCA) for new retirees after the dates noted above.
No assets are accumulated in a trust that meets the criteria in paragraph 4 of GASB Statement 75. The plan does not
issue a separate report.
Employees Covered
At the measurement date of June 30, 2020, the following current and former employees were covered by the benefit
terms under the plan:
Active plan members 265
Retirees 226
Total 491
Total OPEB Liability
The City’s OPEB liability of $18,751,804 was measured as of June 30, 2020 and was determined by an actuarial
valuation as of June 30, 2019 rolled forward to 2020 using standard update procedures. The OPEB liability from the
governmental activities is primarily liquidated from the general fund.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
84
Note 11 – Other Postemployment Healthcare Plan (Continued)
Actuarial Assumptions and Other Inputs
The total OPEB liability as of June 30, 2019 actuarial valuation was determined using the following actuarial
assumptions and other inputs, applied to all periods included in the measurement, unless otherwise specified:
Actuarial Valuation Date June 30, 2019
Contribution Policy No pre-funding
Discount Rate 2.21% at June 30, 2020 (Bond Buyer 20-Bond Index). 3.50% at June
30, 2019 (Bond Buyer 20-Bond index)
Inflation 2.75% annually
Salary Increase Aggregate - 3% annually, Merit - CalPERS 1997-2015 Experience
Study
Mortality, Retirement, Termination, and
Disability
CalPERS 1997-2015 Experience Study
Mortality Improvement Scale Modified projected fully generational with Scale MP-2019
Healthcare Trend Rate - Non-Medicare An annual healthcare cost trend rate of 7.25% for 2021, decreasing to
an ultimate rate of 4.0% in 2076
Healthcare Trend Rate - Medicare An annual healthcare cost trend rate of 6.3% for 2021, decreasing to an
ultimate rate of 4.0% in 2076
Changes in total OPEB Liability
The change in total OPEB liability are as follows:
Total OPEB
Liability
Balance at June 30, 2019 (Valuation Date)14,594,602$
Changes Recognized for the Measurement Period:
Service Cost 906,127
Interest on the total OPEB liability 533,762
Changes in assumptions 3,218,042
Benefit payments (500,729)
Net Changes during July 1, 2019 to June 30, 2020 4,157,202
Balance at June 30, 2020 (Measurement Date) 18,751,804$
Sensitivity of the Total OPEB Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate
The following presents the total OPEB liability of the City, calculated using the discount rate for the Plan, as well as
what the City’s total OPEB liability would be if it were calculated using a discount rate that is one percentage point
lower or one percentage point higher than the current rate:
Discount Rate - 1% Current Discount Discount Rate + 1%
Rate (1.21%) Rate (2.21%) Rate (3.21%)
22,013,981$ 18,751,804$ 16,177,996$
Plan's Total OPEB Liability
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
85
Note 11 – Other Postemployment Healthcare Plan (Continued)
Sensitivity of the Total OPEB Liability to Changes in the Discount Rate (Continued)
The following presents the total OPEB liability of the City, as well as what the City’s total OPEB liability would be if
it were calculated using healthcare cost trend rates that are one percentage point lower or one percentage point higher)
than the current healthcare cost trend rates:
Healthcare Cost
Trend Rates
-1% (6.3% - 7.25%) 1%
15,681,082$ 18,751,804$ 22,753,612$
Plan's Total OPEB Liability
OPEB Expense and Deferred Outflows/Inflows of Resources Related to OPEB
For the year ended June 30, 2021, the City recognized OPEB expense of $1,385,627. At June 30, 2021, the City
reported deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB from the following
sources:
Deferred outflows Deferred inflows
of Resources of Resources
Difference between expected and actual experience -$ (1,175,496)$
Changes in assumptions 3,153,806 (1,021,000)
Employer contributions made
subsequent to the measurement date 559,128 -
Total 3,712,934$ (2,196,496)$
The $559,128 reported as deferred outflows of resources related to contributions subsequent to the measurement date
will be recognized as a reduction of the OPEB liability in the year ending June 30, 2022. The change in assumptions
was due to the change in discount rate to 2.21% from 3.50% for the June 30, 2020 measurement date and is
amortized over the average expected remaining service lives.
Other amounts reported as deferred outflows of resources and deferred inflows of resources related to OPEB will be
recognized in OPEB expense as follows:
Measurement Period Deferred Outflows/
Ended June 30 (Inflows) of Resources
2022 (54,262)$
2023 (54,262)
2024 32,738
2025 225,738
2026 308,786
Thereafter 498,572
957,310$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
86
Note 12 – Claims Payable
The workers’ compensation and general liability claims administrators have estimated liabilities for probable future
payments relating to claims outstanding as of June 30, 2021 in the following amounts which are recorded in separate
internal service funds:
Worker' compensation claims 3,592,854$
General liability claims 2,765,958
Total claims payable 6,358,812$
Although the eventual outcome of these claims is uncertain, in the opinion of management, the resolution of these
matters is not expected to have a material adverse effect on the financial condition of the City, beyond the provision
for losses reflected in the recorded claims payable liabilities.
Changes in claims payable for workers’ compensation for the past three fiscal years are as follows:
Current Year Amounts
Beginning Claims and End Amounts Due in
of Year Changes in Claim of Year Due within more than
Workers' Compensation Liability Estimates Payments Liability One Year One Year
2018-2019 2,888,480$ 1,433,203 (1,066,813) 3,254,870$ 879,000$ 2,375,870$
2019-2020 3,254,870 70,329 (392,803) 2,932,396 792,000 2,140,396
2020-2021 2,932,396 2,058,195 (1,397,737) 3,592,854 970,000 2,622,854
Changes in claims payable for general liability for the past three fiscal years are as follows:
Current Year Amounts
Beginning Claims and End Amounts Due in
of Year Changes in Claim of Year Due within more than
General Liability Liability Estimates Payments Liability One Year One Year
2018-2019 138,238$ 114,526$ (642,811)$ (390,047)$ (66,000)$ (324,047)$
2019-2020 609,953 525,681 (445,585) 690,049 117,000 573,049
2020-2021 690,049 4,456,029 (2,380,120) 2,765,958 470,000 2,295,958
Note 13 – Risk Management
Bodily injury, property damage and public officials’ errors and omissions insurance is provided via participation in a
joint power’s authority. Effective July 1, 2015, the City is a member of the Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA), a
joint powers authority established pursuant to California Government Code Sections 990.4-990.8 and 6500, et seq.
The pool has 20 member cities. The City is insured by the MPA for up to $29,000,000 per claim for liability
coverage, including $28,000,000 provided by an excess policy with the California Affiliated Risk Management
Authority, after a deductible of $50,000 which is paid by the City. Premiums paid by the participating members may
be retrospectively increased or decreased to reflect the actual operating costs of MPA and the City’s share of incurred
losses. The City is contingently liable for assessments which may be made by MPA in the event that MPA has
insufficient resources to pay unexpectedly large claims.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
87
Note 13 – Risk Management (Continued)
The City is self-insured for the first $500,000 of each workers’ compensation claim. The City belongs to the Local
Agency Workers’ Compensation Excess (LAWCX) joint powers authority, established pursuant to California
Government Code Sections 990.4-990.8 and 6500 et seq., for the purpose of workers’ compensation excess coverage.
LAWCX coverage is for individual workers’ compensation claims in excess of $500,000 up to $5,000,000. In
addition, additional excess coverage beyond $5,000,000 is purchased via California State Association of Counties
Excess Insurance Authority (CSAC EIA) bringing statutory coverage to $50,000,000.
Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies
Under the terms of federal, county, and state grants, periodic audits are required, and certain costs may be questioned
as not appropriate expenditures under the terms of the grants. Such audits could lead to reimbursements to the grantor
agencies. If expenditures were disallowed, the City believes such disallowances, if any, would be immaterial.
The City is a defendant in certain legal claims and actions arising from the normal course of operations. In the
opinion of management and legal counsel, such claims and actions will not have a material adverse effect on the
City’s financial position.
Gilroy Garlic Festival
On July 28, 2019, the Gilroy Garlic Festival, held at Christmas Hill Park, was the site of an unexpected and random
shooting. The gunman killed himself, three others and wounded 17 people. The City’s response costs have been
submitted to the California Governor’s Office of Emergency Services (Cal OES) for reimbursement consideration.
The City has been named as a party in litigation lawsuits against the Gilroy Garlic Festival Association responsible
for organizing the festival. Currently, the Gilroy Garlic Festival Association’s insurance is covering all legal costs.
The City may incur additional financial impacts as a result of this event. At this time, the extent of those impact is
unknown as it is too early in the case to make those determinations.
COVID-19
In December 2019, a novel strain of coronavirus has spread around the world resulting in business and social
disruption. The coronavirus was declared a Public Health Emergency of International Concern by the World Health
Organization on January 30, 2020. The pandemic was ongoing during FY21 and is still ongoing in nature as various
variants of the virus have emerged causing public health administrators to continue implementing mitigation
measures including but not limited to masking and limitations on social gatherings. The full financial impact and
duration cannot be determined at this time.
Business-Type Activities Delinquencies
The City provides water and sewer utility services. Since the onset of the pandemic in 2020, Governor Gavin
Newsom issued executive orders instituting moratorium on shutting off water services for delinquent/non-payment
accounts. Subsequent legislation enacted in September 2021 extended that moratorium through December 31, 2021.
The City’s water and sewer utilities currently have estimated $900,000 in delinquent accounts. The City is currently
offering its delinquent customers a payment arrangement plan and will continue its collection efforts. In addition,
State Water Resources Control Board of California has instituted a water and wastewater arrearage payment program
to provide relief to community water and wastewater systems for unpaid bills related to the pandemic. The funding
will cover water debt from residential and commercial customers accrued between March 4, 2020 and June 15, 2021
in the first round, and if the program still has funding available, it will extend to wastewater charges. The City has
submitted application to receive a grant allocation from the program.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
88
Note 14 – Commitments and Contingencies (Continued)
Listed below are projects for uncompleted contracts over $250,000 outstanding as of June 30, 2021:
Name of Project
Outstanding
Amount
Enterprise Resource Planning (ERP) and
Permitting Software Systems and
Implementation Services
1,316,051$
10th Street and Uvas Creek Bridge Design
Services
780,761
McCarthy Well Project - Design and
Construction Engineering Services
543,749
FY21 Citywide Pavement Maintenance 256,666
2,897,227$
Note 15 – Classification of Fund Balances
Public Facilities Nonmajor
Impact Capital Governmental
General Projects Fund Funds Total
Nonspendable:
Inventory 47,874$ -$ -$ 47,874$
47,874 - - 47,874
Restricted:
Public safety - - 459,026 459,026
Community library - - 6,496,675 6,496,675
Street maintenance - - 5,550,992 5,550,992
Grant programs - - 1,679,551 1,679,551
Housing - - 2,707,415 2,707,415
Traffic impact - - 14,258,526 14,258,526
Sewer development - - 13,182,409 13,182,409
Water development - - 5,102,067 5,102,067
Storm drains - - 2,078,854 2,078,854
Community
development - - 4,442,031 4,442,031
Debt service - - 1,702,332 1,702,332
Museum - - 9,554 9,554
City poor assistance - - 15,053 15,053
Land held for resale - - 706,754 706,754
Subtotal - - 58,391,239 58,391,239
Assigned:
Capital projects - - 5,276,537 5,276,537
Subtotal - - 5,276,537 5,276,537
Unassigned (deficit)19,585,369 (5,397,488) (54) 14,187,827
Total 19,633,243$ (5,397,488)$ 63,667,722$ 77,903,477$
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
89
Note 15 – Classification of Fund Balances (Continued)
General Fund Balance Policy
The City’s general fund reserve policy consists of an unrestricted General Fund Reserve of 20% of general fund
expenditures and an Economic Stability Reserve of 10% of general fund expenditures. The Economic Stability
Reserve would only be used in extraordinary circumstances, upon satisfaction of one of the following “economic
triggers” and with the majority vote of the City Council: (i) state take-away of significant revenue; (ii) large drop in
property taxes (decrease in assessed valuations), (iii) major business closures (sales tax and/or utility users’ tax
impact); (iv) dramatic drop in development from projections; (v) large unexpected drop in sales taxes (or other
primary revenues - utility users’ tax, franchise fees or transient occupancy tax) due to severe recession or (vi) the
economic triggers cause the General Fund Reserve to fall below a predetermined percentage of expenditures (e.g.
20%). In the event the Economic Stability Reserve is used, the City is obligated to replenish the reserve by the end of
the next biennial budget to 10% of the general fund expenditures for the given year.
Note 16 – Prior Period Adjustments
The City made following prior period adjustments as of July 1, 2020:
Governmental Business-Type
Activities Activities Total
Net position at July 1, 2020, as previously reported 166,368,370$ 184,046,988$ 350,415,358$
To implement GASB 84 12,990 - 12,990
Net position at July 1, 2020, as restated 166,381,360$ 184,046,988$ 350,428,348$
General Fund Henry Miller Museum Trust Total
Net position at July 1, 2020, as previously reported 14,858,470$ -$ -$ 14,858,470$
To implement GASB 84 (13,581) 17,238 9,333 12,990
Net position at July 1, 2020, as restated 14,844,889$ 17,238$ 9,333$ 14,871,460$
Permanent Funds
The City made the following prior period adjustments as of July 1, 2020 to report the net position of its custodial
funds:
Senior
Advisory Highway 152 Highway 152 Highway 152
Board Series 2002 Series 2006 Series 2018 Total
Net position at July 1, 2020, as previously reported -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
To implement GASB 84 8,345 544 709 1,082,718 1,092,316
Net position at July 1, 2020, as restated 8,345$ 544$ 709$ 1,082,718$ 1,092,316$
Custodial Funds
Prior period adjustments in general fund, fiduciary funds and governmental activities are all from the implementation
of GASB statement 84.
City of Gilroy
Notes to the Basic Financial Statements (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
90
Note 17 – Subsequent Events
American Rescue Plan Act
On March 11, 2021 President Joe Biden signed into law H.R. 1319 – American Rescue Plan Act of 2021 to combat
the impacts of the COVID-19 pandemic and lay the foundation for a strong economic recovery. The total bill was a
$1.9 trillion-dollar package and included $350 billion dollars in funding for state, local, territorial, and tribal
governments. The specific breakdown of this $350 billion included: $195 billion for states, $130 billion for local
governments, $20 billion for tribal governments, and $4.5 billion for territories. The City was allocated $10,964,521
as a result of the passage of the bill. This funding will be received in two equal $5,482,260 tranches from the
Treasury Department. The first tranche was received on May 19, 2021 and the second tranche will be distributed 365
days from that day. The ARPA funding requires obligation of recovery funds by December 31, 2024 and expenditure
of funds by December 31, 2026. As of June 30, 2021, a total of $5,482,260 is reported in unearned revenue in the
general fund.
REQUIRED SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
(UNAUDITED)
91
Measurement period 2019-20 2018-19 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16
Total pension liability
Service cost 2,360,748$ 2,218,281$ 2,107,888$ 2,119,709$ 1,974,107$
Interest 8,220,201 7,888,537 7,397,421 7,057,333 6,992,371
Changes of benefit terms - - - - -
Changes of assumptions - - (870,201) 5,558,063 -
Differences between expected and actual experience 670,381 3,067,906 1,618,519 (2,724,046) (878,722)
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (6,415,856) (6,003,668) (5,515,662) (4,810,256) (4,335,513)
Net change in total pension liability 4,835,474 7,171,056 4,737,965 7,200,803 3,752,243
Total pension liability - beginning 116,325,023 109,153,967 104,416,002 97,215,199 93,462,956
Total pension liability - ending (a)121,160,497$ 116,325,023$ 109,153,967$ 104,416,002$ 97,215,199$
Pension fiduciary net position
Contributions - employer 3,645,000$ 3,254,181$ 2,796,490$ 2,535,645$ 2,448,744$
Contributions - employee 1,076,549 992,926 1,003,145 888,342 895,816
Net investment income 4,099,977 5,226,520 6,275,073 7,621,577 355,337
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (6,415,856) (6,003,668) (5,515,662) (4,810,256) (4,335,513)
Plan to plan resource movement 1,029 - (182) - -
Administrative expense2 (115,410) (55,985) (115,667) (100,535) (41,912)
Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense)1 - 182 (219,654) - -
Net change in plan fiduciary net position 2,291,289 3,414,156 4,223,543 6,134,773 (677,528)
Plan fiduciary net position - beginning 3 81,865,434 78,451,278 74,227,735 68,092,962 68,770,490
Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b)84,156,723$ 81,865,434$ 78,451,278$ 74,227,735$ 68,092,962$
Plan net pension liability - ending (a) - (b)37,003,774$ 34,459,589$ 30,702,689$ 30,188,267$ 29,122,237$
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage 69.46% 70.38% 71.87% 71.09% 70.04%
of the total pension liability
Covered payroll3 13,093,445$ 12,003,033$ 11,457,160$ 10,902,171$ 11,189,178$
Plan net pension liability as a percentage of covered
payroll 282.61% 287.09% 267.98% 276.90% 260.27%
Notes to Schedule:
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Changes of Assumptions: None in 2019 and 2020. In 2018, demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CalPERS Experience
Study and Review of Actuarial Assumption December 2017. There were no changes in the discount rate. In 2017, the accounting discount rate reduced from 7.65
percent to 7.15 percent. In 2016, there were no changes. In 2015, amounts reported reflect an adjustment of the discount rate from 7.5 percent (net of administrative
expense) to 7.65 percent (without a reduction for pension plan administrative expense.) In 2014, amounts reported were based on the 7.5 percent discount rate.
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Miscellaneous Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
2 Includes any beginning of year adjustment.
Benefit Changes: The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after the June 30, 2017 valuation
date. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes).
92
Measurement period 2014-15 2013-141
Total pension liability
Service cost 1,914,477$ 1,886,470$
Interest 6,720,915 6,378,166
Changes of benefit terms - -
Changes of assumptions (1,563,145) -
Differences between expected and actual experience 67,994 -
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (4,140,599) (3,800,609)
Net change in total pension liability 2,999,642 4,464,027
Total pension liability - beginning 90,463,314 85,999,287
Total pension liability - ending (a)93,462,956$ 90,463,314$
Pension fiduciary net position
Contributions - employer 2,236,836$ 2,105,469$
Contributions - employee 894,531 978,326
Net investment income 1,523,463 10,200,504
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee
contributions (4,140,599) (3,800,609)
Plan to plan resource movement - -
Administrative expense2 (77,393) -
Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense)1 - -
Net change in plan fiduciary net position 436,838 9,483,690
Plan fiduciary net position - beginning 3 68,333,652 58,849,962
Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b)68,770,490$ 68,333,652$
Plan net pension liability - ending (a) - (b)24,692,466$ 22,129,662$
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage 73.58% 75.54%
of the total pension liability
Covered payroll3 10,920,524$ 10,072,452$
Plan net pension liability as a percentage of covered
payroll 226.11% 219.70%
Notes to Schedule:
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Changes of Assumptions: None in 2019 and 2020. In 2018, demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CalPERS Experience
Study and Review of Actuarial Assumption December 2017. There were no changes in the discount rate. In 2017, the accounting discount rate reduced from 7.65
percent to 7.15 percent. In 2016, there were no changes. In 2015, amounts reported reflect an adjustment of the discount rate from 7.5 percent (net of administrative
expense) to 7.65 percent (without a reduction for pension plan administrative expense.) In 2014, amounts reported were based on the 7.5 percent discount rate.
