HomeMy WebLinkAboutCityCouncil_RegularSession_agendapacket_03_03_2025.PDFMarch 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 1 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
CITY COUNCIL CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
7351 ROSANNA STREET, GILROY, CA
95020
MONDAY, MARCH 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
MAYOR
Greg Bozzo
COUNCIL MEMBERS
Dion Bracco
Tom Cline
Terence Fugazzi
Zach Hilton
Carol Marques
Kelly Ramirez
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
PUBLIC COMMENTS ON AGENDA ITEMS ARE TAKEN BEFORE THE CITY COUNCIL TAKES ACTION. Please keep
your comments to 3 minutes. Time restrictions may vary based on the Mayor's discretion.
Send written comments on any agenda item to publiccomments@cityofgilroy.org or City Hall, 7351 Rosanna
Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by 1 p.m. on the meeting day will be distributed to the City Council
before the meeting. Comments are also available at bit.ly/3NuS1IN.
In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act, 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’s
Office at least 72 hours prior to the meeting at (408) 846-0204 or
cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org to help ensure that reasonable arrangements can be
made.
If you dispute any planning or land use decision from this meeting in court, you may only raise issues you or
someone else presented at this meeting's public hearing or in written letters to the City Council before the hearing.
Be aware that the time to seek a judicial review of any final decision made at this meeting is defined by Section
1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
During this meeting, a Closed Session may be called under Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2). This will
happen if, in the City's legislative body's opinion (based on current facts, circumstances, and legal advice), there's
a significant risk of a lawsuit against the City.
Additional materials submitted after agenda distribution are available on www.cityofgilroy.org as soon as possible.
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.
March 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 2 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
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.
If you need translation assistance, contact the City Clerk 72 hours before the meeting at 408-846-0204 or
cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org.
Si necesita un intérprete durante la junta y gustaría dar un comentario público, comuníquese con el
Secretario de la Ciudad un mínimo de 72 horas antes de la junta al 408-846-0204 o envíe un correo
electrónico a la Oficina del Secretario de la Ciudad a cityclerk@cityofgilroy.org.
To access written translation during the meeting, please scan the QR Code or
click this link:
Para acceder a la traducción durante la reunión, por favor escanee el código
QR o haga clic en el enlace:
bit.ly/3FBiGA0
Choose Language and Click Attend | Seleccione su lenguaje y haga clic en
asistir
Use a headset on your phone for audio or read the transcript on your device.
Use sus auriculares para escuchar el audio o leer la transcripción en el
dispositivo.
The agenda for this meeting is outlined as follows:
1. OPENING
1.1. Call to Order
1.2. Pledge of Allegiance
1.3. Invocation
1.4. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
1.5. Roll Call
1.6. Orders of the Day
1.7. Employee Introductions
2. CLOSED SESSION
2.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION.
Significant Exposure to Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (2) of Subdivision
(d) and Paragraph (3) of Subdivision (e) of Government Code Section
54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 (3) (b), based upon receipt of
a written communication from Shenkman & Hughes, PC (available for
inspection upon request at the office of the City Clerk). One case as
defendant.
March 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
3. ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION
Report of any action taken in Closed Session and vote or abstention of each Council
Member if required by Government Code Section 54957.1 and GCC Section 17A.13(b);
Public Report of the vote to continue in closed session if required under GCC Section
17A.11(5).
4. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Proclamations and Awards
4.1. Presentation of Retirement Proclamation to Scott Barron
5. COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE (Informational Only)
6. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
6.1. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE
CITY COUNCIL
This part of the meeting allows public address on non-agenda topics
within the Council's jurisdiction. To speak, complete a Speaker's Card from
the entrances and give it to the City Clerk. Speaking time ranges from 1-3
minutes based on the Mayor's discretion. Extended discussions or actions
on non-agenda items are restricted by law. For Council action, the topic
may be listed on a future agenda.
