Minutes 1977/04/12
1
3918
Gilroy, California
April 12, 1977
A Special Meeting of the Gilroy City Council was called to order
by His Honor Mayor Norman B. Goodrich at 4:04 p.m.
Roll Call Present: Council Members: William E. Childers, Roberta H. Hughqn,
Marion T. Link, John E. Pate, David V. Stout and Norman B. Goodrich.
Absent: Council Member: Brian D. Cunningham.
So.Co.Bldg. The Mayor stated that the purpose of the meeting was to decide
Morator- whether the City of Gilroy was going to cooperate with the oresent plan as
ium presented by the Board of Supervisors regarding the County Building Mora-
torium Committee by giving the Cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill each two
(2) representatives on said Committee which were promised and did get,
however, the Cities did not get what Supervisor Steinberg promised at a
recent meeting where she was present.
The Mayor read excerpts from a transcript of said meeting, noting
that Mrs. Steinberg agreed that the City of Gilroy would be allowed two (2)
representatives on said Committee. He further noted that his second ques-
tion to Mrs. Steinberg was after long and lengthy study of the transition
area planned by Gilroy and Morgan Hill as it would be presented it would
be the City's desire in regard to planning of this transition area, would
she be willing as a Supervisor to accept the City's desires in this plan-
ning area, and her answer was absolutely. Then she went on to say that
she wanted to make it clear that she would not question the Cities plan-
ning for anything that goes into the City, but she would like to reserve
the right to discuss with the City the boundary of the transition area.
The Mayor agreed after the boundary had been accepted. Mrs. Steinberg
then noted that the urban planning would be the cities and that she ex-
presses the position of many Supervisors. The Mayor noted that the Board
of Supervisors then passed a resolution following this meetin~ with Mrs.
Steinberg and it did not have this understanding in same. He further noted
that the County Building Moratorium Committee is only an advisory committee;
that the Board of Supervisors has veto powers and will make all the deci-
sions and that they intend to do the planning in the transition area; and
that this is not what Mrs. Steinberg stated. He further noted that Mrs.
3919
-
Steinberg said that as far as she was concerned the Cities would do their
planning in their transition area, and that she felt that the Board of
Supervisors would go along with same.
The Mayor noted that Morgan Hill went on continued record as not
to participate with the planning Committee that is being formed unless and
until certain changes are made. He further noted that this was the reason
this Special Meeting was called, however it did not start out that way as
he thought everything might be resolved following Mrs. Steinberg's meetina
with the City representatives and the City might be ready to participate
in the joint effort of the planning of the South County.
The Mayor noted that he is not ready to cooperate with the County
Committee as it is now structed with the restrictions that are on it and
if the Council agrees the City should reaffirm the City's position.
Councilman Link noted that he feels that the County does not
wish to cooperate with the City; that they just want the Cities to rubber-
stamp whatever they say. He further noted that the Supervisors had stated
that they would let the City of Gilroy reword the Resolution to whatever
words or terms that would be acceptable to the City. He suggested that the
City attempt to determine if the County Board of Supervisors would turn
over all the planning of the transition areas to the Cities as this is
what they indicated at their April 11, 1977 meeting, however noted that
same was not written in the document passed.
-
Councilman Stout noted if the City knows what the Board of Super-
visors are requesting, does the City know what they would prefer to have?
He reviewed the City's proposed urban planning area boundaries up to 1990
based on present projections which are revewed annually; that the said area
is what the City could be reasonably concerned about as of this date. He
further noted that the question then arises about the area that is not yet
annexed to the City, but is in the overall area adjacent to the City's
proposed urban planning area. He further noted that the City has attempted
in previous action to determine from the County the street patterns in un-
incorporated areas developed tying in with the City's streets. He notes
that the City is concerned with this unincorporated area that is the future
of the City of Gilroy that is not yet in the urban service area and is not
yet annexed; that if property owners in this area wish to develop same they
would have to go to the County as it would be in the County's jurisdiction:
He suggests that the City should state what they would like to control
within this area that actually affects the growth of the City of Gilroy.
He states that if the City knows what is wrong then they should be in a
position to state what is riqht based on what its planning is and further
that he does not feel that the City is in a position to state same at this
meeting. He noted that if the County did not accept same they would truly
be violating the rights of the City of Gilroy to plan its present and future
urban service areas. He further noted that there was an Advisory Committee
of the County Planning Commission who made a two year study of South County
Planning which was presented to the Board of Supervisors who disregarded
same. He further suggested that when the City develops a plan that the
City knows it wants we would ask the County to conform and respect and
cooperate with that, then the City should include in that to request that
the County rescind the building moratorium and go back to variable density
during the period of the time of the additional study. He suggests that
this matter then be reassigned to the Committee that did the original
south county planning study to take into consideration the agricultural
land that the City is most familiar with and that which we should be recom-
mending to the Board of Supervisors.
,!"'1'7A'"
Councilman Pate stated based on previous recent action, that
the City of Gilroy has no alternative but to join with the City of Morqan
Hill and not in anyway participate in the Board of Supervisors' Committee
being formed regarding the South County Building Moratorium. He stated
that the Committee seems to have no authority and is not feasible, further
that the City has agreed to join with the South County United Committee in
a suit against the Board of Supervisors in their buildinq moratorium. He
noted that nothing can be accomplished with the Board of Supervisor's
proposed Committee. He concurred that the City of Gilroy at some future
date will have to inform the County what it wants in the transition area
and recommended that the City study same and make a proposal directly to
the Board of Supervisors rather than trying to go through a Committee.