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Miscellaneous Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
2 Includes any beginning of year adjustment.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
Benefit Changes: The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after the June 30, 2017 valuation
date. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes).
93
Measurement period 2019-20 2018-19 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16
Total pension liability
Service cost 4,116,535$ 4,001,654$ 3,782,506$ 3,795,030$ 3,436,724$
Interest 12,139,906 11,586,454 11,090,179 10,658,420 10,258,316
Changes of benefit terms - - - - -
Changes of assumptions - - (633,599) 9,024,447 -
Differences between expected and actual experience (85,114) (560,783) (600,354) (1,138,485) (557,694)
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (8,070,115) (7,569,570) (7,391,540) (6,957,768) (6,616,198)
Net change in total pension liability 8,101,212 7,457,755 6,247,192 15,381,644 6,521,148
Total pension liability - beginning 171,850,808 164,393,053 158,145,861 142,764,217 136,243,069
Total pension liability - ending (a)179,952,020$ 171,850,808$ 164,393,053$ 158,145,861$ 142,764,217$
Pension fiduciary net position
Contributions - employer 6,320,224$ 5,572,994$ 4,906,333$ 4,528,260$ 4,131,687$
Contributions - employee 1,575,349 1,245,565 1,196,981 1,157,337 1,130,369
Net investment income 6,112,651 7,469,298 8,983,812 10,785,793 541,083
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (8,070,115) (7,569,570) (7,391,540) (6,957,768) (6,616,198)
Plan to plan resource movement (1,029) - (263) - -
Administrative expense2 (169,364) (80,996) (165,621) (143,087) (59,596)
Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense)1 - 263 (314,517) - -
Net change in plan fiduciary net position 5,767,716 6,637,554 7,215,185 9,370,535 (872,655)
Plan fiduciary net position - beginning 3 120,137,570 113,500,016 106,284,831 96,914,296 97,786,951
Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b)125,905,286$ 120,137,570$ 113,500,016$ 106,284,831$ 96,914,296$
Plan net pension liability - ending (a) - (b)54,046,734$ 51,713,238$ 50,893,037$ 51,861,030$ 45,849,921$
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage 69.97% 69.91% 69.04% 67.21% 67.88%
of the total pension liability
Covered payroll3 14,083,254$ 13,479,938$ 12,879,248$ 12,700,905$ 12,637,804$
Plan net pension liability as a percentage of covered payroll 383.77% 383.63% 395.16% 408.33% 362.80%
Notes to Schedule:
2 Includes any beginning of year adjustment.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
Benefit Changes: The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after the June 30, 2017 valuation
date. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes).
Changes of Assumptions: None in 2019 or 2020. In 2018, demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CalPERS Experience
Study and Review of Actuarial Assumption December 2017. There were no changes in the discount rate. In 2017, the accounting discount rate reduced from 7.65
percent to 7.15 percent. In 2016, there were no changes. In 2015, amounts reported reflect an adjustment of the discount rate from 7.5 percent (net of administrative
expense) to 7.65 percent (without a reduction for pension plan administrative expense.) In 2014, amounts reported were based on the 7.5 percent discount rate.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Safety Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
94
Measurement period 2014-15 2013-141
Total pension liability
Service cost 3,251,786$ 3,441,840$
Interest 9,778,748 9,235,218
Changes of benefit terms - -
Changes of assumptions (2,444,546) -
Differences between expected and actual experience 437,762 -
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (5,976,690) (5,792,746)
Net change in total pension liability 5,047,060 6,884,312
Total pension liability - beginning 131,196,009 124,311,697
Total pension liability - ending (a)136,243,069$ 131,196,009$
Pension fiduciary net position
Contributions - employer 3,911,991$ 3,844,918$
Contributions - employee 1,106,970 1,082,775
Net investment income 2,139,791 14,460,928
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (5,976,690) (5,792,746)
Plan to plan resource movement - -
Administrative expense2 (110,062) -
Other Miscellaneous Income/(Expense)1 - -
Net change in plan fiduciary net position 1,072,000 13,595,875
Plan fiduciary net position - beginning 3 96,714,951 83,119,076
Plan fiduciary net position - ending (b)97,786,951$ 96,714,951$
Plan net pension liability - ending (a) - (b)38,456,118$ 34,481,058$
Plan fiduciary net position as a percentage 71.77% 73.72%
of the total pension liability
Covered payroll3 12,055,260$ 12,092,757$
Plan net pension liability as a percentage of covered payroll 319.00% 285.14%
Notes to Schedule:
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Changes in the Net Pension Liability and Related Ratios (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Changes of Assumptions: None in 2019 or 2020. In 2018, demographic assumptions and inflation rate were changed in accordance to the CalPERS Experience
Study and Review of Actuarial Assumption December 2017. There were no changes in the discount rate. In 2017, the accounting discount rate reduced from 7.65
percent to 7.15 percent. In 2016, there were no changes. In 2015, amounts reported reflect an adjustment of the discount rate from 7.5 percent (net of administrative
expense) to 7.65 percent (without a reduction for pension plan administrative expense.) In 2014, amounts reported were based on the 7.5 percent discount rate.
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Safety Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
2 Includes any beginning of year adjustment.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
Benefit Changes: The figures above do not include any liability impact that may have resulted from plan changes which occurred after the June 30, 2017 valuation
date. This applies for voluntary benefit changes as well as any offers of Two Years Additional Service Credit (a.k.a. Golden Handshakes).
95
Fiscal Year End 2020-21 2019-20 2018-19 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16 2014-15
Actuarially determined contribution 3,772,061$ 3,645,000$ 3,254,181$ 2,796,490$ 2,535,645$ 2,448,744$ 2,236,836$
Contributions in relation to the actuarially
determined contribution2 (3,772,061) (3,645,000) (3,254,181) (2,796,490) (2,535,645) (2,448,744) (2,236,836)
Contribution deficiency (excess) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Covered payroll3 13,486,248$ 13,093,445$ 12,003,033$ 11,457,160$ 10,902,171$ 11,189,178$ 10,920,524$
Contributions as a percentage of covered
payroll3 27.97% 27.84% 27.11% 24.41% 23.26% 21.88% 20.48%
Notes to Schedule:
Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates:
Actuarial cost method Entry Age Normal Cost Method
Amortization method Level percentage of payroll
Asset valuation method Market value
Inflation 2.50%
Salary increases Varies by entry age and service
Payroll Growth 2.875%
Investment rate of return
Retirement age
Mortality
The actuarial methods and assumptions used to set the actuarially determined contributions for Fiscal Year 2019-20 were derived from the June 30, 2017 funding
valuation report.
7.15% net of pension plan investment expenses; includes Inflation.
The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience study for
the period from 1997 to 2015.
The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience Study for
the period from 1997 to 2015. Pre-retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates
include 15 years of projected mortality improvement using 90% of Scale MP-2016
published by the Society of Actuaries
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
2 Employers are assumed to make contributions equal to the actuarially determined contributions. However, some employers may choose to make additional
contributions towards their unfunded liability. Employer contributions for such plans exceed the actuarially determined contributions.
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Miscellaneous
96
Fiscal Year End 2013-14 1
Actuarially determined contribution 2,105,469$
Contributions in relation to the actuarially
determined contribution2 (2,105,469)
Contribution deficiency (excess)-$
Covered payroll3 10,072,452$
Contributions as a percentage of covered
payroll3 20.90%
Notes to Schedule:
Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates:
Actuarial cost method Entry Age Normal Cost Method
Amortization method Level percentage of payroll
Asset valuation method Market value
Inflation 2.50%
Salary increases Varies by entry age and service
Payroll Growth 2.875%
Investment rate of return
Retirement age
Mortality
The actuarial methods and assumptions used to set the actuarially determined contributions for Fiscal Year 2019-20 were derived from the June 30, 2017 funding
valuation report.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Miscellaneous
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
7.15% net of pension plan investment expenses; includes Inflation.
The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience study for
the period from 1997 to 2015.
The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience Study for
the period from 1997 to 2015. Pre-retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates
include 15 years of projected mortality improvement using 90% of Scale MP-2016
published by the Society of Actuaries
2 Employers are assumed to make contributions equal to the actuarially determined contributions. However, some employers may choose to make additional
contributions towards their unfunded liability. Employer contributions for such plans exceed the actuarially determined contributions.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
97
2020-21 2019-20 2018-19 2017-18 2016-17 2015-16 2014-15
Actuarially determined contribution 6,718,586$ 6,320,224$ 5,572,994$ 4,906,333$ 4,528,260$ 4,131,687$ 3,911,991$
Contributions in relation to the actuarially
determined contribution2 (6,718,586) (6,320,224) (5,572,994) (4,906,333) (4,528,260) (4,131,687) (3,911,991)
Contribution deficiency (excess) -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$ -$
Covered payroll3 14,505,752$ 14,083,254$ 13,479,938$ 12,879,248$ 12,700,905$ 12,637,804$ 12,055,260$
Contributions as a percentage of covered
payroll3 46.32% 44.88% 41.34% 38.09% 35.65% 32.69% 32.45%
Notes to Schedule:
Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates:
Actuarial cost method Entry Age Normal Cost Method
Amortization method Level percentage of payroll
Asset valuation method Market value
Inflation 2.50%
Salary increases Varies by entry age and service
Payroll Growth 2.875%
Investment rate of return
Retirement age
Mortality
2 Employers are assumed to make contributions equal to the actuarially determined contributions. However, some employers may choose to make additional
contributions towards their unfunded liability. Employer contributions for such plans exceed the actuarially determined contributions.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Safety Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience study for
the period from 1997 to 2015.
The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience Study for
the period from 1997 to 2015. Pre-retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates
include 15 years of projected mortality improvement using 90% of Scale MP-2016
published by the Society of Actuaries.
7.15% net of pension plan investment expenses; includes Inflation.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
The actuarial methods and assumptions used to set the actuarially determined contributions for Fiscal Year 2019-20 were derived from the June 30, 2017 funding
valuation report.
98
2013-14 1
Actuarially determined contribution 3,844,918$
Contributions in relation to the actuarially
determined contribution2 (3,844,918)
Contribution deficiency (excess)-$
Covered payroll3 12,092,757$
Contributions as a percentage of covered
payroll3 31.80%
Notes to Schedule:
Methods and assumptions used to determine contribution rates:
Actuarial cost method Entry Age Normal Cost Method
Amortization method Level percentage of payroll
Asset valuation method Market value
Inflation 2.50%
Salary increases Varies by entry age and service
Payroll Growth 2.875%
Investment rate of return
Retirement age
Mortality
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
Schedule of Plan Contributions - Pension (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Last Ten Fiscal Years
California Public Employees' Retirement System Defined Pension Plan - Safety Plan
1 Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 68 is applicable.
The probabilities of retirement are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience study for
the period from 1997 to 2015.
The probabilities of mortality are based on the 2017 CalPERS Experience Study for
the period from 1997 to 2015. Pre-retirement and Post-retirement mortality rates
include 15 years of projected mortality improvement using 90% of Scale MP-2016
published by the Society of Actuaries.
2 Employers are assumed to make contributions equal to the actuarially determined contributions. However, some employers may choose to make additional
contributions towards their unfunded liability. Employer contributions for such plans exceed the actuarially determined contributions.
3 Includes one year’s payroll growth using 2.75 percent payroll growth assumption for fiscal years ended June 30, 2018-19; 3.00 percent payroll growth assumption
for fiscal years ended June 30, 2014-17.
The actuarial methods and assumptions used to set the actuarially determined contributions for Fiscal Year 2019-20 were derived from the June 30, 2017 funding
valuation report.
7.15% net of pension plan investment expenses; includes Inflation.
99
This page intentionally left blank.
100
Measurement period 2019-20 2018-19 2017-18 2016-17
Total OPEB liability
Service cost 906,127$ 697,310$ 723,000$ 832,000$
Interest 533,762 594,793 546,000 463,000
Actual vs. expected experience - (1,655,290) - -
Changes of assumptions 3,218,042 547,789 (625,000) (1,691,000)
Benefit payments, including refunds of employee contributions (500,729) (524,000) (491,000) (479,000)
Net change in total OPEB liability 4,157,202 (339,398) 153,000 (875,000)
Total OPEB liability - beginning 14,594,602 14,934,000 14,781,000 15,656,000
Total OPEB liability - ending (a)18,751,804$ 14,594,602$ 14,934,000$ 14,781,000$
Covered employee-payroll 3 28,912,941$ 29,906,910$ 27,610,000$ 26,626,000$
Plan net OPEB liability as a percentage of covered payroll 64.86% 48.80% 54.09% 55.51%
Notes to Schedule:
Benefit Changes:
There were no changes in benefits.
Changes in Assumptions:
The discount rate for the June 30, 2017 measurement date was increased to 3.58% from 2.85%.
The discount rate for the June 30, 2018 measurement date was increased to 3.87% from 3.58%.
The discount rate for the June 30, 2019 measurement date was decreased to 3.50% from 3.87%.
The discount rate for the June 30, 2020 measurement date was decreased to 2.21% from 3.50%
Plan assets:
There are no plan assets accumulated in a trust that meets the criteria of GASB to pay related benefits for the OPEB plan.
Historical information is presented only for measurement periods for which GASB 75 is applicable.
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Schedule of Changes in the Net OPEB Liability and Related Ratios
Required Supplementary Information (Unaudited)
City of Gilroy
Other Post Employment Benefit Plan
Last Ten Fiscal Years
101
Original Final Variance with
Budget Budget Actual Final Budget
REVENUES:
Taxes:
Property taxes 15,077,258$ 15,077,258$ 17,016,855$ 1,939,597$
Sales tax 21,411,869 21,411,869 18,296,221 (3,115,648)
Transient occupancy tax 1,955,955 1,955,955 1,105,300 (850,655)
Utility taxes 4,643,807 4,643,807 4,400,681 (243,126)
Franchise taxes 1,732,351 1,732,351 1,732,613 262
Document transfer tax 313,982 313,982 629,472 315,490
Motor vehicle in lieu tax 33,111 33,111 41,867 8,756
Total taxes 45,168,333 45,168,333 43,223,009 (1,945,324)
Intergovernmental:
Grants 143,500 143,500 244,556 101,056
Total intergovernmental
Charges for Services:
Administrative charges 2,289,048 2,289,048 2,040,609 (248,439)
Overhead to enterprise 447,799 447,799 459,171 11,372
Plan checks and inspections 2,604,871 2,604,871 4,550,708 1,945,837
Special planning services 500,000 500,000 458,761 (41,239)
Special police services 54,122 54,122 14,355 (39,767)
Special fire services 150,000 150,000 163,499 13,499
Community recreation 1,234,935 1,234,935 260,115 (974,820)
Total charges for services 7,280,775 7,280,775 7,947,218 666,443
Licenses and Permits:
Business licenses 713,987 713,987 540,234 (173,753)
Hazardous material permits 194,500 194,500 261,076 66,576
Building permits 2,694,783 2,694,783 1,437,490 (1,257,293)
Other licenses and permits 59,276 59,276 39,504 (19,772)
Total licenses and permits 3,662,546 3,662,546 2,278,304 (1,384,242)
Fines:
Vehicle fines 166,580 166,580 45,517 (121,063)
Parking fines 21,150 21,150 18,582 (2,568)
Abandoned vehicle 75,000 75,000 167,589 92,589
Total Fines 262,730 262,730 231,688 (31,042)
Investment income 500,890 500,890 (25,861) (526,751)
Miscellaneous:
Police and fire 490,536 490,536 865,811 375,275
Community services 116,800 116,800 113,664 (3,136)
Buildings 2,000 2,000 3,963 1,963
Other 466,140 466,140 995,884 529,744
Total Miscellaneous 1,075,476 1,075,476 1,979,322 903,846
Total Revenues 58,094,250 58,094,250 55,878,236 (2,216,014)
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information
Budgetary Comparison Schedule - General Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
102
Original Final Variance with
Budget Budget Actual Final Budget
EXPENDITURES:
General Government:
City council 224,523 214,823 218,221 (3,398)
City administration 2,144,509 1,622,415 1,398,664 223,751
Emergency services 4,020 1,100 180,937 (179,837)
Finance 783,915 689,843 709,869 (20,026)
General administration 1,510,635 1,510,635 1,616,786 (106,151)
City attorney 435,000 435,000 586,598 (151,598)
Personnel 1,415,622 1,257,254 985,879 271,375
Total general government 6,518,224 5,731,070 5,696,954 34,116
Public Safety:
Police administration 3,761,447 3,763,342 4,171,332 (407,990)
Police patrol operations 16,138,476 15,170,559 14,352,698 817,861
Police investigation 1,591,426 1,458,071 1,296,714 161,357
Communications 2,441,105 2,433,981 2,088,121 345,860
Police records 1,290,513 1,190,678 1,027,363 163,315
Fire administration 1,646,554 1,553,872 1,160,410 393,462
Fire operations 10,239,679 10,834,575 10,792,117 42,458
Total public safety 37,109,200 36,405,078 34,888,755 1,516,323
Public works:
Engineering 1,223,089 858,208 696,701 161,507
Street maintenance/forestry 1,276,596 1,193,645 1,236,216 (42,571)
Landscape maintenance 2,943,739 2,366,982 2,601,454 (234,472)
Total public works 5,443,424 4,418,835 4,534,371 (115,536)
Community development:
Administration 287,539 378,675 211,921 166,754
Planning 2,553,760 2,074,211 1,834,575 239,636
B.L.E.S.1,906,931 1,535,727 1,438,038 97,689
Chemical containment hazardous materials 625,789 493,400 506,022 (12,622)
Total community development 5,374,019 4,482,013 3,990,556 491,457
Recreation services:
Community recreation 3,928,008 2,777,721 1,702,666 1,075,055
Total recreation services 3,928,008 2,777,721 1,702,666 1,075,055
Capital outlay:
Capital outlay 273,869 785,869 213,465 572,404
Total capital outlay 273,869 785,869 213,465 572,404
TOTAL EXPENDITURES 58,646,744 54,600,586 51,026,767 3,573,819
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES (552,494) 3,493,664 4,851,469 1,357,805
OTHER FINANCING SOURCES:
Transfers in 182,000 182,000 334,031 152,031
Transfers out (282,884) (282,884) (397,146) (114,262)
Total other financing sources (100,884) (100,884) (63,115) 37,769
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE (653,378)$ 3,392,780$ 4,788,354 1,395,574$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 14,844,889
End of Year 19,633,243$
(Concluded)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information
Budgetary Comparison Schedule - General Fund (Continued)
103
This page intentionally left blank.