Email written comments on non-agenda topics
to publiccomments@cityofgilroy.org or mail them to City Hall, 7351
Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020, by 1:00 p.m. on the meeting day. These
comments, available at City Hall, will be shared with the Council and
included in the meeting record. Late submissions will be shared as soon
as possible. A 10-page limit applies to hard-copy materials, but electronic
submissions are unlimited.
7. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco – Downtown Committee, Santa Clara County Library Joint
Powers Authority, Santa Clara Water Commission, Santa Clara Valley Water Joint Water
Resources Committee, SCRWA
Council Member Fugazzi – Santa Clara Water Commission (alternate), Silicon Valley
Regional Interoperability Authority Board (alternate), SCRWA, Visit Gilroy California
Welcome Center, VTA Mobility Partnership Committee
Council Member Marques – ABAG, Downtown Committee, Santa Clara County Library
Joint Powers Authority (alternate), Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Governing Board,
Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Implementation Board, SCRWA (alternate)
Council Member Hilton – CalTrain Policy Group, Santa Clara County Expressway Plan
2040 Advisory Board (alternate), Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board, South
County Youth Task Force Policy Team (alternate), VTA Policy Advisory Committee
Council Member Ramirez – ABAG (alternate), Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors
March 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
(alternate), Gilroy Sister Cities, Gilroy Youth Task Force (alternate), SCRWA, Santa Clara
Housing and Community Development Advisory Committee
Council Member Cline – CalTrain Policy Group (alternate), Gilroy Sister Cities (alternate),
Gilroy Youth Task Force, Santa Clara County Expressway Plan 2040 Advisory Board,
Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA Board (alternate), Silicon Valley Regional
Interoperability Authority Board, Visit Gilroy California Welcome Center (alternate), VTA
Mobility Partnership Committee, VTA Policy Advisory Committee (alternate)
Mayor Bozzo – Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors, Santa Clara Valley Water Joint Water
Resources Committee, South County Youth Task Force Policy Team, VTA Board of
Directors (alternate), Santa Clara Housing and Community Development Advisory
Committee (alternate)
8. CONSENT CALENDAR
Items under the Consent Calendar are deemed routine and approved with one motion. If a Council member or a member
of the public wishes for a separate discussion on an item, it must be requested for removal before the Council's approval
vote. If removed, the item will be discussed in its original order.
8.1. Approval of a Notice of Acceptance of Completion for the FY25 Annual
CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project No. 25-PW-291 and Approval of a Final
Contract Amount of $172,003.00
8.2. Claim of Virginia Ferree (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote
under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of the claim)
9. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
10. PUBLIC HEARINGS
10.1. Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-
Large to a District-Based Election System for the Purpose of Receiving
Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New Districts and Hearing the
Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing of
District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
1. Disclosure of Ex-Parte Communications
2. Staff Report: Andrew Faber, City Attorney
3. Open Public Hearing
4. Close Public Hearing
5. Possible Action:
Hold a Public Hearing and receive public input and a presentation from the
City of Gilroy's ("City") consulting Demographer, Redistricting Partners,
regarding the process and criteria for establishing boundaries for district
elections pursuant to the California Voting Rights Act ("CVRA") for the City
Council. The City Council should further discuss the following topics:
1. The Communities of Interest within the City that should define the
boundaries and composition of districts before any maps of any
proposed district boundaries are drawn; and,
2. Whether the City should draw six districts and retain its directly elected
Mayor, or draw 7 districts where City Councilmembers select the Mayor
March 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 5 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
on a rotating or other basis.
11. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
11.1. Special Event Ordinance Update
1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Staff is seeking Council direction to continue to waive fees for special events
organized by non-profit organizations in the downtown area, and provide
direction on the establishment of Downtown event zones and a fee waiver
program for special events.
12. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
12.1. Create a Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program and Adopt a
Resolution Amending FY 2024-25 Budget to Appropriate Program Budget
Adjustments
1. Staff Report: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
1. Receive report, direct staff to create a Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR)
Preservation Program, become a partner agency in the Santa Clara
County Office of Supportive Housing’s BMR Partnership Program, and
authorize staff to execute the necessary steps to preserve the affordability
of BMR homes as outlined in the report, including entering into loan
agreements with and repaying Santa Clara County and executing
necessary documents as appropriate.
2. Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2024-25 budget to appropriate Pilot
BMR Preservation Program budget adjustments.
12.2. Presentation on Elected Officials' Roles in Emergency Management
1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Receive a presentation on the roles and responsibilities of elected officials in
emergency management and provide any feedback or direction as
appropriate.
13. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
14. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
14.1. Santa Teresa Fire Station Update
March 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 6 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
14.2. Demonstration and Update Regarding the Service Request Software
SeeClickFix
14.3. Demonstration and Update on the Bicycle and Pedestrian Encouragement
GIS Map
15. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
16. CLOSED SESSION
16.1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to GC
Sec. 54956.8 and GC Sec.17A.8(a)(2) 13.1.1.
Property: 140 5th Street (APN 799- 070- 23)
Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator and Victoria Valencia,
Economic Development Manager
Other Party to Negotiations: Advantage Peak, LLC
Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Lease
16.2. PUBLIC EMPLOYEE PERFORMANCE EVALUATION Pursuant to
Government Code Section 54957 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.8(a)(4)
Name/Title: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
17. ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION
Report of any action taken in Closed Session and vote or abstention of each Council
Member if required by Government Code Section 54957.1 and GCC Section 17A.13(b);
Public Report of the vote to continue in closed session if required under GCC Section
17A.11(5).
18. ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE MEETING DATES
March 2025
17 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
April 2025
7 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
21 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
May 2025
5 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
19 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
Meetings are live streamed on the City of Gilroy’s website at gilroy.city/meetings and on
YouTube at https://bit.ly/45jor03.
Access the 2025 City Council Meeting Calendar at https://gilroy.city/2025.
4.1
p. 6 of 264
Page 1 of 2
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Approval of a Notice of Acceptance of Completion for
the FY25 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project
No. 25-PW-291 and Approval of a Final Contract
Amount of $172,003.00
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department:Public Works
Submitted By:Daniel Padilla, City Engineer
Prepared By:Susana Ramirez, Engineer I
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services
Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure
RECOMMENDATION
a) Approve a Notice of Acceptance of Completion for the FY25 Annual Community
Development Block Grant (CDBG) Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project No. 25-PW-291.
b) Approve a final contract amount of $172,003.00 for the FY25 Annual CDBG
Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project No. 25-PW-291.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Construction of the FY25 Annual Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project (Project) was completed
by Villalobos and Associates, and Public Works staff has reviewed and approved the
performed work. The Project consisted of constructing twenty (20) new ADA-compliant
pedestrian curb ramps for a total construction cost of $172,003.00.
Staff recommends City Council approval of the attached Notice of Acceptance of
Completion for the FY25 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project No. 25-PW-291.
BACKGROUND
8.1
p. 7 of 264
Approval of Notice of Acceptance of Completion for FY25 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb Ramp
Project No. 25-PW-291
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 2 March 3, 20251
9
1
2
The City receives CDBG Program funding annually from the United States Department
of Housing and Urban Development (HUD). The City of Gilroy Fiscal Year 2024 to
Fiscal Year 2028 Capital Improvement Program (FY24-FY28 CIP) was adopted by the
City Council on June 5, 2023. The FY25 Annual Sidewalk/Curb Ramp Project is
included in the FY24-FY28 CIP as Project #800450.
On November 18, 2024, the City Council awarded a construction contract for the Project
to Villalobos & Associates in the amount of $141,755.00 with a project contingency of
$38,188.33 for a total allocation of $179,943.33 and authorized the City Administrator to
execute the contract and associated documents.
