HomeMy WebLinkAbout08 17 2026 - Item 8.1 - Armando Be1
Stefan Mercer
From:Armando Be <barmando3@gmail.com>
Sent:Sunday, August 16, 2026 9:31 PM
To:Council Member Zachary Hilton; Council Member Carol Marques; Council Member Dion
Bracco; Mayor Greg Bozzo; Council Member Kelly Ramirez; Matt Morley; Council
Member Terence Fugazzi; Council Member Tom Cline; Public Comments
Subject:EXTERNAL - 8/17/26 Council meeting Agenda Item 8.1- Introduction and First Reading
of an Ordinance Amending ....
Attachments:AMAZON PLAN APPLICATION.jpeg
Mayor and Councilmembers,
I urge each of you to take a serious look at what is before you tomorrow. The Gilroy community is
not asking for minor changes to the City's Architectural and Site Review ordinance. It is asking you to
address a much larger question:
How should Gilroy regulate large-scale data centers and other projects capable of having
substantial citywide impacts?
The community expects its elected representatives to take that question seriously and develop an
appropriate response. Unfortunately, the staff recommendation does not do that. It is essentially more
of the same.
The staff’s proposed procedural changes—additional notification, a community meeting and some
changes to Planning Commission review leave the fundamental system largely unchanged.
Administrative review by the Community Development Director remains the predominant standard. It
is of great consequence that the elected City Council still has very little direct involvement in the
approval of large-scale data center projects.
I support public notification and community meetings. But asking residents to attend another
meeting and submit another round of comments is not a substitute for establishing clear rules.
The community is asking the Council to direct staff to develop a regulatory framework specifically
for data centers with measurable, objective standards that regulates what is acceptable and what is
not.
The staff report itself acknowledges that the Planning Commission recommended the Council to
consider developing objective standards governing the size, intensity and operational characteristics
of projects, including water consumption, battery energy storage, fuel storage and campus size.
The Planning Commission has identified and clearly understands the missing piece. The City
should now act on it.
CAUTION: This email originated from an External Source. Please use proper judgment and caution when opening attachments, clicking links, or
responding to this email.
2
The community has already provided a starting point. This is important: community members
have already written a proposed model ordinance for regulating data centers and presented it to the
Mayor and City Manager for consideration.
We are not simply asking the City to "do something." We have identified the problem, developed
proposed solutions and provided a framework that staff can evaluate and refine. It is unfortunate that
the staff report does not even identify this community-developed proposal as an alternative for the
Council to consider.
The timing is urgent. Each of you is now aware that Amazon intends additional data-center
development on the approximately 60-acre property, separate from the approximately 56-acre Phase
1 and Phase 2 development. It is clear to the community that Gilroy should establish its rules before
another application moves forward. That is why a temporary moratorium, or other appropriate interim
measure, should be considered.
The community is asking for a temporary pause while Gilroy establishes clear rules for an entirely
new category of development.
Councilmembers, tomorrow's vote will matter. You know the community is asking for more than
the staff recommendation provides. You know the Planning Commission has identified the need for
objective standards. And you know community members have already provided a proposed model
regulatory framework.
Tomorrow, you have a choice. You can adopt relatively minor changes to an existing Architectural
and Site Review process that was not designed for projects of this scale and intensity, or you can
recognize that Gilroy needs a new policy framework and direct the City to do the serious work the
community is asking for.
That choice will be noticed. If the Council adopts the staff recommendation without first
addressing these substantive concerns, many residents will reasonably conclude that their concerns
were heard but not taken seriously.
The staff report expressly recognizes that the Council can approve, modify or reject the proposed
amendment and direct staff to prepare a revised version. Please use that authority.
I respectfully ask the Council to:
1. Do not simply adopt the staff recommendation tomorrow.
2. Establish an appropriate temporary moratorium or interim measure on new large-scale data-
center development.
3. Direct staff to develop measurable, objective data-center standards, using the community-
developed, proposed ordinance as a starting point.
4. Address cumulative and phased development so major projects cannot circumvent those
standards.
5. Establish clear thresholds that involve the City Council in the approval process.
3
6. Return with a comprehensive regulatory framework that provides both meaningful public
participation and meaningful public accountability.
Gilroy does not need another version of the same system. It needs rules appropriate for the scale
of development we are now facing. Tomorrow's vote is an opportunity to demonstrate that you have
heard the community and are prepared to listen and to act as their elected representatives.
Sincerely,
Armando Benavides