104
The City Administrator submits to the City Council a proposed budget for all funds. Council then proceeds to make any changes
to the proposed budget it deems necessary. Before adopting the proposed budget, Council holds a public hearing for any
interested party desiring to be heard. Notice must be given 10 days prior to the hearing and must be published in the City’s
official newspaper. After the conclusion of the public hearing, Council may further make revisions to the proposed budget.
Thereafter, Council adopts the budget with revisions, if any.
Legally adopted budgets for all governmental funds are established on a basis consistent with accounting principles generally
accepted in the United States of America. City Council approval is required for all revisions to the adopted budget that require
additional appropriations or new funding. City Administrator approval is required for all transfers within the adopted budget.
Operational appropriations lapse at fiscal year-end unless City Council takes formal action to carry forward appropriations into
the following fiscal year.
The level on which expenditures may not legally exceed appropriations is the fund level. The budgetary comparison schedules
are not presented for the Lease Revenue Bond Series 2020A Debt Service Fund.
City of Gilroy
Required Supplementary Information
Notes to the Budgetary Comparison Schedules
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Budget and Budgetary Accounting
105
This page intentionally left blank.
106
SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION
107
Original Final Variance with
Budget Budget Actual Final Budget
REVENUES:
Charges for services 6,194,926$ 6,194,926$ 4,325,852$ (1,869,074)$
Investment income 153,606 153,606 4,624 (148,982)
Miscellaneous - - 281,104 281,104
Total revenues 6,348,532 6,348,532 4,611,580 (1,736,952)
EXPENDITURES:
Current:
Public works 1,292,600 1,611,596 8,429 1,603,167
Debt service:
Interest and fiscal charges 58,715 58,715 91,343 (32,628)
Total expenditures 1,351,315 1,670,311 99,772 1,570,539
EXCESS OF REVENUES OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES 4,997,217 4,678,221 4,511,808 (166,413)
OTHER FINANCIN SOURCES (USES):
Transfers in 40,763 40,763 40,763 -
Transfers out (4,330,995) (4,330,995) (3,591,375) 739,620
Total other financing sources (uses)(4,290,232) (4,290,232) (3,550,612) 739,620
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE 706,985$ 387,989$ 961,196 573,207$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year (6,358,684)
End of Year (5,397,488)$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Public Facilities Impact Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
108
Community Development Block Grant - This fund is used to account for Housing and Urban Development grants used to operate
the Community Development Grant Program.
Rehabilitation Loans - This fund is used to account for loan proceeds used from the state for housing projects.
Housing Trust Fund - This fund is used to account for local funds used to address affordable housing and homelessness, for both
capital projects and services provided to homebuyers regarding down payment assistance and administrative oversight.
Community Facilities District - This fund is used to account for funds from special landscape assessment districts used to maintain
improvements of a public nature that provide benefits to the property owner.
Vehicle License Fee - This fund is used to account for vehicle license fees received from Santa Clara County to be used for
pavement maintenance, operations, signals, signs and markings.
Measure B - This fund is used to account for street and road maintenance and repair projects.
Traffic Impact - This fund is used to finance the construction of streets, bridges, interchanges and traffic signals within the City as
described in the City of Gilroy’s Circulation Element. Improvements and expansions of the City’s traffic circulation system are
needed to accommodate development of new residential, commercial and industrial uses with the City. The traffic impact fee is used
to expand system capacity to accommodate new development.
Storm Drains - This fund is used finance the construction of drainage collection and distribution systems within the City as described
in the City of Gilroy’s Storm Drain Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of the City’s storm drain system are needed to
accommodate development of new residential, commercial and industrial uses within the City. The storm drain development fee is
used to expand system capacity to accommodate new development.
Utility Undergrounding - This fund is used to allocate resources to underground existing overhead utilities (electricity, telephone
and cable) along fully constructed streets. The City collects the fee from developers as development occurs along these streets.
Street Trees Development - This fund is used to account for the collection of a front footage fee to plant trees in new developments.
Prop 172 Sales Tax - This fund is used to account for funds received from state sales tax used for public safety activities.
NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS
These funds account for revenue sources that are restricted for specific purposes (other than those resources to be expended solely for
the construction of major capital facilities).
Gas Tax - This fund is used to account for the City’s share of state gasoline tax required to be used for construction and maintenance
of the City’s road network system.
Pavement Management - This fund is used to account for County Measure A and other transportation grants used to repair and
rebuild various roads.
Public Safety Grants - This fund is used to account for state and federal grants used for public safety activities.
SPECIAL REVENUE FUNDS
BANS 2009 Financing -This fund is used to account for the 2009 short-term refinancing of the City’s public facilities debt. The
City included its cost for the Christopher High School joint use public facilities with GUSD in the refinancing.
Los Arroyos Fund - This fund is used to account for funds received from South County Housing to support future homebuyers in the
Los Arroyos neighborhood.
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS
These funds account for resources intended to be used primarily for major capital facilities (other than those financed by revenues of
proprietary funds).
Capital Projects -This fund is used to account for major capital projects other than those financed by revenues of proprietary funds,
including projects that are partially funded from other sources such as grants or fuel tax.
CalHome Funds - This fund is used to account funds received from South County Housing to support future homebuyers.
109
PERMANENT FUNDS
Museum Trust - This fund was established by the sale of a vase by the Gilroy Museum. The purpose in selling the vase was to create
an endowment for the museum. This would generate interest income for the museum.
Henry Miller - This fund is used to account for a donation from Henry Miller. The annual interest earned on the original donation of
$15,000 is the amount donated to the poor of Gilroy each Christmas season.
Lease Revenue Bonds Series 2020A - This fund is used to account for the payments of debt service of principal and interest for the
PFFA Lease Revenue 2020A Bonds.
Sewer Development - This fund is used to account for the construction of sewer collection and conveyance systems within the City
as described in the City of Gilroy’s Sewer Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of the City’s sewer system are needed to
accommodate development of new residential, commercial and industrial uses within the City. The sewer development fee is used to
expand system capacity to accommodate new development.
CA Energy Commission Loan -This fund is used to account for the payments of debt service of principal and interest for the loan
agreement between the CA Energy Commission (CEC) and the City for the Wide LED streetlight replacement project.
Gilroy Community Library -This fund is used to account for payments of the indebtedness of the refinanced 2019 series A and B
General Obligation Bonds for the Gilroy Community Library.
Water Development - This fund is used to account for the construction of water transmission, distribution and storage systems within
Pressure Zone 1 of the City’s water system as described in the City of Gilroy’s Water Master Plan. Improvements and expansions of
the City’s water system are needed to accommodate development of new residential, commercial and industrial uses within the City.
The water development fee is used to expand capacity to accommodate new development.
Refunding Lease 2010 -This fund is used to account for the payments of debt service of principal and interest for the PFFA
Refunding Lease 2010 Bonds.
2013 Refunding Bond -This fund is used to account for the payments of debt service of principal and interest for the 2013 Lease
Revenue Refunding Bonds.
Bank Interest - This fund is used to account for the interest earned on the citywide treasurer’s investment pool. Quarterly, the
earnings are allocated to the appropriate funds. At the end of the fiscal year, the earnings of those funds not subject to interest are
transferred to the Capital Projects Fund.
Gilroy Community Library - This fund is used to account for the acquisition, construction and improvement of facilities to be used
as a public library within the City. Funding was provided by issuance of general obligation bonds. Interest earned on specific LAIF
account will be recorded directly to the Library fund.
DEBT SERVICE FUNDS
These funds account for resources accumulated for the payment of principal and interest (other than that for proprietary fund debt).
NONMAJOR GOVERNMENTAL FUNDS (Continued)
CAPITAL PROJECTS FUNDS (Continued)
110
Public
Pavement Safety Prop 172
Gas Tax Management Grants Sales Tax
ASSETS
Cash and investments 6,157,416$ 178,466$ 291,149$ 13,946$
Receivables:
Accounts - - 34,381 -
Due from other governments 103,159 - 98,884 57,335
Interest - - - -
Loans - - - -
Advances from other funds - - - -
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - -
Total assets 6,260,575$ 178,466$ 424,414$ 71,281$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 695,200$ -$ 10,486$ -$
Accrued liabilities 14,383 - 26,183 -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities 709,583 - 36,669 -
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted 5,550,992 178,466 387,745 71,281
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 5,550,992 178,466 387,745 71,281
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 6,260,575$ 178,466$ 424,414$ 71,281$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Special Revenue Funds
111
Community Housing Community
Development Rehabilitation Trust Facilities
Block Grant Loans Fund District
ASSETS
Cash and investments -$ 230$ 740,604$ 1,388,841$
Receivables:
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments 73,460 - - -
Interest 395,011 - 320,760 -
Loans 1,712,075 - 1,322,080 -
Advances from other funds - - - -
Land held for resale - - 706,754 -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - -
Total assets 2,180,546$ 230$ 3,090,198$ 1,388,841$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 91,241$ -$ 41,577$ 3,722$
Accrued liabilities 8,621 - 15,473 22,246
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities 99,862 - 57,050 25,968
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues 401,363 - 320,760 -
Total deferred inflows of resources 401,363 - 320,760 -
Fund balances:
Restricted 1,679,321 230 2,712,388 1,362,873
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 1,679,321 230 2,712,388 1,362,873
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 2,180,546$ 230$ 3,090,198$ 1,388,841$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Special Revenue Funds
112
Vehicle
License Los Arroyos CalHome
Measure B Fee Fund Funds
ASSETS
Cash and investments 2,041,259$ 1,218,746$ 407,538$ 294,243$
Receivables:
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments - - - -
Interest - - - 57,765
Loans - - - 180,600
Advances from other funds - - - -
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - -
Total assets 2,041,259$ 1,218,746$ 407,538$ 532,608$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 123$ 533,258$ -$ -$
Accrued liabilities - - - -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - 238,365
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities 123 533,258 - 238,365
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted 2,041,136 685,488 407,538 294,243
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 2,041,136 685,488 407,538 294,243
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 2,041,259$ 1,218,746$ 407,538$ 532,608$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Special Revenue Funds
113
BANS
Capital 2009 Traffic Storm
Projects Financing Impact Drains
ASSETS
Cash and investments 5,404,205$ 34,968$ 14,342,877$ 1,143,471$
Receivables:
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments - - - -
Interest - - - -
Loans - - - -
Advances from other funds - - - 939,317
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - -
Total assets 5,404,205$ 34,968$ 14,342,877$ 2,082,788$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 27,435$ -$ 84,351$ 3,934$
Accrued liabilities 100,233 - - -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities 127,668 - 84,351 3,934
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted - 34,968 14,258,526 2,078,854
Assigned 5,276,537 - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 5,276,537 34,968 14,258,526 2,078,854
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 5,404,205$ 34,968$ 14,342,877$ 2,082,788$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Capital Projects Funds
114
Street
Utility Trees Sewer Water
Undergrounding Development Development Development
ASSETS
Cash and investments 8$ 139,092$ 12,891,194$ 5,106,671$
Receivables:
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments - - - -
Interest - - - -
Loans - - - -
Advances from other funds - - 1,427,388 -
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - -
Total assets 8$ 139,092$ 14,318,582$ 5,106,671$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable -$ -$ 3,934$ 4,604$
Accrued liabilities - - - -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - 1,132,239 -
Total liabilities - - 1,136,173 4,604
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted 8 139,092 13,182,409 5,102,067
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 8 139,092 13,182,409 5,102,067
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 8$ 139,092$ 14,318,582$ 5,106,671$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Capital Projects Funds
115
Gilroy Refunding 2013
Bank Community Lease Refunding
Interest Library 2010 Bond
ASSETS
Cash and investments -$ 5,254,686$ 65$ 86,833$
Receivables:
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments - 4,274 - -
Interest - - - -
Loans - - - -
Advances from other funds - - - -
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - - 920,288
Total assets -$ 5,258,960$ 65$ 1,007,121$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable 54$ -$ -$ -$
Accrued liabilities - - - -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities 54 - - -
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted - 5,258,960 65 1,007,121
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)(54) - - -
Total fund balances (54) 5,258,960 65 1,007,121
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances -$ 5,258,960$ 65$ 1,007,121$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Capital Projects Funds Debt Service Funds
116
Permanent Funds
Gilroy CA Energy Lease Revenue
Community Commission Bond Series Henry Miller
Library Loan 2020A Library
ASSETS
Cash and investments 1,237,715$ 20,033$ 675,110$ 15,053$
Receivables:- -
Accounts - - - -
Due from other governments - - - -
Interest - - - -
Loans - - - -
Advances from other funds - - - -
Land held for resale - - - -
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - - 3 -
Total assets 1,237,715$ 20,033$ 675,113$ 15,053$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable -$ -$ -$ -$
Accrued liabilities - - - -
Deposits payable - - - -
Unearned revenue - - - -
Due to the component unit - - - -
Total liabilities - - - -
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - - - -
Total deferred inflows of resources - - - -
Fund balances:
Restricted 1,237,715 20,033 675,113 15,053
Assigned - - - -
Unassigned (deficit)- - - -
Total fund balances 1,237,715 20,033 675,113 15,053
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 1,237,715$ 20,033$ 675,113$ 15,053$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
Debt Service Funds
117
Permanent Funds
Total Other
Museum Governmental
Trust Funds
ASSETS
Cash and investments 44,853$ 59,129,272$
Receivables:
Accounts - 34,381
Due from other governments - 337,112
Interest - 773,536
Loans - 3,214,755
Advances from other funds - 2,366,705
Land held for resale - 706,754
Restricted assets:
Cash and investments with fiscal agents - 920,291
Total assets 44,853$ 67,482,806$
LIABILITIES, DEFERRED INFLOWS OF
RESOURCES, AND FUND BALANCES
Liabilities:
Accounts payable -$ 1,499,919$
Accrued liabilities - 187,139
Deposits payable 35,299 35,299
Unearned revenue - 238,365
Due to the component unit - 1,132,239
Total liabilities 35,299 3,092,961
Deferred inflows of resources:
Unavailable revenues - 722,123
Total deferred inflows of resources - 722,123
Fund balances:
Restricted 9,554 58,391,239
Assigned - 5,276,537
Unassigned (deficit)- (54)
Total fund balances 9,554 63,667,722
Total liabilities, deferred inflows of
resources, and fund balances 44,853$ 67,482,806$
(Concluded)
City of Gilroy
Combining Balance Sheet (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
June 30, 2021
118
Public
Pavement Safety Prop 172
Gas Tax Management Grants Sales Tax
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ 288,314$
Intergovernmental 2,229,186 333,034 656,371 -
Charges for services - - - -
Investment income 34,558 308 2,486 80
Miscellaneous - - 90,678 -
Total revenues 2,263,744 333,342 749,535 288,394
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - - -
Public safety - - 716,554 250,874
Community development - - - -
Public works 551,141 - - -
Capital outlay 2,554,185 216,623 55,785 -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures 3,105,326 216,623 772,339 250,874
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (841,582) 116,719 (22,804) 37,520
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in - 8,119 118,965 -
Transfers out (107,363) - (197,168) (37,520)
Total other financing sources (uses)(107,363) 8,119 (78,203) (37,520)
Net Change in Fund Balances (948,945) 124,838 (101,007) -
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 6,499,937 53,628 488,752 71,281
End of year 5,550,992$ 178,466$ 387,745$ 71,281$
(Continued)
Special Revenue Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
119
Community Housing Community
Development Rehabilitation Trust Facilities
Block Grant Loans Fund District
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ 468,109$
Intergovernmental 684,138 - - -
Charges for services - - - -
Investment income 30,873 - 8,572 5,942
Miscellaneous 4,896 - 270,122 -
Total revenues 719,907 - 278,694 474,051
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - - -
Public safety - - - -
Community development 1,009,272 - 524,084 -
Public works - - - 346,346
Capital outlay 252,791 - - -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures 1,262,063 - 524,084 346,346
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (542,156) - (245,390) 127,705
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in 148,183 - 18,664 -
Transfers out (60,338) - - -
Total other financing sources (uses)87,845 - 18,664 -
Net Change in Fund Balances (454,311) - (226,726) 127,705
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 2,133,632 230 2,939,114 1,235,168
End of year 1,679,321$ 230$ 2,712,388$ 1,362,873$
(Continued)
Special Revenue Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
120
Vehicle
License Los Arroyos CalHome
Measure B Fee Fund Funds
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$
Intergovernmental 2,052,798 366,285 - 45,906
Charges for services - - - -
Investment income 7,135 6,568 2,013 1,206
Miscellaneous - - - 77,118
Total revenues 2,059,933 372,853 2,013 124,230
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - - -
Public safety - - - -
Community development - - - -
Public works 22,633 171,331 - -
Capital outlay - 651,470 - -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures 22,633 822,801 - -
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 2,037,300 (449,948) 2,013 124,230
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in - - - -
Transfers out - - - -
Total other financing sources (uses)- - - -
Net Change in Fund Balances 2,037,300 (449,948) 2,013 124,230
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 3,836 1,135,436 405,525 170,013
End of year 2,041,136$ 685,488$ 407,538$ 294,243$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Special Revenue Funds
121
BANS
Capital 2009 Traffic Storm
Projects Financing Impact Drains
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$
Intergovernmental - - - -
Charges for services - - 2,918,793 60,897
Investment income 31,445 173 63,221 19,030
Miscellaneous 113,900 - - -
Total revenues 145,345 173 2,982,014 79,927
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - - -
Public safety - - - -
Community development - - - -
Public works - - 124,404 48,787
Capital outlay 236,816 - 2,061,922 -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures 236,816 - 2,186,326 48,787
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (91,471) 173 795,688 31,140
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in - - 48,769 1,196
Transfers out - - - -
Total other financing sources (uses)- - 48,769 1,196
Net Change in Fund Balances (91,471) 173 844,457 32,336
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 5,368,008 34,795 13,414,069 2,046,518
End of year 5,276,537$ 34,968$ 14,258,526$ 2,078,854$
(Continued)
Capital Projects Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
122
Street
Utility Trees Sewer Water
Undergrounding Development Development Development
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$
Intergovernmental - - - -
Charges for services - 2,396 1,764,901 464,810
Investment income 35 681 80,738 23,833
Miscellaneous - - - -
Total revenues 35 3,077 1,845,639 488,643
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - - -
Public safety - - - -
Community development - - - -
Public works - - 1,375,571 48,709
Capital outlay - - - -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - -
Interest and fiscal charges - - - -
Total expenditures - - 1,375,571 48,709