ANALYSIS
The Project scope of work included the construction of twenty (20) new ADA-compliant
pedestrian curb ramps at the following locations:
• Two (2) at the intersection of Laurel Drive and Cypress Court
• Two (2) at the intersection of Cypress Court and Juniper Drive
• Two (2) at the intersection of Welburn Avenue and Doris Court
• One (1) at the intersection of Welburn Avenue and Carmel Street
• Two (2) at the intersection of Welburn Avenue and Diane Court
• Two (2) at the intersection of Sherwood Drive and Carmel Street
• One (1) at the intersection of Sherwood Drive and David Court
• Four (4) at the intersection of Irish Court and Parish Way
• Four (4) at the intersection of Hanna Street and El Cerrito Way
The overall schedule of Project construction was nine working days. Construction began
on December 9, 2024, and was completed on December 20, 2024.
Staff recommends the City Council approve the Notice of Acceptance of Completion
and the final contract amount of $172,003.00 for the FY25 Annual CDBG Sidewalk/Curb
Ramp Project No. 25-PW-291.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Construction of this Project was funded through CDBG Fund, Fund 245. There are no
impacts to the City’s General Fund.
The total Project construction cost was $172,003. The CDBG grant amount awarded for
curb ramps in FY25 was $179,943.33. The remaining balance of $7,940.33 will be
returned to the City’s CDBG Fund.
Attachments:
1. Notice of Acceptance of Completion of Project 25-PW-291
8.1
p. 8 of 264
8.1
p. 9 of 264
8.1
p. 10 of 264
Page 1 of 1
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Claim of Virginia Ferree (The City Administrator
recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent
Calendar shall constitute denial of the claim)
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department:Administrative Services
Submitted By:LeeAnn McPhillips, Administrative Services and Human
Resources Director / Risk Manager
Prepared By:LeeAnn McPhillips, Administrative Services and Human
Resources Director / Risk Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable
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 March 3,
2025 meeting:
• Claim of Virginia Ferree
Attachments:
1. Claim of Virginia Ferree
8.2
p. 11 of 264
8.2
p. 12 of 264
8.2
p. 13 of 264
8.2
p. 14 of 264
Page 1 of 6
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's
Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public
Input on the Potential Contours of the New Districts
and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the
Transition Process and the Drawing of District Maps
for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Andrew Faber, City Attorney
Department:Administration
Submitted By:Andrew Faber, City Attorney
Prepared By:Andrew Faber, City Attorney
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Hold a Public Hearing and receive public input and a presentation from the City of
Gilroy's ("City") consulting Demographer, Redistricting Partners, regarding the process
and criteria for establishing boundaries for district elections pursuant to the California
Voting Rights Act ("CVRA") for the City Council. The City Council should further discuss
the following topics:
1. The Communities of Interest within the City that should define the boundaries
and composition of districts before any maps of any proposed district boundaries
are drawn; and,
2. Whether the City should draw six districts and retain its directly elected Mayor, or
draw 7 districts where City Councilmembers select the Mayor on a rotating or
other basis.
BACKGROUND
10.1
p. 15 of 264
Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New
Districts and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing
of District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 6 March 3, 2025
The City of Gilroy (“City”) currently has an at-large election system, where each of the
City's six Councilmembers are elected to staggered four-year terms by voters
throughout the City. The mayor is also elected at-large to a four-year term.
1. Letter Alleging Violation of the CVRA and the City's Resolution of Intent to
Transition from an At-Large Electoral System to One Based on Districts.
On December 16, 2024, the City received a letter from attorney Kevin Shenkman of
Shenkman & Hughes in Malibu, California ("Plaintiffs' Counsel") -on behalf of his client
the Southwest Voter Registration Education Project- alleging that the City is in violation
of the California Voting Rights Act ("CVRA") because the City elects its
Councilmembers at-large, and that the City's elections are characterized by racially
polarized voting. Racially polarized voting occurs where there is a sufficient/ significant
correlation between the race or ethnicity of voters and those voters' choice of
candidates or other electoral choices, as compared to the choice of candidates or
electoral choices preferred by the rest of the electorate. Plaintiffs' Counsel's letter
demands that the City immediately transition from an at-large elections system to a
district-based one. As noted above, the City currently has an at-large election system,
where each of the City’s six Councilmembers are elected by voters throughout the City.