.......
Councilwoman Hughan stated the number of representatives on the
County Building Moratorium Committee is not a qood basis for non-partici-
pation in same. She recommended that we join with Morgan Hill and r~~use
3920
to participate on said Committee on the basis that this Committee is not
going to accomplish anything.
Councilman Childers concurred with Councilman Pate and Council-
man Link to not participate in the proposed Committee of the Board of Super-
visors. He recommended that the City reaffirm its previous action and let
the courts decide if the building moratorium is legal or not, however in
the meantime the City should study the transition area and decide what
proposal it will make to the County for same.
Motion was made by Councilman Stout seconded 'by Councilman
Childers and carried that the City of Gilroy reaffirms it position in re- ...
gard to participating in the make-up of the County Committee and the objec-
tives, duties and responsibilities that have been outlined for it.
The Mayor suggested that discussion be had in regard to what the
City wants and if we want to plan our own area for submission to the
Board of Supervisors.
Councilman Link noted that the County has already adopted an
ordinance that all areas outside the five year urban planning area of
each City will be zoned to twenty (20) acre minimum.
Discussion was had in regard to the County forcing the cities
to accept boundaries of the transition area.
Councilman Stout noted that the City should be studying planning
for the South County urban and transition areas in order to be able to
present a proposal to the Board of Supervisors for same.
Councilwoman Hughan stated that there was a time factor in the
matter since the Board of Supervisors indicated that if the City did not
do it they would.
Councilman Stout noted that the City already has a boundary of
the transition areas but prooerties wihtin that area could be sucject to
the building moratorium if the City does not have a plan of its own;
thought has to be given to what the City is going to do with the area thqt
it wants to have control over.
....
-..It
Councilman Link stated that even though an area is in the unincor-
porated area of the County and if the City had a plan for same, that the
property owner could to with that property what the City wanted in the
future.
Mr. Ed Lazzarini addressed the Council and noted that the hearing
for the injunction has been scheduled for May 4, 1977 and tomorrow the
South County United Committee is going to request the Judge that same be
rescheduled for an earlier date. He noted that it is a hearing for a per-
manent injunction and in order to show cause why the injunction should not
be established.
Mr. Lazzarini noted that it was suggested from one of the Councils
either from the City of Gi 1 roy or Morgan Hi 11 that the Board of Supervi sors
lift the building permit moratorium, reconvene the South County Planning
Advisory Committee, instruct that Committee to work with the two (2) cities
to establish transition zones, and to adjust the variable density so that
it meets the current needs. Meanwhile continue with the lot split moratorium
until that's done. That would give everybody a way out of this dilemma, and
the law suit could be dropped, the building permit moratorium could be
lifted, the local Committee of twenty (20) could work with the Cities'
staffs and actually work in study sessions with the Planninq Commissions of
the two (2) cities to establish this transition zone, which would enclose
the overlay plan to make sure that when the cities got to the annexation pf
those properties they would match the traffic-ways and so on and so forth
of both cities and meet the needs of this community. Then we would have
a purpose for a lot split moratorium that would last maybe until December,
but maybe could be lifted sooner.
"'"""II
~.....-;4
Council concurred with Mr. Lazzarini IS statements.
Councilman Childers recommended that the Council's feelings be
formalized in a letter to the Board of Supervisors.
Mr. Lazzarini, noted that the South County United Committee has
r
3921
an appointment April 13, 1977 at 1:30 p.m. with Supervisor Steinberg at her
office and invited the Mayor and Council Members available to attend same.
He also stated that if they had endorsement of their proposal from the City
of Gilroy Council same could be mediated.
Mr. Lazzarini stated that under the law suit the County has some
options open to them that they don't have under the ordinance system. In
order to negate the ordinance passed after the second reading they must pass
another ordinance; also they can't have an emergency ordinance to remove
a moratorium ordinance. Under a court order they could stipulate to some
of the charges South County United Committee has made which would take care
of part of the ordinance passed and the remaining portion of said ordinance
would still be in effect. He further stated that the South County United
Committee will have their attorney present at the meeting with Mrs. Stein-
berg with the hope that a court compromise could be reached.
The Mayor noted that he would attend said meeting with South County
United Committee. Council Members: Stout, Link and Pate indicated that they
would attend if possible.
Motion was made by Councilman Pate seconded by Councilman Childers
and carried that as we have already stated that we reinstate our position
of not participating in the Committee for at least two or three reasons:
the most important reason being that we don't feel that anything worthwhile
can become of it, because of the fact that the Committee would have no
authority; that secondly we propose to the Board of Supervisors as a
practical response to their proposal (outlined by Mr. Ed Lazzarini) relating
to the lifting of the building permit moratorium, the reinstatement of the
South County Advisory Committee, the coordinatin~ of establishment of
transition zones, specifically noting that the purpose of that reinstate-
ment would be to have the South County Advisory Committee work with the City
Staffs, the City Planning Commissions of the various cities in order to
determine the transition zones, then to rework variable density to an accept-
able procedure for the balance of the unincorporated area, and to work on
the agricultural preserve problem and that the reason for reiterating iJ
because the City questions the legality of the Board of Supervisor's action
and further that same be drafted in a letter directed to the Board of Super-
visors and presented to Supervisor Steinberg at the April 13, 1977 meeting
in her offi ce.
Adjournment
The Mayor adjourned the meeting at 4:56 p.m.
Respec~fully submitted,
/
(
?)~~
/