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 35 3,077 470,068 439,934
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in - 27 28,351 5,893
Transfers out (8,119) - (692,875) -
Total other financing sources (uses)(8,119) 27 (664,524) 5,893
Net Change in Fund Balances (8,084) 3,104 (194,456) 445,827
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 8,092 135,988 13,376,865 4,656,240
End of year 8$ 139,092$ 13,182,409$ 5,102,067$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Capital Projects Funds
123
Gilroy Refunding 2013
Bank Community Lease Refunding
Interest Library 2010 Bond
Revenues:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ -$
Intergovernmental - - - -
Charges for services - - - -
Investment income - 29,303 20,224 787
Miscellaneous - - - -
Total revenues - 29,303 20,224 787
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - - 6,914 5,707
Public safety - - - -
Community development - - - -
Public works - - - -
Capital outlay - - - -
Debt service:
Principal retirement - - - 945,000
Interest and fiscal charges - - 463,382 891,669
Total expenditures - - 470,296 1,842,376
Revenues over (under)
expenditures - 29,303 (450,072) (1,841,589)
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - (17,555,000) -
Transfers in - - 17,969,653 1,845,169
Transfers out - - (1,892,247) -
Total other financing sources (uses)- - (1,477,594) 1,845,169
Net Change in Fund Balances - 29,303 (1,927,666) 3,580
Fund balances:
Beginning of year (54) 5,229,657 1,927,731 1,003,541
End of year (54)$ 5,258,960$ 65$ 1,007,121$
(Continued)
Capital Projects Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Debt Service Funds
124
Permanent Funds
Gilroy CA Energy Lease Revenue
Community Commission Bond Series Henry
Library Loan 2020A Miller
Revenues:
Taxes 1,937,065$ -$ -$ -$
Intergovernmental - - - -
Charges for services - - - -
Investment income 3,299 159 6,717 82
Miscellaneous - - 50,129 -
Total revenues 1,940,364 159 56,846 82
Expenditures:
Current:
General government 6,680 - 212,500 2,267
Public safety - - - -
Community development - - - -
Public works - - - -
Capital outlay - - - -
Debt service:
Principal retirement 990,810 91,515 790,000 -
Interest and fiscal charges 843,675 8,347 485,958 -
Total expenditures 1,841,165 99,862 1,488,458 2,267
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 99,199 (99,703) (1,431,612) (2,185)
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - - 16,459,825 -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - -
Transfers in - 99,863 3,638,453 -
Transfers out - - (17,969,653) -
Total other financing sources (uses)- 99,863 2,128,625 -
Net Change in Fund Balances 99,199 160 697,013 (2,185)
Fund balances:
Beginning of year, as restated (Note 16) 1,138,516 19,873 (21,900) 17,238
End of year 1,237,715$ 20,033$ 675,113$ 15,053$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Debt Service Funds
125
Permanent Funds
Total Other
Museum Governmental
Trust Funds
Revenues:
Taxes -$ 2,693,488$
Intergovernmental - 6,367,718
Charges for services - 5,211,797
Investment income 221 379,689
Miscellaneous - 606,843
Total revenues 221 15,259,535
Expenditures:
Current:
General government - 234,068
Public safety - 967,428
Community development - 1,533,356
Public works - 2,688,922
Capital outlay - 6,029,592
Debt service:
Principal retirement - 2,817,325
Interest and fiscal charges - 2,693,031
Total expenditures - 16,963,722
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 221 (1,704,187)
Other financing sources (uses):
Issuance of debt - 16,459,825
Payment to refunded bond escrow - (17,555,000)
Transfers in - 23,931,305
Transfers out - (20,965,283)
Total other financing sources (uses)- 1,870,847
Net Change in Fund Balances 221 166,660
Fund balances:
9,333 63,501,062 Beginning of year, as restated (Note 16)
End of year 9,554$ 63,667,722$
(Concluded)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balances (Continued)
Nonmajor Governmental Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
126
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental 2,007,500$ 2,007,500$ 2,229,186$ 221,686$
Investment income 114,872 114,872 34,558 (80,314)
Total Revenues 2,122,372 2,122,372 2,263,744 141,372
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 1,509,089 4,654,107 551,141 4,102,966
Capital outlay 1,047,000 2,481,414 2,554,185 (72,771)
Total Expenditures 2,556,089 7,135,521 3,105,326 4,030,195
REVENUE OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES (433,717) (5,013,149) (841,582) 4,171,567
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers out (107,363) (107,363) (107,363) -
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)(107,363) (107,363) (107,363) -
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE (541,080)$ (5,120,512)$ (948,945) 4,171,567$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 6,499,937
End of Year 5,550,992$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Budgeted Amounts
Gas Tax Special Revenue Fund
127
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental -$ -$ 333,034$ 333,034$
Investment income - - 308 308
Total Revenues - - 333,342 333,342
Expenditures:
Capital outlay - 304,385 216,623 87,762
Total Expenditures - 304,385 216,623 87,762
REVENUE OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES - (304,385) 116,719 421,104
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers in - - 8,119 8,119
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)- - 8,119 8,119
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE -$ (304,385)$ 124,838 429,223$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 53,628
End of Year 178,466$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Pavement Management Special Revenue Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Budgeted Amounts
128
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental 551,800$ 1,027,656$ 656,371$ (371,285)$
Investment income 11,043 11,043 2,486 (8,557)
Miscellaneous - - 90,678 90,678
Total Revenues 562,843 1,038,699 749,535 (289,164)
Expenditures:
Current:
Public safety 614,686 1,009,183 716,554 292,629
Capital outlay - 126,000 55,785 70,215
Total Expenditures 614,686 1,135,183 772,339 362,844
REVENUE OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES (51,843) (96,484) (22,804) 73,680
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers in 157,885 157,885 118,965 (38,920)
Transfers out (100,000) (100,000) (197,168) (97,168)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)57,885 57,885 (78,203) (136,088)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE 6,042$ (38,599)$ (101,007) (62,408)$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 488,752
End of Year 387,745$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Public Safety Grants Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
129
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Taxes 261,000$ 261,000$ 288,314$ 27,314$
Investment income 723 723 80 (643)
Total Revenues 261,723 261,723 288,394 26,671
Expenditures:
Current:
Public safety 258,129 258,129 250,874 7,255
Total Expenditures 258,129 258,129 250,874 7,255
REVENUE OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES 3,594 3,594 37,520 33,926
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers out - - (37,520) (37,520)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)- - (37,520) (37,520)
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE 3,594$ 3,594$ - (3,594)$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 71,281
End of Year 71,281$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Prop 172 Sales Tax Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
130
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental 509,869$ 509,869$ 684,138$ 174,269$
Investment income 9,009 9,009 30,873 21,864
Miscellaneous - - 4,896 4,896
Total Revenues 518,878 518,878 719,907 201,029
Expenditures:
Current:
Community development 253,807 319,807 1,009,272 (689,465)
Capital outlay - 169,000 252,791 (83,791)
Total expenditures 253,807 488,807 1,262,063 (773,256)
REVENUE OVER
(UNDER) EXPENDITURES 265,071 30,071 (542,156) (572,227)
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers in - - 148,183 148,183
Transfers out (53,500) (53,500) (60,338) (6,838)
Total Other Financing Sources (Uses)(53,500) (53,500) 87,845 141,345
NET CHANGE IN FUND BALANCE 211,571$ (23,429)$ (454,311) (430,882)$
FUND BALANCE:
Beginning of Year 2,133,632
End of Year 1,679,321$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Community Development Block Grant Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
131
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 5$ 5$ -$ (5)$
Total revenues 5 5 - (5)
Net Change in Fund Balances 5$ 5$ - (5)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 230
End of year 230$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Rehabilitation Loans Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
132
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 31,441$ 31,441$ 8,572$ (22,869)$
Miscellaneous 55,000 55,000 270,122 215,122
Total revenues 86,441 86,441 278,694 192,253
Expenditures:
Current:
Community development 150,883 150,883 524,084 (373,201)
Total expenditures 150,883 150,883 524,084 (373,201)
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (64,442) (64,442) (245,390) (180,948)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in - - 18,664 18,664
Total other financing sources (uses)- - 18,664 18,664
Net Change in Fund Balances (64,442)$ (64,442)$ (226,726) (162,284)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 2,939,114
End of year 2,712,388$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Housing Trust Fund Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
133
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Taxes 380,000$ 380,000$ 468,109$ 88,109$
Investment income 16,855 16,855 5,942 (10,913)
Total revenues 396,855 396,855 474,051 77,196
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 369,477 371,091 346,346 24,745
Total expenditures 369,477 371,091 346,346 24,745
Net Change in Fund Balances 27,378$ 25,764$ 127,705 101,941$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 1,235,168
End of year 1,362,873$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Community Facilities District Special Revenue Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
134
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental 1,000,804$ 1,000,804$ 2,052,798$ 1,051,994$
Investment income - - 7,135 7,135
Total revenues 1,000,804 1,000,804 2,059,933 1,059,129
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 1,000,804 1,000,804 22,633 978,171
Total expenditures 1,000,804 1,000,804 22,633 978,171
Net Change in Fund Balances -$ -$ 2,037,300 2,037,300$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 3,836
End of year 2,041,136$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Measure B Special Revenue Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
135
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental 320,000$ 320,000$ 366,285$ 46,285$
Investment income 37,126 37,126 6,568 (30,558)
Total revenues 357,126 357,126 372,853 15,727
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 20,000 450,700 171,331 279,369
Capital outlay 235,100 849,650 651,470 198,180
Total expenditures 255,100 1,300,350 822,801 477,549
Net Change in Fund Balances 102,026$ (943,224)$ (449,948) 493,276$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 1,135,436
End of year 685,488$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Vehicle License Fee Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
136
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 7,634 7,634 2,013 (5,621)
Net Change in Fund Balances 7,634$ 7,634$ 2,013 (5,621)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 405,525
End of year 407,538$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Los Arroyos Fund Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
137
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Intergovernmental -$ -$ 45,906$ 45,906$
Investment income 2,220 2,220 1,206 (1,014)
Miscellaneous - - 77,118 77,118
Total revenues 2,220 2,220 124,230 122,010
Net Change in Fund Balances 2,220$ 2,220$ 124,230 122,010$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 170,013
End of year 294,243$
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
CalHome Funds Special Revenue Fund
Budgeted Amounts
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
138
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 34,815$ 34,815$ 31,445$ (3,370)$
Miscellaneous - - 113,900 113,900
Total revenues 34,815 34,815 145,345 110,530
Expenditures:
Capital outlay - 307,270 236,816 70,454
Total expenditures - 307,270 236,816 70,454
Net Change in Fund Balances 34,815$ (272,455)$ (91,471) 180,984$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 5,368,008
End of year 5,276,537$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
139
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 276$ 276$ 173$ (103)$
Total revenues 276 276 173 (103)
Net Change in Fund Balances 276$ 276$ 173 (103)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 34,795
End of year 34,968$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
BANS 2009 Financing Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
140
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Charges for services 3,776,744$ 3,776,744$ 2,918,793$ (857,951)$
Investment income 302,924 302,924 63,221 (239,703)
Total revenues 4,079,668 4,079,668 2,982,014 (1,097,654)
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 10,296 1,201,782 124,404 1,077,378
Capital outlay 594,000 1,928,355 2,061,922 (133,567)
Total expenditures 604,296 3,130,137 2,186,326 943,811
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 3,475,372 949,531 795,688 (153,843)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 48,769 48,769 48,769 -
Total other financing sources (uses)48,769 48,769 48,769 -
Net Change in Fund Balances 3,524,141$ 998,300$ 844,457 (153,843)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 13,414,069
End of year 14,258,526$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Traffic Impact Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
141
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Charges for services 52,931$ 52,931$ 60,897$ 7,966$
Investment income 27,234 27,234 19,030 (8,204)
Total revenues 80,165 80,165 79,927 (238)
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 155,155 362,509 48,787 313,722
Total expenditures 155,155 362,509 48,787 313,722
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (74,990) (282,344) 31,140 313,484
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 68,831 68,831 1,196 (67,635)
Total other financing sources (uses)68,831 68,831 1,196 (67,635)
Net Change in Fund Balances (6,159)$ (213,513)$ 32,336 245,849$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 2,046,518
End of year 2,078,854$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Storm Drains Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
142
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 181$ 181$ 35$ (146)$
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers out - - (8,119) (8,119)
Total other financing sources (uses)- - (8,119) (8,119)
Net Change in Fund Balances 181$ 181$ (8,084) (8,265)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 8,092
End of year 8$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Utility Undergrounding Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
143
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Charges for services 2,600$ 2,600$ 2,396$ (204)$
Investment income 3,032 3,032 681 (2,351)
Total revenues 5,632 5,632 3,077 (2,555)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 27 27 27 -
Total other financing sources (uses)27 27 27 -
Net Change in Fund Balances 5,659$ 5,659$ 3,104 (2,555)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 135,988
End of year 139,092$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Street Trees Development Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
144
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Charges for services 2,376,306$ 2,376,306$ 1,764,901$ (611,405)$
Investment income 321,166 321,166 80,738 (240,428)
Total revenues 2,697,472 2,697,472 1,845,639 (851,833)
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 508,078 584,601 1,375,571 (790,970)
Total expenditures 508,078 584,601 1,375,571 (790,970)
Revenues over (under)
expenditures 2,189,394 2,112,871 470,068 (1,642,803)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 352,847 352,847 28,351 (324,496)
Transfers out (694,146) (694,146) (692,875) 1,271
Total other financing sources (uses)(341,299) (341,299) (664,524) (323,225)
Net Change in Fund Balances 1,848,095$ 1,771,572$ (194,456) (1,966,028)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 13,376,865
End of year 13,182,409$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Sewer Development Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
145
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Charges for services 608,015$ 608,015$ 464,810$ (143,205)$
Investment income 102,996 102,996 23,833 (79,163)
Total revenues 711,011 711,011 488,643 (222,368)
Expenditures:
Current:
Public works 2,902,219 4,467,920 48,709 4,419,211
Total expenditures 2,902,219 4,467,920 48,709 4,419,211
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (2,191,208) (3,756,909) 439,934 4,196,843
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 5,893 5,893 5,893 -
Total other financing sources (uses)5,893 5,893 5,893 -
Net Change in Fund Balances (2,185,315)$ (3,751,016)$ 445,827 4,196,843$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 4,656,240
End of year 5,102,067$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Water Development Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
146
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 3$ 3$ -$ (3)$
Total revenues 3 3 - (3)
Net Change in Fund Balances 3$ 3$ - (3)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year (54)
End of year (54)$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Bank Interest Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
147
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 89,485$ 89,485$ 29,303$ (60,182)$
Total revenues 89,485 89,485 29,303 (60,182)
Net Change in Fund Balances 89,485$ 89,485$ 29,303 (60,182)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 5,229,657
End of year 5,258,960$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Gilroy Community Library Capital Projects Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
148
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 62,500$ 62,500$ 20,224$ (42,276)$
Total revenues 62,500 62,500 20,224 (42,276)
Expenditures:
Current:
General government 5,500 5,500 6,914 (1,414)
Debt service:
Interest and fiscal charges 810,706 810,707 463,382 347,325
Total expenditures 816,206 816,207 470,296 345,911
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (753,706) (753,707) (450,072) 303,635
Other financing sources (uses):
Payment to refunded bond escrow (930,000) (930,000) (17,555,000) (16,625,000)
Transfers in 1,746,206 1,746,206 17,969,653 16,223,447
Transfers out - - (1,892,247) (1,892,247)
Total other financing sources (uses)816,206 816,206 (1,477,594) (2,293,800)
Net Change in Fund Balances 62,500$ 62,499$ (1,927,666) (1,990,165)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 1,927,731
End of year 65$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Refunding Lease 2010 Debt Service Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
149
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income -$ -$ 787$ 787$
Total revenues - - 787 787
Expenditures:
Current:
General government 8,500 8,500 5,707 2,793
Debt service:
Principal retirement 945,000 945,000 945,000 -
Interest and fiscal charges 891,669 891,669 891,669 -
Total expenditures 1,845,169 1,845,169 1,842,376 2,793
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (1,845,169) (1,845,169) (1,841,589) 3,580
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 1,845,169 1,845,169 1,845,169 -
Total other financing sources (uses)1,845,169 1,845,169 1,845,169 -
Net Change in Fund Balances -$ -$ 3,580 3,580$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 1,003,541
End of year 1,007,121$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
2013 Refunding Bond Debt Service Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
150
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Taxes 2,110,683$ 2,110,683$ 1,937,065$ (173,618)$
Investment income 27,179 27,179 3,299 (23,880)
Total revenues 2,137,862 2,137,862 1,940,364 (197,498)
Expenditures:
Current:
General government 5,200 5,200 6,680 (1,480)
Debt service:
Principal retirement 890,000 890,000 990,810 (100,810)
Interest and fiscal charges 1,215,483 1,215,483 843,675 371,808
Total expenditures 2,110,683 2,110,683 1,841,165 269,518
Net Change in Fund Balances 27,179$ 27,179$ 99,199 72,020$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 1,138,516
End of year 1,237,715$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
Gilroy Community Library Debt Service Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
151
Variance with
Final Budget
Actual Positive
Original Final Amounts (Negative)
Revenues:
Investment income 822$ 822$ 159$ (663)$
Total revenues 822 822 159 (663)
Expenditures:
Debt service:
Principal retirement 91,516 91,515 91,515 -
Interest and fiscal charges 8,347 8,347 8,347 -
Total expenditures 99,863 99,862 99,862 -
Revenues over (under)
expenditures (99,041) (99,040) (99,703) (663)
Other financing sources (uses):
Transfers in 99,863 99,863 99,863 -
Total other financing sources (uses)99,863 99,863 99,863 -
Net Change in Fund Balances 822$ 823$ 160 (663)$
Fund balances:
Beginning of year 19,873
End of year 20,033$
Budgeted Amounts
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Revenues, Expenditures, and Changes in Fund Balance - Budget and Actual
CA Energy Commission Loan Debt Service Fund
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
152
General Liability -This fund is used to account for all expenses relating to the City’s general liability insurance. The costs are
recovered through an annual “user fee” which is charged to various funds.
INTERNAL SERVICE FUNDS
These funds account for goods or services provided to other departments of the City where the intent of the City is that the costs of
these goods or services are to be recovered through interdepartmental charges at the time that the goods are delivered or the services
rendered to those departments.
Fleet Services -This fund is used to account for the operations required to maintain the City’s vehicles. The costs are recovered
through an annual “user fee” which is charged to all departments/funds that have vehicle use. This fund also provides funding for
replacement of all the City’s vehicles on an “as needed” basis.