A district-based election system is one in which the City is divided into separate
districts, each with one Councilmember who resides in that district and who is elected
only by voters residing in that district.
On February 24, 2025, at its regularly scheduled meeting, adopted a resolution of intent
to make the transition to district-based elections from the current at-large election
system. The first district-based elections will be in 2026. There are two district-based
options to consider: the creation of six districts and the retention of the at-large mayor
position; or, the creation of seven districts where one of the City Councilmembers
serves as mayor on a rotating basis.
2. The CVRA Rubric/ Violations of the CVRA
The CVRA was signed into law in 2002, and only applies to jurisdictions like the City
that utilize an at-large election method where voters of the entire jurisdiction elect each
of the members of the City Council. The CVRA prohibits an at-large method of election
that impairs the ability of a protected class to elect candidates of their choice or their
ability to influence the outcome of an election. The impairment occurs where there is
racially polarized voting – that is, when voters' candidate or other electoral choices
correlate in a statistically significant way with the race or ethnicity of the voter. The
correlation makes it more difficult for members of racial or ethnic minorities to elect
candidates of their choice as there is potential vote dilution in an at-large electoral
system. The intent of the CVRA was to significantly expand protections against vote
dilution over those provided by the Federal Voting Rights Act of 1965 (“FVRA”).
10.1
p. 16 of 264
Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New
Districts and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing
of District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 6 March 3, 2025
Compared with the FVRA, it is easier for plaintiffs to prove a violation of the CVRA
against public entities. Under the CVRA, proof of intent on the part of voters or elected
officials to discriminate against a protected class is not required. The Legislature also
mandated that those who mount a successful challenge under the CVRA recover their
attorneys' fees. Furthermore, a violation of the CVRA (but not the FVRA) can exist even
if it would not be possible through districting to create one or more “majority-minority”
districts.
3. The CVRA's Safe Harbor Provision
On December 16, 2024, the City received a “demand letter” regarding an alleged
violation of the CVRA. Under the CVRA, the City had 45 days to pass a resolution
proclaiming its intent to transition from at-large elections to district-based elections,
outlining the steps it will take to fully facilitate the entire transition, and the estimated
timeframe to complete the transition. The City obtained a short extension; the City
Council adopted its resolution at its regularly scheduled February 24 meeting.
The City now has 90 days from the February 24, 2025 resolution to complete the
transition process. (Elec. Code § 10010, subd. (e)(3)). Thus, absent extension, the City
must complete the transition to district-based elections by May 27, 2025, and has set
the following tentative schedule:
First Hearing:March 3, 2025 (Public Input on District Contours)
Second Hearing:March 17, 2025 (same)
Third Hearing:April 7, 2025 (Consideration of Draft Maps)
Fourth Hearing:April 21, 2025 (Consideration of Draft Maps)
Fifth Hearing:May 5, 2025 (Consideration of Draft Maps/ Order
Of Elections)
4. The Transition Process under the Safe Harbor Provision
The City has engaged a demographer, Redistricting Partners, to support the transition
effort to district-based elections. During this process, the City must:
• Hold at least five public hearings to receive public input and to consider draft
maps. The public hearing on March 3, 2025 will be the first of two required public
hearing for the public to provide input on communities of interest and the
composition of districts, as well as whether the City should retain a directly
elected mayor with six districts, or go to seven districts with a City
Councilmember selected mayor with seven districts. The City will not consider
any maps at this public hearing or the second public hearing, which has
tentatively been scheduled for March 17, 2025.
• After the two required initial hearings to gather public input, the City Council will
hold at least three additional public hearings starting in April of 2025 to consider
and select a map with district boundaries based on the public input received
10.1
p. 17 of 264
Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New
Districts and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing
of District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 6 March 3, 2025
regarding the City's communities of interest and the City Council's direction as to
whether the transition will produce six or seven districts with a directly elected mayor or
one chosen by the seven City Councilmembers, respectively. Redistricting Partners will
produce one or more maps for consideration by the City Council and the public before
each meeting, which will be available to the public at least 7 days before any hearing at
which the City Council considers the maps. Redistricting Partners will present those
maps – explaining each map’s attributes and the differences between or among them.