Equipment Outlay -This fund is used to allocate resources intended for the purchase of General Fund equipment costing more than
$1,000.
Workers’ Compensation - This fund is used to account for all expenses relating to workers’ compensation (i.e., injury claims,
insurance premiums, etc.). The costs are recovered through an annual “user fee” which is charged to all departments/funds that have
employees.
Facility Services -This fund is used to account for all expenses relating to the operation and maintenance of City facilities. The costs
are recovered through an annual “user fee” which is charged to all departments/funds that have facilities.
Information Technologies -This fund is used to account for all expenses relating to computer hardware, software, maintenance,
capital purchasing and other service charges. The costs are recovered through an annual “user fee” which is charged to all
departments/funds that have computer equipment.
Fringe Benefits -This fund is used for City paid benefits which are charged. Examples include medical, dental, disability,
unemployment, life insurance and retirement including PERS and PARS. These benefit costs are allocated to the funds based on
budget for three quarters and then reconciled to actual in the fourth quarter.
153
Fleet Equipment Workers' General
Services Outlay Compensation Liability
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and investments 3,694,735$ 2,500,756$ 3,742,855$ 2,960,256$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent - - - -
Accounts receivable - - - -
Inventory 43,575 - - -
Prepaid items - - - -
Total current assets 3,738,310 2,500,756 3,742,855 2,960,256
Noncurrent assets:
Interfund loans receivable 2,989,892 901,150 - -
Capital assets:
Nondepreciable 7,999 4,404 - -
Depreciable, net 3,932,213 482,476 - -
Total capital assets 3,940,212 486,880 - -
Total noncurrent assets 6,930,104 1,388,030 - -
Total assets 10,668,414 3,888,786 3,742,855 2,960,256
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable 208,520 41,713 - 43,912
Accrued liabilities 27,746 732 - 386
Compensated absences, current portion 1,800 - - -
Claims payable, current portion - - 970,000 470,000
Total current liabilities 238,066 42,445 970,000 514,298
Noncurrent liabilities:
Compensated absences 16,563 - - -
Claims payable - - 2,622,854 2,295,958
Total noncurrent liabilities 16,563 - 2,622,854 2,295,958
Total liabilities 254,629 42,445 3,592,854 2,810,256
NET POSITION:
Investment in capital assets 3,940,212 486,880 - -
Unrestricted 6,473,573 3,359,461 150,001 150,000
Total net position 10,413,785$ 3,846,341$ 150,001$ 150,000$
(Continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Net Position
Internal Service Funds
June 30, 2021
LIABILITIES
154
Facility Information Fringe
Services Technologies Benefits Total
ASSETS
Current assets:
Cash and investments 1,943,261$ 4,633,048 458,346$ 19,933,257$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent - - 2,000,000 2,000,000
Accounts receivable 17,252 - - 17,252
Inventory - - - 43,575
Prepaid items - 12,084 - 12,084
Total current assets 1,960,513 4,645,132 2,458,346 22,006,168
Noncurrent assets:
Interfund loans receivable - - - 3,891,042
Capital assets:
Nondepreciable - 1,746,423 - 1,758,826
Depreciable, net - 214,202 - 4,628,891
Total capital assets - 1,960,625 - 6,387,717
Total noncurrent assets - 1,960,625 - 10,278,759
Total assets 1,960,513 6,605,757 2,458,346 32,284,927
Current Liabilities:
Accounts payable 116,616 369,109 2,959 782,829
Accrued liabilities 56,446 39,682 459,083 584,075
Compensated absences, current portion 3,400 3,900 - 9,100
Claims payable, current portion - - - 1,440,000
Total current liabilities 176,462 412,691 462,042 2,816,004
Noncurrent liabilities:
Compensated absences 31,001 34,820 - 82,384
Claims payable - - - 4,918,812
Total noncurrent liabilities 31,001 34,820 - 5,001,196
Total liabilities 207,463 447,511 462,042 7,817,200
NET POSITION:
Investment in capital assets - 1,960,625 - 6,387,717
Unrestricted 1,753,050 4,197,621 1,996,304 18,080,010
TOTAL NET POSITION 1,753,050$ 6,158,246$ 1,996,304$ 24,467,727$
(Concluded)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Net Position (Continued)
Internal Service Funds
June 30, 2021
LIABILITIES
155
Fleet Equipment Workers' General
Services Outlay Compensation Liability
OPERATING REVENUES:
Charges for services 1,930,538$ 125,923$ 1,292,484$ 1,264,785$
Miscellaneous - - - 1,078,386
Total operating revenues 1,930,538 125,923 1,292,484 2,343,171
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Current:
Operations 1,607,004 209,285 - -
Depreciation 506,335 108,833 - -
Administration - - 196,038 86,216
Claims and judgments - - 1,397,737 2,380,120
Insurance premiums - - 276,239 1,187,706
Total operating expenses 2,113,339 318,118 1,870,014 3,654,042
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)(182,801) (192,195) (577,530) (1,310,871)
NONOPERATING REVENUES:
Investment income 59,389 25,118 17,073 9,136
Total nonoperating revenues 59,389 25,118 17,073 9,136
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS (123,412) (167,077) (560,457) (1,301,735)
TRANSFERS:
Transfers in 5,000 - - -
Total transfers 5,000 - - -
CHANGES IN NET POSITION (118,412) (167,077) (560,457) (1,301,735)
NET POSITION:
Beginning of year 10,532,197 4,013,418 710,458 1,451,735
End of year 10,413,785$ 3,846,341$ 150,001$ 150,000$
(Continued)
Internal Service Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position
156
Facility Information Fringe
Services Technologies Benefits Total
OPERATING REVENUES:
Charges for services 2,487,387$ 2,901,398$ 16,580,827$ 26,583,342$
Miscellaneous 546,628 3,600 - 1,628,614
Total operating revenues 3,034,015 2,904,998 16,580,827 28,211,956
OPERATING EXPENSES:
Current:
Operations 2,806,186 2,973,302 16,584,733 24,180,510
Depreciation - 92,350 - 707,518
Administration 745 - - 282,999
Claims and judgments - - - 3,777,857
Insurance premiums - - - 1,463,945
Total operating expenses 2,806,931 3,065,652 16,584,733 30,412,829
OPERATING INCOME (LOSS)227,084 (160,654) (3,906) (2,200,873)
NONOPERATING REVENUES:
Investment income 7,916 25,990 - 144,622
Total nonoperating revenues 7,916 25,990 - 144,622
INCOME (LOSS) BEFORE TRANSFERS 235,000 (134,664) (3,906) (2,056,251)
TRANSFERS:
Transfers in - 1,584 - 6,584
Total transfers - 1,584 - 6,584
CHANGES IN NET POSITION 235,000 (133,080) (3,906) (2,049,667)
NET POSITION:
Beginning of year 1,518,050 6,291,326 2,000,210 26,517,394
End of year 1,753,050$ 6,158,246$ 1,996,304$ 24,467,727$
(Concluded)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Revenues, Expenses, and Changes in Net Position (Continued)
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
Internal Service Funds
157
Fleet Equipment Workers' General
Services Outlay Compensation Liability
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Cash received from customers and users 1,930,538$ 125,923$ 1,292,484$ 2,343,171$
Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services (1,110,506) (206,735) (196,807) (62,151)
Cash paid to employees for services (503,175) 732 - (24,190)
Cash paid for insurance claims - - (1,013,518) (1,491,917)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 316,857 (80,080) 82,159 764,913
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Cash received from other funds 235,872 116,617 - -
Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities 235,872 116,617 - -
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Acquisition of capital assets (275,777) (63,790) - -
Net cash (used in) capital and related
financing activities (275,777) (63,790) - -
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Interest received 59,389 25,118 17,073 9,136
Net cash provided by investing activities 59,389 25,118 17,073 9,136
Net change in cash and cash equivalents 336,341 (2,135) 99,232 774,049
RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
TO STATEMENTOF NET POSITION:
Beginning of year 3,358,394 2,502,891 3,643,623 2,186,207
End of year 3,694,735$ 2,500,756$ 3,742,855$ 2,960,256$
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:
Cash and investments 3,694,735$ 2,500,756$ 3,742,855$ 2,960,256$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent - - - -
Total cash and cash equivalents 3,694,735$ 2,500,756$ 3,742,855$ 2,960,256$
Reconciliation of Operating Income (Loss) to
to Net Cash Provided by (used in) Operating Activities:
Operating income (loss) (182,801)$ (192,195)$ (577,530)$ (1,310,871)$
Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss)
to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation 506,335 108,833 - -
Changes in assets and liabilities:
(Increase)/decrease in accounts receivables - - - -
(Increase)/decrease in inventory (4,602) - - -
(Increase)/decrease in prepaid items - - - -
Increase/(decrease) in accounts payable 70,454 2,550 (33) 24,065
Increase/(decrease) in accrued liabilities (29,379) 732 (736) (24,190)
Increase/(decrease) in compensated absences (43,150) - - -
Increase/(decrease) in claims payable - - 660,458 2,075,909
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 316,857$ (80,080)$ 82,159$ 764,913$
(continued)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Cash Flows
Internal Service Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
158
Facility Information Fringe
Services Technologies Benefits Total
CASH FLOWS FROM OPERATING ACTIVITIES
Cash received from customers and users 3,049,963$ 2,904,998$ 16,580,827$ 28,227,904$
Cash paid to suppliers for goods and services (2,234,187) (2,114,556) (16,657,538) (22,582,480)
Cash paid to employees for services (677,517) (660,565) - (1,864,715)
Cash paid for insurance claims - - - (2,505,435)
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 138,259 129,877 (76,711) 1,275,274
CASH FLOWS FROM NONCAPITAL
FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Cash received from other funds - 1,584 - 354,073
Net cash provided by noncapital financing activities - 1,584 - 354,073
CASH FLOWS FROM CAPITAL AND
RELATED FINANCING ACTIVITIES:
Acquisition of capital assets - (781,608) - (1,121,175)
Net cash (used in) capital and related
financing activities - (781,608) - (1,121,175)
CASH FLOWS FROM INVESTING ACTIVITIES:
Interest received 7,916 25,990 - 144,622
Net cash provided by investing activities 7,916 25,990 - 144,622
Net change in cash and cash equivalents 146,175 (624,157) (76,711) 652,794
RECONCILIATION OF CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS
TO STATEMENTOF NET POSITION:
Beginning of year 1,797,086 5,257,205 2,535,057 21,280,463
End of year 1,943,261$ 4,633,048$ 2,458,346$ 21,933,257$
CASH AND CASH EQUIVALENTS:
Cash and investments 1,943,261$ 4,633,048$ 458,346$ 19,933,257$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent - - 2,000,000 2,000,000
Total cash and cash equivalents 1,943,261$ 4,633,048$ 2,458,346$ 21,933,257$
Reconciliation of Operating Income (Loss) to
to Net Cash Provided by (used in) Operating Activities:
Operating income (loss) 227,084$ (160,654)$ (3,906)$ (2,200,873)$
Adjustments to reconcile operating income (loss)
to net cash provided by (used in) operating activities:
Depreciation - 92,350 - 707,518
Changes in assets and liabilities:
(Increase)/decrease in accounts receivables 15,948 - - 15,948
(Increase)/decrease in inventory - - - (4,602)
(Increase)/decrease in prepaid items - 80,160 - 80,160
Increase/(decrease) in accounts payable (107,803) 133,173 (622) 121,784
Increase/(decrease) in accrued liabilities (189) (26,568) (72,183) (152,513)
Increase/(decrease) in compensated absences 3,219 11,416 - (28,515)
Increase/(decrease) in claims payable - - - 2,736,367
Net cash provided by (used in) operating activities 138,259$ 129,877$ (76,711)$ 1,275,274$
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Cash Flows (Continued)
Internal Service Funds
For the Year Ended June 30, 2021
159
This page intentionally left blank.
160
These funds account for assets held by the City on behalf of other organizations.
Fiduciary Funds
Senior Advisory Board - This fund is used to account for revenues that come from fundraising and donations. The funds are used
to buy equipment for the Senior Center.
Highway 152 Series 2002 - This fund is used to account for special assessments collected and pay the bonded indebtedness for the
Highway 152 Series 2002 improvements.
Highway 152 Series 2006 - This fund is used to account for special assessments collected and pay the bonded indebtedness for the
Highway 152 Series 2006 improvements.
Highway 152 Series 2018 - This fund is used to account for special assessments collected and pay the bonded indebtedness for the
Highway 152 Series 2018 Bonds.
Custodial Funds
161
Senior
Advisory Highway 152 Highway 152 Highway 152
Board Series 2002 Series 2006 Series 2018
Assets:
Cash and investments 8,386$ -$ -$ 808,042$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent - - - 290,613
Total Assets 8,386 - - 1,098,655
Net Position:
Restricted for:
Individuals, organizations, and other governments 8,386 - - 1,098,655
Total Net Position 8,386$ -$ -$ 1,098,655$
(Continued)
Custodial Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Position
Fiduciary Funds
June 30, 2021
162
Total
Assets:
Cash and investments 816,428$
Cash and investments with fiscal agent 290,613
Total Assets 1,107,041
Net Position:
Restricted for:
Individuals, organizations, and other governments 1,107,041
Total Net Position 1,107,041$
(Concluded)
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Fiduciary Net Position (Continued)
Fiduciary Funds
June 30, 2021
163
Senior
Advisory Highway 152 Highway 152 Highway 152
Board Series 2002 Series 2006 Series 2018
REVENUES:
Taxes -$ -$ -$ 920,975$
Transfer from other custodial fund - - - 1,253
Investment income 41 - - 954
Total additions 41 - - 923,182
EXPENDITURES:
General administration - - - 27,042
Transfer to other custodial fund - 544 709 -
Payments on conduit bonds - principal - - - 651,251
Payments on conduit bonds - interest - - - 228,952
Total deductions - 544 709 907,245
CHANGE IN NET POSITION 41 (544) (709) 15,937
NET POSITION:
Beginning of year, as restated 8,345 544 709 1,082,718
End of year 8,386$ -$ -$ 1,098,655$
(Continued)
June 30, 2021
Custodial Funds
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position
Fiduciary Funds
164
Total
REVENUES:
Taxes 920,975$
Transfer from other custodial fund 1,253
Investment income 995
Total additions 923,223
EXPENDITURES:
General administration 27,042
Transfer to other custodial fund 1,253
Payments on conduit bonds - principal 651,251
Payments on conduit bonds - interest 228,952
Total deductions 908,498
CHANGE IN NET POSITION 14,725
NET POSITION:
Beginning of year, as restated 1,092,316
End of year 1,107,041$
(Concluded)
June 30, 2021
City of Gilroy
Combining Statement of Changes in Fiduciary Net Position (Continued)
Fiduciary Funds
165
This page intentionally left blank.
166
STATISTICAL
SECTION
Contents Page
Financial Trends 170 - 178
Revenue Capacity 180 - 189
Debt Capacity 190 - 197
Demographic and Economic Information 198 - 199
Operating Information 201 - 205
STATISTICAL SECTION
(Unaudited)
This part of the City of Gilroy's comprehensive annual financial report presents detailed information as a context for understanding
what the information in the financial statements, note disclosures, and required supplementary information says about the City's
overall financial health.
These tables contain trend information to help the reader understand how the City's financial
performance and well-being have changed over time.
Sources: Unless otherwise noted, the information in these tables is derived from the comprehensive
annual financial reports for the relevant year.
These tables contain information to help the reader assess the City's most significant local
revenue source, the property tax.
These tables present information to help the reader assess the affordability of the City's current
levels of outstanding debt and the City's ability to issue additional debt in the future.
These tables offer demographic and economic indicators to help the reader understand the
environment within which the City's financial activities take place.
These tables contain service and infrastructure data to help the reader understand how the
information in the City's financial report relates to the services the City provides and the
activities it performs.
169
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Governmental Activities:
Net investment in capital assets 180,031,582$ 170,944,637$ 162,950,296$ 167,625,947.00$ 159,684,128$
Restricted 19,257,961 19,616,322 24,277,233 22,320,085.00 35,564,991
Unrestricted 25,031,844 26,414,676 28,892,199 (26,524,001) (25,032,197)
Total governmental activities net position 224,321,387 216,975,635 216,119,728 163,422,031 170,216,922
Business-type Activities:
Net investment in capital assets 93,390,622 91,165,074 88,728,174 90,335,349 90,917,108
Restricted - - - - -
UUnrestricted 79,652,868 82,012,944 85,736,094 84,832,390 88,668,400
Total business-type activities net position 173,043,490 173,178,018 174,464,268 175,167,739 179,585,508
Primary Government:
Net investment in capital assets 273,422,204 262,109,711 251,678,470 257,961,296 250,601,236
Restricted 19,257,961 19,616,322 24,277,233 22,320,085 35,564,991
UUnrestricted 104,684,712 108,427,620 114,628,293 58,308,389 63,636,203
Total primary government net position 397,364,877$ 390,153,653$ 390,583,996$ 338,589,770$ 349,802,430$
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Net Position By Component
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
170
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Governmental Activities:
Net investment in capital assets 154,863,285$ 159,069,886$ 156,750,373$ 151,904,792$ 149,891,568$
Restricted 41,636,040 48,731,281 49,688,804 57,137,761 57,570,568
Unrestricted (25,229,815) (36,193,491) (37,759,850) (42,661,193) (42,545,831)
Total governmental activities net position 171,269,510 171,607,676 168,679,327 166,381,360 164,916,305
Business-type Activities:
Net investment in capital assets 88,183,287 87,336,604 91,134,932 83,550,353 83,119,598
Restricted - - -
UUnrestricted 93,612,020 98,375,675 100,053,259 100,496,635 99,198,302
Total business-type activities net position 181,795,307 185,712,279 191,188,191 184,046,988 182,317,900
Primary Government:
Net investment in capital assets 243,046,572 246,406,490 247,885,305 235,455,145 233,011,166
Special revenue 41,636,040 48,731,281 49,688,804 57,137,761 57,570,568
UUnrestricted 68,382,205 62,182,184 62,293,409 57,835,442 56,652,471
Total primary government net position 353,064,817$ 357,319,955$ 359,867,518$ 350,428,348$ 347,234,205$
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Net Position By Component (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
171
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Expenses:
Governmental activities:
General government 11,895,682$ 3,732,098$ 3,795,033$ 3,619,582$ 3,900,226$
Public safety 5,995,050 28,747,964 29,696,344 30,273,444 31,020,245
Community development 14,271,031 15,485,705 14,824,460 15,901,215 21,413,283
Community services 180,845 7,686,862 7,726,938 7,807,765 8,217,318
Recreation Services - - - - -
Interest and other charges 16,654,681 3,226,789 3,744,396 3,406,855 3,327,992
Total governmental activities expenses 48,997,289 58,879,418 59,787,171 61,008,861 67,879,064
Business-type activities
Sewer 11,575,152 10,206,770 9,929,622 9,806,990 12,298,662
Water 11,428,662 8,081,041 8,642,660 8,329,710 8,370,320
Total business-type activities expenses 23,003,814 18,287,811 18,572,282 18,136,700 20,668,982
Total primary government expenses 72,001,103$ 77,167,229$ 78,359,453$ 79,145,561$ 88,548,046$
Program revenues:
Governmental activities:
Charges for services:
General government 7,623$ 1,119,217$ 1,415,106$ 2,096,137$ 1,651,713$
Public safety 1,055,373 1,004,530 897,059 1,030,410 1,146,593
Community development 767,444 3,866,305 5,434,764 7,385,391 6,145,791
Community services 66,788 757,445 810,503 886,988 978,780
Recreation services - - - - -
Operating grants and contributions 8,711,464 14,091,083 15,057,119 13,109,933 22,838,535
Capital grants and contributions - 3,207,487 3,157,642 8,999,636 3,820,892
Total governmental activities program revenues 10,608,692 24,046,067 26,772,193 33,508,495 36,582,304
Business-type activities:
Charges for services:
Sewer 7,828,759 8,441,024 10,359,334 - 11,984,798
Water 4,556,861 8,179,888 8,640,784 - 7,330,300
Capital grants and contributions 95,360 1,410,773 179,707 - 5,086,464
Total business-type activities program revenues 12,480,980 18,031,685 19,179,825 - 24,401,562
Total primary government program revenues 23,089,672$ 42,077,752$ 45,952,018$ 33,508,495$ 60,983,866$
Net revenue (expense):
Governmental activities (38,388,597)$ (34,833,351)$ (33,014,978)$ (27,500,366)$ (31,296,760)$
Business-type activities (10,522,834) (256,126) 607,543 (18,136,700) 3,732,580
Total primary government net expense (48,911,431)$ (35,089,477)$ (32,407,435)$ (45,637,066)$ (27,564,180)$
City of Gilroy
Fiscal Year
Changes in Net Position
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
172
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Expenses:
Governmental activities:
General government 6,437,408$ 7,315,065$ 7,696,445$ 6,131,791$ 7,315,868$
Public safety 33,393,829 35,591,790 37,837,438 40,088,865 40,797,962
Community development 19,167,193 19,211,323 22,518,209 8,556,959 7,147,532
Public works 8,978,597 9,654,957 - 23,525,423 16,862,660
Recreation Services - - 9,526,627 - 1,779,121
Interest and other charges 3,256,733 3,147,606 3,226,849 2,431,588 2,081,420
Total governmental activities expenses 71,233,760 74,920,741 80,805,568 80,734,626 75,984,563
Business-type activities
Sewer 12,060,236 11,538,388 14,044,716 14,668,434 15,820,944
Water 9,197,426 9,937,768 11,777,220 12,603,780 16,435,598
Total business-type activities expenses 21,257,662 21,476,156 25,821,936 27,272,214 32,256,542
Total primary government expenses 92,491,422$ 96,396,897$ 106,627,504$ 108,006,840$ 108,241,105$
Program revenues:
Governmental activities:
Charges for services:
General government 3,087,335$ 3,280,977$ 3,726,486$ 3,550,758$ 2,815,647$
Public safety 1,439,418 959,277 1,234,017 1,188,951 1,242,281
Community development 5,207,571 6,430,321 6,624,477 3,909,360 4,185,811
Public works 986,582 977,834 - 715,299 3,593,959
Recreation services - - 1,009,235 - 223,154
Operating grants and contributions 15,860,767 19,389,757 13,146,274 14,247,635 16,482,904
Capital grants and contributions 5,438,560 10,319,300 6,538,076 1,931,458 2,000,357
Total governmental activities program revenues 32,020,233 41,357,466 32,278,565 25,543,461 30,544,113
Business-type activities:
Charges for services:
Sewer 12,833,030 12,961,285 12,904,657 12,872,189 12,702,398
Water 9,156,082 11,343,036 12,294,119 14,590,973 14,830,153
Capital grants and contributions 1,172,844 2,330,335 4,160,510 2,439,117 2,511,059
Total business-type activities program revenues 23,161,956 26,634,656 29,359,286 29,902,279 30,043,610
Total primary government program revenues 55,182,189$ 67,992,122$ 61,637,851$ 55,445,740$ 60,587,723$
Net revenue (expense):
Governmental activities (39,213,527)$ (33,563,275)$ (48,527,003)$ (55,191,165)$ (45,440,450)$
Business-type activities 1,904,294 5,158,500 3,537,350 2,630,065 (2,212,932)
Total primary government net expense (37,309,233)$ (28,404,775)$ (44,989,653)$ (52,561,100)$ (47,653,382)$
City of Gilroy
Changes in Net Position (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
(accrual basis of accounting)
173
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
General revenues and other changes in net position:
Governmental Activities:
Taxes:
Property taxes 8,907,492$ 9,462,337$ 9,728,458$ 10,862,568$ 11,468,510$
Sales tax 13,833,561 14,114,277 14,423,130 15,858,910 17,884,735
Transient occupancy taxes 998,743 1,092,486 1,234,798 1,501,837 1,676,691
Franchise tax 1,355,340 1,326,364 1,408,045 1,463,770 1,569,059
Other taxes 4,781,148 4,694,440 4,759,067 4,905,868 5,116,588
Investment income 922,309 350,105 630,095 619,139 647,057
State motor vehicle in lieu 25,739 26,670 22,072 21,479 21,385
Other 109,798 390,812 632,113 164,321 392,815
Transfers (647,847) (669,940) (678,707) (689,011) (685,189)
Total governmental activities 30,286,283 30,787,551 32,159,071 34,708,881 38,091,651
Business-type activities:
Investment and rental income 777,528 - - - -
Other 600 - - - -
Share of DCU net income (loss)(1,059,357) - - - -
Transfers 647,847 669,940 678,707 689,011 685,189
Total business-type activities 366,618 669,940 678,707 689,011 685,189
Total primary government 30,652,901$ 31,457,491$ 32,837,778$ 35,397,892$ 38,776,840$
Changes in net position:
Governmental activities 301,450$ (4,045,800)$ (855,907)$ 7,208,515$ 6,794,891$
Business-type activities 950,871 413,814 1,286,250 3,800,429 4,417,769
Total primary government 1,252,321$ (3,631,986)$ 430,343$ 11,008,944$ 11,212,660$
Net Position (Net Assets), Beginning 396,112,556$ 397,364,877$ 390,153,653$ 390,583,996$ 338,589,770$
Beginning Fund Balance Restatement (1)- (3,579,238) - (63,003,170) -
Changes in Net Position (Net Assets) 1,252,321 (3,631,986) 430,343 11,008,944 11,212,660
Net Position (Net Assets), Ending 397,364,877$ 390,153,653$ 390,583,996$ 338,589,770$ 349,802,430$
(1)Net Position, as restated
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Changes in Net Position (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
174
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General revenues and other changes in net position:
Governmental Activities:
Taxes:
Property taxes 12,278,553$ 13,161,002$ 14,476,481$ 15,595,639$ 17,016,855$
Sales tax 17,768,469 18,827,189 20,186,105 17,233,882 18,584,534
Transient occupancy taxes 1,709,332 1,722,355 1,771,882 1,237,812 1,105,300
Franchise tax 1,623,951 1,713,690 1,669,817 1,855,622 1,732,613
Other taxes 5,264,486 5,192,899 5,093,813 5,667,201 5,030,153
Investment income 900,622 1,190,732 2,567,147 2,039,471 502,770
State motor vehicle in lieu 24,715 29,444 26,695 - -
Other 15,188 571,340 166,316 127,479 644,291
Transfers (305,505) 1,241,528 (640,347) (447,847) (641,121)
Total governmental activities 39,279,811 43,650,179 45,317,909 43,309,259 43,975,395
Business-type activities:
Investment and rental income - - 1,298,215 1,169,133 (157,277)
Other - - - - (79,785)
Share of DCU net income (loss)- - - (2,112,340) (1,982,829)
Transfers 305,505 (1,241,528) 640,347 447,847 641,121
Total business-type activities 305,505 (1,241,528) 1,938,562 (495,360) (1,578,770)
Total primary government 39,585,316$ 42,408,651$ 47,256,471$ 42,813,899$ 42,396,625$
Changes in net position:
Governmental activities 66,284$ 10,086,904$ (3,209,094)$ (11,881,906)$ (1,465,055)$
Business-type activities 2,209,799 3,916,972 5,475,912 4,247,045 (1,729,088)
Total primary government 2,276,083$ 14,003,876$ 2,266,818$ (7,634,861)$ (3,194,143)$
Net Position (Net Assets), Beginning 348,802,430$ 352,078,513$ 357,319,955$ 359,586,773$ 350,428,348
Beginning Fund Balance Restatement (1)- (8,762,454) - (1,523,564) -
Changes in Net Position (Net Assets) 2,276,083 14,003,896 2,266,818 (7,634,861) (3,194,143)
Net Position (Net Assets), Ending 351,078,513$ 357,319,955$ 359,586,773$ 350,428,348$ 347,234,205$
(1)Net Position, as restated
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Changes in Net Position (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(accrual basis of accounting)
175
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
General fund:
Nonspendable 59,670$ 45,003$ 52,592$ 74,622$ 84,923$
Restricted - - - - -
Assigned - - - - -
Unassigned 25,423,199 23,038,183 22,291,553 21,316,940 22,202,316
Total general fund 25,482,869$ 23,083,186$ 22,344,145$ 21,391,562$ 22,287,239$
All other governmental funds:
Nonspendable 9,766 5,454,973 9,265 9,265 8,670
Restricted 37,880,519 31,995,403 41,474,238 40,117,010 44,922,496
Assigned 525,601 226,654 576,889 544,284 2,827,521
Unassigned (12,379,723) (12,423,935) (11,866,882) (12,884,818) (7,883,587)
Total all other governmental funds 26,036,163$ 25,253,095$ 30,193,510$ 27,785,741$ 39,875,100$
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
176
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General fund:
Nonspendable 74,217$ 126,965$ 76,000$ 126,915$ 47,874$
Restricted - - - - -
Assigned - - - - -
Unassigned 24,354,609 25,475,105 27,683,870 14,731,555 19,585,369
Total general fund 24,428,826$ 25,602,070$ 27,759,870$ 14,858,470$ 19,633,243$
All other governmental funds:
Nonspendable 9,470 25,570 1,000 706,754 706,754
Restricted 50,775,875 55,248,281 57,445,219 56,261,267 56,999,818
Assigned 1,588,907 1,448,954 1,483,818 5,368,008 5,276,537
Unassigned (5,761,804) (2,841,776) (4,206,362) (54) (4,712,875)
Total all other governmental funds 46,612,448$ 53,881,029$ 54,723,675$ 62,335,975$ 58,270,234$
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Fund Balances of Governmental Funds (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
177
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Revenues:
Taxes 30,122,948$ 33,041,266$ 33,902,225$ 37,190,336$ 40,177,903$
Licenses and permits 2,000,283 2,071,569 2,088,024 2,847,912 3,720,755
Intergovernmental 6,413,621 5,258,266 5,235,608 3,260,688 4,291,272
Charges for services 14,688,796 13,944,828 17,081,714 17,396,590 24,960,535
Fines 425,265 251,313 226,220 281,580 266,163
Special assessments 2,133,413 - - - -
Investment income (loss)898,495 385,744 697,612 600,960 608,641
Contribution from property owners - - - - -
Miscellaneous 826,591 1,035,480 1,464,470 2,128,737 2,059,106
Total revenues 57,509,412 55,988,466 60,695,873 63,706,803 76,084,375
Expenditures:
General government 3,287,262 3,793,066 4,073,708 4,025,604 4,532,241
Public safety 25,448,868 26,416,606 27,448,432 28,845,371 29,867,361
Community services 5,650,806 6,029,323 6,072,624 6,322,864 6,764,060
Community development 26,470,128 14,393,211 10,031,035 16,393,573 14,675,204
Debt service:
Principal retirement 2,170,000 1,350,000 25,745,000 2,215,000 2,305,000
Interest 3,287,244 3,319,071 3,525,898 3,557,829 3,479,710
Bond issuance costs - - 275,515 2,582 -
Total expenditures 66,314,308 55,301,277 77,172,212 61,362,823 61,623,576
Excess of revenues over
(under) expenditures (8,804,896) 687,189 (16,476,339) 2,343,980 14,460,799
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers in 5,496,446 3,746,485 3,574,115 4,318,330 6,803,782
Transfers out (7,576,735) (7,616,425) (7,154,454) (11,012,940) (8,521,471)
Issuance of loan/notes - - - 959,229 241,926
Issuance of bonds - - 23,120,000 - -
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - - -
Payment to bond excrow agent - - - - -
Premium on bonds - - 1,138,052 - -
Total other financing sources (uses)(2,080,289) (3,869,940) 20,677,713 (5,735,381) (1,475,763)
Net Change in fund balances (10,885,185)$ (3,182,751)$ 4,201,374$ (3,391,401)$ 12,985,036$
Fund balances - June 30 134,465,357$ 131,282,606$ 135,483,980$ 132,092,579$ 12,985,036$
Debt service as a percentage
of noncapital expenditures 8.34%9.57%38.74%9.55%9.53%
(a)
(a) Long-term debt was transferred to the Successor Agency on February 1, 2012. The Successor Agency is not considered a
component unit for the City, thus the debt payments are disclosed in the Fiduciary Funds section of this report.