During one or more of these three hearings the City Council will discuss the proposed
sequence of election – that is, which districts will be on the ballot in November of 2026,
and which will be up in 2028.
During this March 3, 2025 hearing - the first public hearing, the City’s demographer,
Redistricting Partners, will make a presentation on the CVRA and the transition process
for preparing district boundaries. The intention of this hearing is to identify the
neighborhoods or "communities of interest" within the City, as well as other local factors
that should be considered by Redistricting Partners when drawing draft maps. The
public will be invited to ask questions about the process and to provide input on
communities of interest in the City. This will allow the demographer to better understand
the City and allow the drawing of maps based on sound demographic and legal
principles. The public is welcome to propose complete districting maps, (See below for
more on the district formation criteria.) The public is also invited to provide input as to
whether the City should move from a directly elected mayor with six districts to a system
in which the Mayor is selected by the seven City Councilmembers on, for example, a
rotating basis. This hearing will also identify and highlight resources available to the
public on the City's website related to the transition to district-based elections. (See
below for more information regarding the City's public outreach process.)
The format for the second hearing on March 17, 2025 will be the same. At the end of
the second public hearing with full consideration of the input offered by the public, the
City Council will provide direction to City staff and the City’s demographer regarding the
criteria to be considered, consistent with the required legal parameters, to create
proposed district maps. The City Council will also be asked to provide direction on the
number of districts to be created, as well as whether the City would like to retain the
practice of directly electing the Mayor.
DISTRICT FORMATION CRITERIA
In creating the district boundaries, the City must ensure compliance with the following
criteria mandated by the CVRA and the Federal Voting Rights Act:
• Each district must contain a nearly equal population.
• The districting plan must be drawn in a manner that complies with the Federal
Voting Rights Act and the Equal Protection Clause of the U.S. Constitution; and,
• The districts must not be drawn with race as the predominant factor.
10.1
p. 18 of 264
Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New
Districts and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing
of District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 6 March 3, 2025
Additionally, Election Code section 21130 requires cities to adopt districts using the
following criteria to the extent practicable, which are set forth in order of priority:
• Districts shall be geographically contiguous.
• To the extent practicable, the geographic integrity of any local neighborhood or
local community of interest must be respected and maintained. A “community of
interest” is a population that shares common social or economic interests that
should be included within a single district for purposes of its effective and fair
representation.
• District boundaries should be easily identifiable and understandable. To the
extent practicable, districts shall be bounded by natural and artificial barriers, by
streets, or by the boundaries of the jurisdiction.
• To the extent practicable, and where it does not conflict with the preceding
criteria, districts shall be drawn to encourage geographical compactness.
The City's demographer – Redistricting Partners – only will present maps that comply
with these criteria.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
In addition to the formal public hearing process, the City is implementing a robust effort
to encourage participation and inclusivity as a part of the districting process:
• Hosting a webpage dedicated to districting, which includes an explanation of the
districting process, relevant demographic data, the process for getting public
input (in all legally required languages), a calendar of public hearings and/or
workshop dates, the notice and agenda for each hearing/workshop, audio/video
records of the hearings/workshops, a copy of the draft map(s) considered, and a
copy of the final adopted map;
• Invited the submission of community of interest ("COI") forms to allow the public
to provide input on keeping communities of interest in single districts to the extent
possible, and invited the submission of draft maps using an interactive mapping
tool to allow the public to weigh-in on how the actual district lines might be drawn;
and
• Providing the above referenced information to good government, civic
engagement, and community groups that are active in the locality, including
those active with minority and non-English speaking communities.