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
178
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Revenues:
Taxes 41,350,739$ 43,512,402$ 51,483,855$ 44,269,937$ 45,916,497$
Licenses and permits 2,713,733 2,751,137 3,487,338 1,776,651 2,278,304
Intergovernmental 3,748,000 4,047,728 3,913,484 5,473,529 6,612,274
Charges for services 18,973,863 22,820,605 11,501,828 13,951,822 17,484,867
Fines 293,899 208,305 239,873 282,535 231,688
Special assessments - - - - -
Investment income (loss)762,671 1,084,408 1,247,543 1,884,149 358,452
Contribution from property owners - - - - -
Miscellaneous 1,604,397 1,635,888 1,990,459 1,348,130 2,867,269
Total revenues 69,447,302 76,060,473 73,864,380 68,986,753 75,749,351
Expenditures:
General government 4,906,824 5,103,946 5,760,831 6,361,042 5,931,022
Public safety 30,830,873 31,781,515 34,062,421 36,867,887 35,856,183
Public Works 7,231,274 7,723,166 7,831,193 7,897,645 7,231,722
Community development 11,052,313 14,993,509 15,421,483 19,143,243 5,523,912
Recreation services - - - - 1,702,666
Capital outlay - - - - 6,243,057
Debt service:
Principal retirement 2,459,619 2,558,818 2,654,708 2,986,212 2,817,325
Interest 3,410,441 3,302,252 3,448,556 3,011,707 2,784,374
Bond issuance costs - - 112,903 - -
Total expenditures 59,891,344 65,463,206 69,292,095 76,267,736 68,090,261
Excess of revenues over
(under) expenditures 9,555,958 10,597,267 4,572,285 (7,280,983) 7,659,090
Other Financing Sources (Uses):
Transfers in 4,233,745 4,503,781 4,236,075 8,937,984 24,306,099
Transfers out (4,910,768) (6,659,253) (5,876,422) (12,905,997) (24,953,804)
Issuance of loan/notes - - - - -
Issuance of bonds - - - 19,087,551 16,459,825
Payment to refunded bond escrow - - - (19,350,000) (17,555,000)
Payment to bond escrow agent - - (8,565,000) - -
Premium on bonds - - 8,633,538 - -
Total other financing sources (uses)(677,023) (2,155,472) (1,571,809) (4,230,462) (1,742,880)
Net Change in fund balances 8,878,935$ 8,441,795$ 3,000,476$ (11,511,445)$ 5,916,210$
Fund balances - June 30 8,878,935$ 8,441,795$ 3,000,476$ (11,511,445)$ 5,916,210$
Debt service as a percentage
of noncapital expenditures 9.95%9.08%9.09%7.96%8.34%
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Changes in Fund Balances of Governmental Funds (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
179
CATEGORY 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Outlet Center $2,833,256 $2,845,863 $2,867,431 $2,899,778 $2,747,030
Newman Development 2,131,034 2,201,623 2,230,855 2,332,215 2,426,698
Regency Center 940,836 949,436 946,073 965,112 999,738
Downtown Core 224,977 271,227 296,354.00 316,595.00 356,687
General Retail 6,130,103 6,268,149 6,340,713 6,513,700 6,530,153
Auto Dealers 1,045,717 1,131,680 1,649,758 2,136,541 2,633,013
Service Stations 1,543,421 1,457,239 1,442,888 1,292,736 1,094,398
Transportation 2,589,138 2,588,919 3,092,646 3,429,277 3,727,411
Others 3,284,517 3,344,680 3,697,010 3,695,108 4,018,337
Allocation from State and County 1,829,803 1,912,529 1,292,761 2,220,825 3,608,834
TOTALS:$13,833,561 $14,114,277 $14,423,130 $15,858,910 $17,884,735
Population 50,081 51,505 52,413 53,000 55,170
Sales Tax Per Capita 276 274 275 299 324
City of Gilroy
Sales Tax by Category
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
Source: MBIA MuniServices Company
State of California, Department of Finance, Population Estimates for California Cities
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
350
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
0
5,000
10,000
15,000
20,000
25,000
Others State/County Gen. Retail Transportation Per Capita
180
CATEGORY 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Outlet Center $2,669,216 $2,571,713 $2,464,617 $1,739,806 $1,869,275
Newman Development 2,500,961 2,529,804 2,743,665 2,643,207 2,955,455
Regency Center 968,005 987,417 1,004,376 896,599 1,000,140
Downtown Core 398,344 385,497.00 505,600 472,427 512,427
General Retail 6,536,526 6,474,431 6,718,258 5,752,039 6,337,297
Auto Dealers 3,224,719 3,691,038 3,855,166 3,056,022 2,446,254
Service Stations 1,064,232 1,290,582 1,298,298 1,129,189 1,085,319
Transportation 4,288,951 4,981,620 5,153,464 4,185,211 3,531,573
Others 4,263,541 4,632,323 4,418,367 4,294,454 4,580,258
Allocation from State and County 2,679,451 2,152,877 3,896,016 3,002,179 3,867,949
TOTALS:$17,768,469 $18,241,251 $20,186,105 $17,233,883 $18,317,077
Population 55,936 55,615 55,928 57,084 59,920
Sales Tax Per Capita 318 328 361 302 306
City of Gilroy
Sales Tax by Category (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
Source: MBIA MuniServices Company
State of California, Department of Finance, Population Estimates for California Cities
181
Agency 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
6.250% 6.500% 6.500% 6.500% 6.250% 6.000% 6.000% 6.000% 6.000% 6.000%
0.250%
0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250% 0.250%
0.750% 0.750% 0.750% 0.750% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000% 1.000%
-
0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125%
--
0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500%
0.500%
0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500%
-
0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125% 0.125%
--
0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500% 0.500%
Total 8.250% 8.750% 8.750% 8.750% 8.750% 9.000% 9.000% 9.000% 9.000% 9.000%
Source: California Department of Tax and Fee Administration
FISCAL YEAR
City of Gilroy
Sales Tax Rates
Last Ten Fiscal Years
SCC Transit District
SCC Valley Transportation
Authority
SCC VTA Bay Area Rapid
Transit
Silicon Valley Transportation
Solutions Tax
State of California
Santa Clara County (SCC)
Transportation Funds
City of Gilroy
SCC Retail Transactions and
Use Tax
SCC Transactions and Use
Tax
0.00% 1.00% 2.00% 3.00% 4.00% 5.00% 6.00% 7.00% 8.00% 9.00% 10.00%
2013
2014
2015
2016
2017
2018
2019
2020
2021
Total
Gilroy
182
Taxpayer Business Type Taxpayer Business Type
Action Gypsum Supply West Bldg.Matls-Whsle Arco Am/Pm Mini Marts Service Stations
Best Buy Stores Furniture/Appliance Best Buy Stores Furniture/Appliance
Chevron Service Stations Service Stations Calvin Klein Apparel Stores
Costco Wholesale Department Stores Chevron Service Stations Service Stations
Cresco Equipment Rentals Heavy Industry Coach Stores Apparel Stores
Digital Storm Miscellaneous Other Costco Wholesale Department Stores
Gilroy Buick Gmc Auto Sales - New Gilroy Auto Outlet Auto Sales - New
Gilroy Chevrolet Cadillac Auto Sales - New Gilroy Chevrolet Cadillac Auto Sales - New
Gilroy Motorcycle Center Misc. Vehicle Sales Gilroy Gas & Mini-Mart Service Stations
Gilroy Toyota Auto Sales - New Gilroy Toyota Auto Sales - New
Happy Daze RVs Misc. Vehicle Sales Home Depot Bldg.Matls-Retail
Home Depot Bldg.Matls-Retail Jn Abbott Distributor Energy Sales
Lowe'S Home Centers Bldg.Matls-Retail Kohl'S Department Stores Department Stores
Mcdonald'S Restaurants Restaurants Lowe'S Home Improvement Bldg.Matls-Retail
Nike Factory Store Apparel Stores Nike Factory Store Apparel Stores
Pape Machinery Heavy Industry Polo Ralph Lauren Apparel Stores
Ross Stores Apparel Stores Rotten Robbie Service Stations Service Stations
Rotten Robbie Service Stations Service Stations See-Grins Rv Misc. Vehicle Sales
Safeway Stores Food Markets South County Chrysler Plymouth Auto Sales - New
See Grins RVs Misc. Vehicle Sales South County Nissan Auto Sales - New
Shell Service Stations Service Stations Target Stores Department Stores
Target Stores Department Stores The Garlic Farm Travel Center Service Stations
Tractor Supply Company Miscellaneous Retail Tv'S Gas & Foodmart Service Stations
Union 76 Service Stations Service Stations Valero Service Stations Service Stations
Wal Mart Stores Department Stores Wal Mart Stores Department Stores
Source: MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
City of Gilroy
Principal Sales Tax Producers
Last Fiscal Year and Nine Years Ago
2020-21 2011-12
183
Fiscal
Year End
Local
Secured*
Home Owner
Exempt
Valuation
Net Local
Secured Net Utility
Net
Unsecured
Net Taxable
Assessed
Value
Total Direct
Tax Rate
(1)
Estimated
Actual
Taxable Value
(2)
Factor of
Taxable
Assessed
Value (2)
Assessed
Value as a
Percentage of
Actual Value
2008-09 6,488,553,329 46,390,400 6,442,162,929 94,818,014 278,011,535 6,814,992,478 - - -
2009-10 5,859,438,604 46,207,000 5,813,231,604 82,118,014 265,276,407 6,160,626,025 - - -
2010-11 5,515,703,007 47,031,600 5,468,671,407 80,918,014 232,541,079 5,782,130,500 0.902963 - - -
2011-12 5,477,242,040 46,387,600 5,430,854,440 78,686,470 281,804,033 5,791,344,943 0.902963 - - -
2012-13 5,467,139,776 46,209,800 5,420,929,976 72,086,470 266,918,393 5,759,934,839 0.902963 - - -
2013-14 5,913,805,270 46,463,200 5,867,342,070 64,186,470 260,981,844 6,192,510,384 0.902963 - - -
2014-15 6,395,754,046 46,050,200 6,349,703,846 52,530,836 265,879,967 6,668,114,649 0.902963 - - -
2015-16 6,798,621,370 45,871,000 6,752,750,370 47,030,836 268,445,327 7,068,226,533 0.902963 - - -
2016-17 7,385,130,561 46,578,000 7,338,552,561 42,130,836 273,713,487 7,654,396,884 0.902963 - - -
2017-18 7,872,947,886 47,244,400 7,825,703,486 39,330,836 263,667,226 8,128,701,548 0.097037 10,250,699,087 1.261050 79.30%
2018-19 8,445,397,378 48,090,000 8,397,307,378 38,939,704 256,724,279 8,692,971,361 0.097037 11,893,042,148 1.368122 73.09%
2019-20 9,001,686,593 47,874,400 8,953,812,193 32,539,704 257,410,089 9,243,761,986 0.097037 16,306,012,109 1.764002 56.69%
2020-21 9,557,360,668 47,341,000 9,510,019,668 29,739,704 267,854,749 9,807,614,121 0.097037 11,688,408,441 1.191769 83.91%
Source: Santa Clara County Assessor data, MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Source: 2016-17 and prior, previously published ACFR.
*Local secured is net of other exemptions.
1.) Total direct tax rate is the city share of the 1% Proposition 13 tax only for TRA 02-000.
2.) Estimated Actual Value is derived from a series of calculations comparing median
assessed values from 1940 to current median sale prices. Based on these calculations
a multiplier value was extrapolated and applied to current assessed values.
City of Gilroy
Assessed Value and Estimated Actual Value of Taxable Property
Last Ten Fiscal Years
(modified accrual basis of accounting)
184
Category 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Residential 6,846,995,669 7,292,373,081 7,766,498,649
Commercial 899,654,270 931,059,983 989,793,738
Industrial 479,091,993 538,635,466 667,191,707
Vacant - 216,844,260 163,403,099
Institutional 112,041,055 111,348,784 65,615,240
Professional 17,961,578 108,709,436 110,337,229
Agriculture 47,135,427 52,895,647 38,226,087
Unitary 38,939,704 32,539,704 29,739,704
Transportation 193,663,876 28,585,319 28,569,765
Public 104,675,187 23,763,391 31,201,356
Recreational 22,525,565 23,001,970 22,973,251
Social 18,604,008 19,463,964 19,888,529
Forestry 6,830,161 6,966,865 7,106,317
Unknown 2,149,694 - -
Gross Secured Value 8,790,268,187 9,386,187,870 9,940,544,671
Unsecured Value 260,824,323 261,877,511 272,030,637
Less Exemptions 358,121,149 404,303,395 404,961,187
Net Taxable Value 8,692,971,361 9,243,761,986 9,807,614,121
Source: Santa Clara County Assessor data, MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Use code categories are based on Santa Clara County Assessor's data
City of Gilroy
Assessed Value of Property by Use Code
Last Three Fiscal Years
185
2011-12 2012-13 2013-14 2014-15 2015-16
Basic City and County Levy
City Direct Rate 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037
All others 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963
1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
Override Assessments
County Retire Levy 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800
County Library 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400
VMC 2008 0.004700 0.005100 0.003500 0.009100 0.008800
County Housing Bond 2016 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Gilroy City Bond 2008 0.036500 0.036500 0.034000 0.034000 0.029000
Gilroy Unified School 2002 0.054500 0.057100 0.058000 0.056600 0.052200
Gilroy Unified 11/2008 0.047900 0.047200 0.056400 0.059900 0.054900
Gilroy Unified 2016 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Gavilan Community College 04 0.021700 0.025700 0.024800 0.023900 0.022600
Gavilan Jt CCD 2018 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Lease Debt-Gilroy Unified 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Lease Debt-Gilroy Unified Priorye 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
SCVWD-State Water Project 0.006300 0.006900 0.007000 0.006500 0.005700
0.212800 0.219700 0.224900 0.231200 0.214400
TOTAL TAX RATE 1.212800 1.219700 1.224900 1.231200 1.214400
Source: Santa Clara County Auditor data, MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Source: 2016-17 and prior: previously published ACFR
This table shows rates for TRA 02-000.
City of Gilroy
Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates
(Per $100 of Taxable Value)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
186
2016-17 2017-18 2018-19 2019-20 2020-21
Basic City and County Levy
City Direct Rate 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037 0.097037
All others 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963 0.902963
1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000 1.000000
Override Assessments . .
County Retire Levy 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800 0.038800
County Library 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400 0.002400
VMC 2008 0.008600 0.008200 0.007200 0.006900 0.006900
County Housing Bond 2016 0.000000 0.012660 0.010500 0.010000 0.000000
Gilroy City Bond 2008 0.027200 0.026000 0.025000 0.020000 0.019000
Gilroy Unified School 2002 0.050100 0.047800 0.046700 0.044400 0.042800
Gilroy Unified 11/2008 0.051300 0.049100 0.046300 0.054400 0.054100
Gilroy Unified 2016 0.060000 0.055900 0.015400 0.053400 0.055000
Gavilan Community College 04 0.021600 0.020000 0.019200 0.018700 0.018400
Gavilan Jt CCD 2018 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.024400 0.023200
Lease Debt-Gilroy Unified 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
Lease Debt-Gilroy Unified Priorye 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000 0.000000
SCVWD-State Water Project 0.008600 0.006200 0.004200 0.004100 0.003700
0.268600 0.267060 0.215700 0.277500 0.264300
TOTAL TAX RATE 1.268600 1.267060 1.215700 1.277500 1.264300
City of Gilroy
Direct and Overlapping Property Tax Rates (Continued)
(Per $100 of Taxable Value)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
187
Taxpayer Taxable Value ($)
Percent of Total
City Taxable
Value (%) Taxable Value ($)
Percent of Total
City Taxable Value
(%)
Simon Property Group 221,085,523 2.25% 188,724,148 3.30%
Olam West Coast Inc 145,402,420 1.48%67,031,145 1.17%
Excel Gilroy LLC 79,339,671 0.81%80,535,391 1.41%
United Natural Foods West Inc 59,995,195 0.61%
Mabury Vineyards LLC Et Al 56,736,066 0.58%
Performance Food Group Inc 43,571,698 0.44%
Towman Cadena LLC 36,765,274 0.37%
Wal Mart Real Est Bus Trt 35,881,137 0.37%29,929,922 0.52%
7610 Isabella Way LLC 31,549,414 0.32%
E P & G South Valley Plaza LLC 28,090,800 0.29%
Calatlantic Group Inc 26,360,073 0.27%
CaLPine Gilroy Cogen L P 26,333,230 0.27%
Monterey Gourmet Foods 25,895,799 0.26%
Central Valley Coalition 25,819,152 0.26%
Costco Wholesale Corp A Ws Corp 24,407,273 0.25%20,229,845 0.35%
Canciamilla Anthony Trustee & Et Al 22,000,000 0.22%
Tri Pointe Homes Inc 20,852,880 0.21%
Pacheco Pass Retail XII LLC 18,889,499 0.19%
Target Corporation 18,014,108 0.18%15,377,306 0.27%
First Street Gilroy I LLC 17,998,920 0.18%
Gilroy Self Storage Partners LLC 17,204,848 0.18%
Mission Park Gilroy LLC 16,974,210 0.17%14,504,263 0.25%
HD Development of Maryland,Inc 16,900,673 0.17%14,426,847 0.25%
Lee James Trustee 16,646,400 0.17%
Trimark-Gilroy Hospitality LLC Et Al 16,167,604 0.16%
Inland Western Retail Real 54,323,523 0.95%
Shapell Industries Inc 44,961,651 0.79%
Health Care Reit Inc 35,118,063 0.61%
South Valley Apts LLC 27,049,496 0.47%
Mccarthy Gilroy LLC 26,814,860 0.47%
Land Department 20,986,807 0.37%
CP6 Sv LLC 20,853,990 0.36%
Tin Inc.20,460,687 0.36%
Chinatown LLC 19,324,285 0.34%
Wells Fargo Bk 18,764,924 0.33%
Kelly-Kehriotis Partners LLC 15,775,969 0.28%
Lowes HIW Inc A WS Corp 15,259,395 0.27%
D R Horton Bay Inc 15,249,924 0.27%
Santa Teresa Properties LLC 13,735,811 0.24%
Avery Cypress Pointe LP 12,704,589 0.22%
Sterigenics U S LLC 12,689,230 0.22%
Town Place LLC 12,508,259 0.22%
Total Top 25 Taxpayers 1,048,881,867 10.69%817,340,330 14.30%
Total Taxable Value 9,807,614,121 100.00%5,713,805,465 100.00%
Source: Santa Clara County Assessor data, MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
2020-21 2011-12
City of Gilroy
Principal Property Taxpayers
Last Fiscal Year and Nine Fiscal Years Ago
188
Fiscal Year
Tax Levied for the Fiscal
Year Amount Collected Percent (%) of Levy
2011-12 5,664,737$ 5,609,406$ 99.02%
2012-13 5,634,085$ 5,622,101$ 99.79%
2014-15 6,515,197$ 6,547,657$ 100.50%
2015-16 6,903,278$ 6,963,327$ 100.87%
2016-17 7,472,764$ 7,487,528$ 100.20%
2017-18 7,941,242$ 7,941,242$ 100.00%
2018-19 8,521,868$ 8,521,868$ 100.00%
2019-20 9,060,136$ 9,060,136$ 100.00%
2020-21 9,598,648$ 9,598,648$ 100.00%
Source: MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Source: 2016-17 and prior, previously published ACFR
Source: Finance Department, County of Santa Clara
City of Gilroy
Property Tax Levies, Tax Collections, and Delinquency
Last Ten Fiscal Years
189
General Tax Lease Special
Fiscal Revenue Allocation Notes & Revenue Assessment Revenue
Year Bonds (4)(5)(6)Bonds Loans Bonds (4)Bonds Bonds
2010 10,724,640$ 1,500,000$ 46,370,000$ 1,130,000$ -$
2011 34,529,124 24,340,000 25,410,269 870,000 -
2012 33,860,997 - 24,340,000 24,438,409 - -
2013 33,162,870 - 24,340,000 23,710,455 - -
2014 32,434,743 - - 47,182,360 - -
2015 31,681,616 - 959,229 45,587,503 - -
2016 30,893,489 - 1,201,155 43,937,647 - -
2017 30,080,362 - 1,126,536 42,232,790 - -
2018 29,247,235 - 1,082,253 40,462,933 - -
2019 28,305,209 - 948,011 38,623,072 - -
2020 26,630,459 857,428 35,710,000
2021 25,639,646 765,913 30,160,000
Note: Details regarding the outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the basic financial statements.
Source:
(1) Finance Department, City of Gilroy
(2) Finance Department, County of Santa Clara
(3) In 2010, the City issued revenue refunding bonds to refinance an existing installment payment obligation.
(4) Presented net of related premiums, discounts, and adjustments.
(5) GO Bonds Series 2009 refinanced on June 1, 2019 to Series 2019 A.
(6) GO Bonds Series 2010 refinanced on November 5, 2019 to Series 2019 B.
(7) 2021 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Series A issued June 2021.
City of Gilroy
Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Governmental Activities
190
Wastewater Total % of
Fiscal Revenue Primary Property Net Debt
Year Bonds (3) (4) (7)Government (1)Assessed Value (2)per Capita
2010 26,168,102$ 85,892,742$ 1.39% 1,758
2011 25,935,334 111,084,727 1.92% 2,253
2012 24,237,585 106,876,991 1.85% 2,134
2013 22,384,827 103,598,152 1.80% 2,011
2014 20,477,068 100,094,171 1.62% 1,910
2015 18,519,310 96,747,658 1.45% 1,825
2016 16,491,551 92,523,842 1.31% 1,677
2017 14,393,793 87,833,481 1.15% 1,570
2018 12,206,034 82,998,455 1.02% 1,484
2019 9,928,276 77,804,568 0.90% 1,391
2020 7,545,517 70,743,404 0.77% 1,239
2021 51,900,000 108,465,559 1.10% 1,810
Note: Details regarding the outstanding debt can be found in the notes to the basic financial statements.
Source:
(1) Finance Department, City of Gilroy
(2) Finance Department, County of Santa Clara
(3) In 2010, the City issued revenue refunding bonds to refinance an existing installment payment obligation.
(4) Presented net of related premiums, discounts, and adjustments.
(5) GO Bonds Series 2009 refinanced on June 1, 2019 to Series 2019 A.
(6) GO Bonds Series 2010 refinanced on November 5, 2019 to Series 2019 B.
(7) 2021 Wastewater Revenue Bonds Series A issued June 2021.
City of Gilroy
Ratios of Outstanding Debt by Type (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Business-Type
Activities
191
Ratio of
General Tax Net General Bonded General
Fiscal Obligation Allocation Assessed Debt to Net Bonded Debt
Year Bonds (4)Bonds Total (1)Value (2)Population (3)Assessed Value Per Capita
2011 34,529,124 34,529,124 5,782,130,500 49,316 0.597% 700
2012 33,860,997 33,860,997 5,791,344,943 50,081 0.585% 676
2013 33,162,870 33,162,870 5,759,934,839 51,505 0.576% 644
2014 32,434,743 32,434,743 6,192,510,384 52,413 0.524% 619
2015 31,681,616 31,681,616 6,668,114,649 53,000 0.475% 598
2016 30,893,489 30,893,489 7,068,226,533 55,170 0.437% 560
2017 30,080,362 30,080,362 7,654,396,884 55,936 0.393% 538
2018 29,247,235 29,247,235 8,128,701,548 55,615 0.360% 526
2019 28,305,209 28,305,209 8,692,971,361 55,928 0.326% 506
2020 26,630,459 26,630,459 9,243,761,986 57,084 0.288% 467
2021 25,639,646 25,639,646 9,807,614,121 59,920 0.261% 428
Source: (1) State of California, Finance Department.
(2) This is the amount restricted for the COP debt service principal payments.