NUMBER OF DISTRICTS AND NATURE OF THE MAYOR'S ELECTION
Early in the process of transitioning to district-based elections, the City Council will
provide direction to staff and consultants on the number of districts to be created. The
City currently has six City Councilmembers elected to four-year staggered terms and a
directly elected Mayor. The City Council will provide direction as to whether to maintain
this system, or switch to one where there are seven districts – with the seven City
Councilors selecting the Mayor on a rotating basis or some other basis.
10.1
p. 19 of 264
Hold the First Public Hearing Regarding the City's Transition from an At-Large to a District-Based
Election System for the Purpose of Receiving Public Input on the Potential Contours of the New
Districts and Hearing the Demographer's Presentation on the Transition Process and the Drawing
of District Maps for the November 2026 and 2028 Elections
City of Gilroy City Council Page 6 of 6 March 3, 2025
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The City of Gilroy must retain the services of a demographer to successfully transition to
district elections. The cost of such services is $45,000 to $50,000. The City also must
retain outside legal counsel to assist in the transition from at-large to district-based
elections, the cost of which will be $35,000 – 45,000. Lastly, it is contemplated that
Shenkman & Hughes, the author of the letter received on December 16, 2024, will send
an invoice to the City at the end of the transition process as allowed under the CVRA for
fees and costs associated with the investigation that gave rise to the letter received on
December 16, 2024 – usually for the services of a demographer and also attorneys'
fees. The amount of that invoice is capped by the statute at approximately $37,500 if
the City meets the CVRA time limits. The total anticipated cost will range from $117,500
to $132,500 and would be paid from the City’s General Fund (100). Should the Council
adopt the Resolution of Intent, staff will proceed with engaging the demographer and
outside legal counsel and the funding would be accommodated within the existing
appropriations in FY25 as typically there are year-end savings.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW
None.
PREVIOUS COUNCIL CONSIDERATION
During the regular meeting of February 24, 2025, the City Council adopted a Resolution
declaring its Intent to Transition to District-Based Elections pursuant to California
Elections Code Section 10010, with the transition taking effect for the November 2026
and 2028 Elections.
Attachments:
1. Resolution of Intent
10.1
p. 20 of 264
10.1
p. 21 of 264
10.1
p. 22 of 264
10.1
p. 23 of 264
10.1
p. 24 of 264
10.1
p. 25 of 264
Page 1 of 4
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Special Event Ordinance Update
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department:Administration
Submitted By:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Prepared By:Victoria Valencia, Economic Development Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Promote Economic Development Activities
RECOMMENDATION
Council discuss and provide feedback on the City's updated Special Event Ordinance.
BACKGROUND
At the August 19, 2024 Council Meeting, staff reported on the status of Chapter 13A,
entitled “Meetings, Assemblies, Parades, Sound-amplifying Systems, Live Music”.
As part of Council’s previous direction, as well as from feedback staff received from
event organizers, staff is in the process of creating general guidelines for a more
consistent and transparent event permit process. These general guidelines include
guidance for:
Insurance requirements based on size and type of event.
When police officers are required and when security is required.
Event organizers’ responsibility during events where alcohol is served or sold vs
events where the event organizer has not applied for an Alcoholic Beverage
Control (ABC) permit.
Fire/Hazmat Requirements, including tents, open flames, and propane usage.
Building requirements for stages and ADA accommodations.
Traffic control and road closures.
11.1
p. 26 of 264
Special Event Ordinance Update
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 4 March 3, 2025
ANALYSIS
Economic Impact
In 2024, there were four events held in the downtown area that were near or above
10,000 visitors on the day of the event: Garlic City Car Show on June 15, Tamal
Festival on September 28, La Ofrenda on November 2, and the Holiday Parade on
December 7. The average visitation to Downtown on Saturdays in 2024 was around
5,400 visitors. Visitation for both the Garlic City Car Show and La Ofrenda were 78%
higher than the average visitation, Tamal Festival had the largest increase at 128% of
the average visitation, followed by the Holiday Parade at 96%, then the Garlic City Car
Show and La Ofrenda, both at 78%. For purposes of this report, attendance was
determined by obtaining data in the area of Monterey Street from 3rd Street to 7th Street.