City of Gilroy
Ratio of General Bonded Debt Outstanding
Last Ten Fiscal Years
OUTSTANDING GENERAL BONDED DEBT
49
50
51
52
53
55
56 56 56
57
58
0.000%
0.100%
0.200%
0.300%
0.400%
0.500%
0.600%
0.700%
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
44
46
48
50
52
54
56
58
60
192
2020-21 Assessed Valuation : $9,854,955,121
Total Debt City’s Share of
DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT: 6/30/2021 % Applicable (1)Debt 6/30/21
Santa Clara County $812,685,000 1.79% $14,538,935
Gavilan Joint Community College District 219,400,000 26.138 57,346,772
Gilroy Unified School District 362,567,495 82.233 298,150,128
City of Gilroy 25,639,646 100 25,639,646
City of Gilroy Community Facilities District No. 2000-1 6,560,907 100 6,560,907
Santa Clara Valley Water District Benefit Assessment District 57,010,000 1.789 1,019,909
TOTAL DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING TAX AND ASSESSMENT DEBT $403,256,297
DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND DEBT:
Santa Clara County General Fund Obligations $914,957,860 1.79% $16,368,596
Santa Clara County Pension Obligation Bonds 341,399,194 1.789 6,107,632
Santa Clara County Board of Education Certificates of Participation 2,670,000 1.789 47,766
Gavilan Joint Community College District General Fund Obligations 6,670,000 26.138 1,743,405
Gilroy Unified School District Certificates of Participation 23,365,000 82.233 19,213,740
City of Gilroy General Fund Obligations 30,160,000 100 30,160,000
Santa Clara County Vector Control Certificates of Participation 1,765,000 1.789 31,576
TOTAL GROSS DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND DEBT $73,672,715
Less: Santa Clara County supported obligations 452,211
TOTAL NET DIRECT AND OVERLAPPING GENERAL FUND DEBT $73,220,504
TOTAL DIRECT DEBT $55,799,646
TOTAL GROSS OVERLAPPING DEBT $421,129,366
TOTAL NET OVERLAPPING DEBT $420,677,155
GROSS COMBINED TOTAL DEBT $476,929,012
NET COMBINED TOTAL DEBT $476,476,801
Ratios to 2020-21 Assessed Valuation :
Direct Debt ($25,639,646) 0.26%
Total Direct and Overlapping Tax and Assessment Debt 4.09%
Total Direct Debt ($55,799,646)0.57%
Gross Combined Total Debt 4.84%
Net Combined Total Debt 4.83%
Source: Avenu Insights & Analytics, California Municipal Statistics, Inc.
(2) Excludes tax and revenue anticipation notes, enterprise revenue, mortgage revenue and non-bonded capital lease
City of Gilroy
Schedule of Direct and Overlapping Bonded Debt
June 30, 2021
(1) The percentage of overlapping debt applicable to the city is estimated using taxable assessed property value.
Applicable percentages were estimated by determining the portion of the overlapping district's assessed value that is
within the boundaries of the city divided by the district's total taxable assessed value.
193
2011 2012 2013 2014 2015
Assessed valuation 5,829,162,100 5,837,732,543 5,806,144,639 6,238,973,584 6,714,164,849
Debt Limit Rate (1)15%15%15%15%15%
Debt limit 874,374,315 875,659,881 870,921,696 935,846,038 1,007,124,727
Total net debt applicable to limit:
General obligation bonds 33,830,000 33,190,000 32,520,000 31,820,000 31,095,000
Legal debt margin 840,544,315$ 842,469,881$ 838,401,696$ 904,026,038$ 976,029,727$
Total debt applicable to the limit
as a percentage of debt limit 4.0%3.9%3.9%3.5%3.2%
Continued
(1) Section 1108 of the City of Gilroy Charter limits the general obligation bonds of the City to 15% of total assessed value
of real and personal property within the City.
City of Gilroy
Legal Debt Margin Information
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
194
2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Assessed valuation 7,114,097,533 7,700,974,884 8,175,945,948 8,741,061,361 9,291,636,386 9,807,614,121
Debt Limit Rate (1)15%15%15%15%15%15%
Debt limit 1,067,114,630 1,155,146,233 1,226,391,892 1,311,159,204 1,393,745,458 1,471,142,118
Total net debt applicable to limit:
General obligation bonds 30,335,000 29,550,000 28,745,000 27,983,538 27,087,578 25,639,646
Legal debt margin 1,036,779,630$ 1,125,596,233$ 1,197,646,892$ 1,283,175,666$ 1,366,657,880$ 1,445,502,472$
Total debt applicable to the limit
as a percentage of debt limit 2.9%2.6%2.4%2.2%2.0%1.8%
End
(1) Section 1108 of the City of Gilroy Charter limits the general obligation bonds of the City to 15% of total assessed value
of real and personal property within the City.
City of Gilroy
Legal Debt Margin Information (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
195
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
Gross revenues:
Charges for services 8,170,711$ 8,441,024$ 9,168,356$ 10,336,111$ 11,773,938$
Investment income (loss)451,737 283,816 370,199 257,938 210,826
Rate Stabilization Fund Balance - 750,000 - - -
Transfer from Sewer Impact Fund 674,534 704,007 705,356 700,544 700,111
Total gross revenues 9,296,982 10,178,847 10,243,911 11,294,593 12,684,875
Operating expenses:
Operations 5,259,612 5,893,404 5,612,274 6,281,516 7,296,107
Billing 551,109 533,611 559,262 588,131 612,551
Administration 237,750 279,787 375,945 377,770 500,398
Claims and judgements - - - - -
Total operating expenses 6,048,471 6,706,802 6,547,481 7,247,417 8,409,056
Net Revenues 3,248,511 3,472,045 3,696,430 4,047,176 4,275,819
Series 1999 installment
payments / Refunding Series 2010 payments 2,462,276$ 2,571,000$ 2,576,576$ 2,576,576$ 2,566,550$
Gross revenue debt service coverage 377.58% 395.91% 397.58% 438.36% 494.24%
Net revenue debt service coverage 131.93% 135.05% 143.46% 157.08% 166.60%
Fund available
Sewer Development Capital Project Fund 10,391,910$ 11,416,503$ 12,304,205$ 10,363$ 11,481,078$
Sewer Fund cash and cash equivalent 29,427,892 29,267,803 27,625,188 26,336,933 18,537,029
Rate stabilization fund - 750,000 750,000 750,000 750,000
Total funds available 39,819,802$ 41,434,306$ 40,679,393$ 27,097,296$ 30,768,107$
Days funds on hand 1,776 1,593 1,540 1,326 805
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Revenue Bond Coverage - Wastewater System
Last Ten Fiscal Years
196
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Gross revenues:
Charges for services 12,644,730$ 12,720,141$ 12,904,657$ 12,872,189$ 12,702,398$
Investment income (loss)188,300 241,144 593,929 561,664 (29,535)
Rate Stabilization Fund Balance - - - - -
Transfer from Sewer Impact Fund 696,546 697,198 694,146 693,577 692,874
Total gross revenues 13,529,576 13,658,483 14,192,732 14,127,430 13,365,737
Operating expenses:
Operations 7,454,895 7,466,650 8,339,489 9,462,155 10,853,866
Billing 594,654 618,400 668,982 730,892 678,651
Administration 472,465 558,846 706,101 667,733 720,726
Claims and judgements - - - - -
Total operating expenses 8,522,014 8,643,896 9,714,572 10,860,780 12,253,243
Net Revenues 5,007,562 5,014,587 4,478,160 3,266,650 1,112,494
Series 1999 installment
payments / Refunding Series 2010 payments 2,558,687$ 2,562,738$ 2,557,625$ 2,557,750$ 2,557,750$
Gross revenue debt service coverage 528.77% 532.96% 554.92% 552.34% 522.56%
Net revenue debt service coverage 195.71% 195.67% 175.09% 127.72% 43.50%
Fund available
Sewer Development Capital Project Fund 12,964,741$ 14,534,002$ 13,533,945$ 13,376,865$ 12,891,194$
Sewer Fund cash and cash equivalent 16,777,330 17,391,216 17,687,792 18,610,720 18,837,132
Rate stabilization fund 750,000 750,000 750,000
Total funds available 30,492,071$ 32,675,218$ 31,971,737$ 31,987,585$ 31,728,326$
Days funds on hand 719 734 665 625 561
Fiscal Year
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Revenue Bond Coverage - Wastewater System (Continued)
City of Gilroy
197
Fiscal Year
Population
(1)
Net Taxable
Assessed Values
Per Capita
Taxable
Property
Values Personal Income
Per Capita
Income
City
Unemployment
Rate (%) (2)
County
Population (1)
Public School
Enrollment (3)
2011-12 50,081 5,791,344,943 115,640 1,438,276,239 28,719 12.7%--
2012-13 51,505 5,759,934,839 111,833 1,474,536,645 28,629 10.4%--
2013-14 52,413 6,192,510,384 118,148 1,512,219,876 28,852 8.6%--
2014-15 53,000 6,668,114,649 125,813 1,566,627,000 29,559 6.9%--
2015-16 55,170 7,068,226,533 128,117 1,648,534,770 29,881 5.7%--
2016-17 55,936 7,654,396,884 136,842 1,720,759,168 30,763 4.9%--
2017-18 55,615 8,128,701,548 146,160 1,817,498,200 32,680 3.7% 1,956,598 11,834
2018-19 55,928 8,692,971,361 155,431 1,927,859,413 34,470 2.5% 1,954,282 11,652
2019-20 57,084 9,243,761,986 161,933 2,046,518,484 35,851 13.9% 1,961,969 11,672
2020-21 56,599 9,807,614,121 173,282 2,190,227,917 38,697 8.6% 1,934,171 10,248
Source: Santa Clara County Assessor data, MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Source: 2016-17 and prior: previously published ACFR Report
( - ) Data unavailable.
1.) Population Projections are provided by the California Department of Finance Projections.
2.) Unemployment and Labor Force Data are provided by the EDD's Labor Market Information Division.
City of Gilroy
Demographic and Economic Statistics
Last Ten Fiscal Years
3.) Student Enrollment reflects the total number of students enrolled in the Las Virgenes Unified School District. Any other school districts within
the City are not accounted for in this statistic.
198
Business Name
Number of
Employees Rank
Percent of
Total
Employment
(%)
Number of
Employees Rank
Percent of
Total
Employment
(%)
Gilroy Unified School District* 1,024 1 3.39%
Christopher Ranch LLC 696 2 2.30% 800 1 4.08%
Olam International (Formerly ConAgra-Gilroy Foods) 422 3 1.40% 500 4 2.55%
Community Solutions 324 4 1.07%
Walmart Supercenter 305 5 1.01% 395 5 2.01%
Costco Wholesale 304 6 1.01% 220 7 1.12%
Saint Louise Regional Hospital 288 7 0.95% 550 2 2.81%
City of Gilroy 258 8 0.85%
Gavilan College 223 9 0.74%
Head Start Nursery 188 10 0.62% 180 9 0.92%
Gilroy Gardens Theme Park (formerly Bonfante) 500 3 2.55%
Monterey Gourmet Foods 225 6 1.15%
Kaiser Permanente 200 8 1.02%
International Paper 180 10 0.92%
Total Top 10 Employers 4,032 13.35% 3,750 19.13%
Total City Labor Force (1) 30,200 19,607
Source: MuniServices, LLC / Avenu Insights & Analytics
Source: 2013-14 previously published ACFR. Nine years prior data is unavailable.
Results based on direct correspondence with city’s local businesses.
(1) Total City Labor Force provided by EDD Labor Force Data.
* Includes FTE & PTE.
City of Gilroy
Principal Employers
Current Year and Seven Years Ago
2020-21 2013-14
199
This page intentionally left blank.
200
Department 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
Administration 6 6 5 4 5 5 6 6 7 7
City Council and Mayor 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7
Community Development 18 18 20 21 21 18 18 21 23 20
Finance 14 13 13 13 13 11 13 14 14 11
Fire 39 41 39 40 39 35 36 37 37 43
Fleet and Facilities 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 10 7
Human Resources 3 3 4 4 4 4 4 4 5 4
Information Technology 2 4 4 2 2 3 3 4 3 4
Police 87 87 88 93 94 87 92 94 96 98
Public Works 34 34 36 38 43 40 42 54 57 48
Recreation 11 11 11 11 12 10 11 11 11 4
Total 231 234 237 243 250 230 242 262 270 253
(a) Beginning in fiscal year 2013-2014, the amount represents the number of filled positions by departments. Prior to fiscal year 2013-14, the amounts
noted represent budgeted positions.
City of Gilroy
Full-Time Equivalent City Employees
By Function / Program
Last Ten Fiscal Years
201
Function 2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
General Gvoernement
Number of Business Licenses Issued 2,958 2,855 2,615 3,034 2,685
Total Volunteer Service Hours 31,905 29,566 35,439 32,598 34,723
Total City-Wide Training Hours Provided 3,513 1,300 1,245 1,957 2,356
Total Vehicle Work Orders Generated 3,118 2,919 2,739 3,146 2,629
Total Facilities Work Orders Generated 1,660 1,658 1,613 1,542 1,445
Public Safety
Police
Number of 911 Calls Received 22,328 24,074 27,753 28,498 21,044 **
Number of Police Calls for Service 59,361 58,124 58,112 62,200 62,071
Number of Investigations Assigned to Detectives 781 769 727 821 913
Number of Case Reports Processed 10,708 11,956 11,926 13,566 12,621
Fire
Total Calls for Service 4,014 4,322 4,557 5,131 5,007
Total Fire Calls 172 178 182 179 223
Total Emergency Medical Aid Calls 2,410 2,566 2,802 3,341 3,323
Community Development
Number of Building Inspections Completed 14,055 13,938 14,101 21,592 24,500
Number of Building Permits Processed 1,160 1,158 1,706 2,042 2,197
Number of Fire Code Permits Issued 587 577 567 819 839
Public Works
430,000 660,000 930,000 90,000 274,479
Linear Feet of Preventive Cleaning 540,000 640,000 600,000 716,900 785,288
Million Gallons of Wastewater Treated per Day 6.39 6.27 6.05 5.99 5.97
Million Gallons of Municipal Water Produced per Day 7.71 8.32 7.87 6.79 5.94
Million Gallons of Wastewater Flow per Day (COG)0.37 3.58 3.45 3.50 3.59
Number of Utility Billing Customers 13,210 13,540 13,716 13,865 14,300
Recreation
Number of Registrations Processed 5,075 7,405 5,500 6,378 5,856
Number of Meals Provided to Seniors Annually 17,744 19,459 19,549 20,031 21,351
Source: City of Gilroy, Various City Departments
* Statistic not available
Square Feet of Chip/Cape/Slurry Seal Completed
City of Gilroy
Operating Indicators By Function / Program
Last Ten Fiscal Years
Fiscal Year
202
Function 2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General Gvoernement
Number of Business Licenses Issued 3,166 3,800 3,965 3,160 4,319
Total Volunteer Service Hours 33,855 31,505 28,460 18,465 2,521
Total City-Wide Training Hours Provided 3,112 3,200 2,688 2,892 1,038
Total Vehicle Work Orders Generated 2,478 1,428 1,327 1,514 1,904
Total Facilities Work Orders Generated 1,317 1,428 1,411 1,488 1,405
Public Safety
Police
Number of 911 Calls Received 23,744 23,484 22,235 23,578 22,740
Number of Police Calls for Service 63,887 63,073 64,134 58,354 44,016
Number of Investigations Assigned to Detectives 845 815 986 1,023 971
Number of Case Reports Processed 12,320 12,478 11,075 11,020 10,095
Fire
Total Calls for Service 5,441 5,374 5,555 6,243 6,299
Total Fire Calls 223 265 282 336 381
Total Emergency Medical Aid Calls 3,735 3,707 3,739 4,065 4,089
Community Development
Number of Building Inspections Completed 23,623 17,991 17,450 14,618 15,652
Number of Building Permits Processed 1,903 1,970 2,050 1,300 1,361
Number of Fire Code Permits Issued 476 1,060 1,230 885 474
Public Works
Square Feet of Chip/Cape/Slurry Seal Completed 712,504 533,397 1,430,477 1,547,477 1,451,239
Linear Feet of Preventive Cleaning 707,379 854,304 897,479 849,228 632,280
Million Gallons of Wastewater Treated per Day 7.60 6.16 6.66 6.18 6.14
Million Gallons of Municipal Water Produced per Day 6.46 7.07 6.80 7.20 7.60
Million Gallons of Wastewater Flow per Day (COG)4.84 3.87 4.13 3.73 3.49
Number of Utility Billing Customers 14,549 14,870 15,133 15,218 15,311
Recreation
Number of Registrations Processed 5,807 4,952 4,737 4,232 2,380
Number of Meals Provided to Seniors Annually 22,566 23,815 25,103 21,979 19,525
Source: City of Gilroy, Various City Departments
* Statistic not available
** Available Data Reflects
Fiscal Year
City of Gilroy
Operating Indicators By Function / Program (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
203
2012 2013 2014 2015 2016
General Government
City Buildings 55 55 55 55 55
Public Safety
Police
Police Sattions 1 1 1 1 1
Police Vehicles 71 72 76 79 86
Fire
Fire Stations 3 3 3 3 3
Fire Vehicles 20 20 20 20 20
Public Works
Park sites 16 16 16 16 16
Centerline Miles of Streets 156 159 118 120 119
Number of Streetlights 3,894 3,969 4,150 4,150 4,773
Miles of Storm Trunk Mains 30 31 31 31 31
Miles of Sewer Mains 108 110 110 111 111
Treatment Plant Dry Weather Flow Capacity (MGD)9 9 9 9 9
Water Meters in Municipal Service Area 13,319 13,651 13,831 14,127 14,669
Miles of Water Mains 116 120 121 152 152
Number of Fire Hydrants 1,948 1,960 2,048 2,150 2,265
Source: City of Gilroy, Various City Departments
Function
City of Gilroy
Capital Assets By Function
Last Ten Fiscal Years
204
2017 2018 2019 2020 2021
General Government
City Buildings 55 57 57 57 57
Public Safety
Police
Police Sattions 1 1 1 1 1
Police Vehicles 87 83 103 109 109
Fire
Fire Stations 3 3 3 3 3
Fire Vehicles 21 20 19 19 20
Public Works
Park sites 16 19 19 20 21
Centerline Miles of Streets 126 151 166 166 166
Number of Streetlights 4,794 4,841 4,861 4,885 4,295
Miles of Storm Trunk Mains 37 39 40 40 40
Miles of Sewer Mains 151 160 161 163 162
Treatment Plant Dry Weather Flow Capacity (MGD)9 9 9 9 9
Water Meters in Municipal Service Area 14,783 14,450 15,133 15,220 15,266
Miles of Water Mains 204 205 210 205 219
Number of Fire Hydrants 2,290 1,948 2,229 2,187 2,293
Source: City of Gilroy, Various City Departments
Function
City of Gilroy
Capital Assets By Function (Continued)
Last Ten Fiscal Years
205
This page intentionally left blank.
206