Approximately 40-50% of visitors to these events, with the exception of the Holiday
Parade (62%) are Gilroy residents, followed by an average of 7% from Morgan Hill, 6%
from Hollister, and dropping down to 2% for Salinas and San Jose. The remaining 33%-
43% of visitors come from various Central Valley and Bay Area Cities, with a few
coming from Southern California, Northern California, and other west coast states.
The four above events do not sell tickets, though they do each bring in 50-100 vendors
varying from arts and crafts, specialty merchandise, and food and beverage. These are
a mix of non-profit and for-profit vendors.
Event Criteria and Zones in Downtown
Currently, event organizers can request to close any street in the downtown area.
Though a traffic control plan is required, this can be a barrier to a successful event due
to cost. Due to safety concerns, City staff has taken over creating traffic control plans
and providing road closure staff and devices. Because there is inconsistency with event
areas downtown, staff recreates traffic control plans for each event.
Staff researched areas in downtown that could be utilized for community events that
would lessen the impact on traffic circulation and emergency response times outside of
an event area, as well as address concerns from downtown business owners. Staff has
created zones that have a similar square footage as events typically held on Monterey
Road. These zones would utilize areas that aren’t normally activated, like the now-
complete Gourmet Alley pedestrian-friendly space and the Donald “Elvis” Prieto Pop-Up
Park. The zones proposed favor parking lots, as Monterey and 6th Street are both
critical roads for commuter traffic and emergency response.
Events may still be held on Monterey Road; however, staff is recommending minimum
attendee limits of 1,500 for side streets (4th Street or 5th Street from Monterey to
Eigleberry) and 2,500 for Monterey from Lewis Street to 6th Street. Events requesting
closure of 6th Street are recommended to have a minimum of 5,000 attendees.
11.1
p. 27 of 264
Special Event Ordinance Update
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 4 March 3, 2025
Recommended event zones include the three City-owned parking lots that are adjacent
to Gourmet Alley between 4th Street and 7th Street; Hornlein Court; and Donald “Elvis”
Prieto Pop-up Park. Event zones can be combined for larger events. The proposed
event zones are included with this staff report.
Fee Schedule
Following the previous Council’s direction, fees related to special events held by non-
profit organizations in and adjacent to the downtown area have been waived. This
included the following day of event costs for events held from June 2024-December
2024:
Police officers: $41,973
Subsidized at 55%, $74.50 per officer, with a minimum of 2 officers, 3
hours each.
19 events, including June, July, and August Downtown Live, Beer Crawl,
Heart of Gilroy, Tamal Festival, La Ofrenda, IFDES Procession, Our Lady
of Guadalupe Procession, Our Lady of Juquila Procession, and Downtown
Holiday Parade
Traffic control: estimated at $107,446
Includes traffic control set up and tear down, vehicle road blocks, k-rail
rental and staff time
9 events, including two August Downtown Live(s), Pachuco Car Show,
Heart of Gilroy, Chalk Festival, Beer Crawl, Tamal Festival, La Ofrenda,
and Downtown Holiday Parade.
This amount is expected to decrease for this year’s events due to the
purchase of the Meridian Rapid Defense barricades.
Fire Marshal inspections: $4,670
$467 per fire inspection
10 events including Beer Crawl, Tamal Festival, La Ofrenda, Downtown
Holiday Parade, and Natividad en la Comunidad
There are no set fees associated with processing special event permit applications. On
average, economic development staff spends up to 15 hours on downtown events and 5
hours on events outside of the downtown. This includes review of the permit application,
communication with the applicant and various city, county, and state departments.
Special event permit applications are also reviewed by a representative from each of
the following departments and divisions of the City: Planning; Building; Fire
Prevention/Hazmat; Fire; Police; Public Works-Operations; and Risk Management.
The cities of Morgan Hill, Monterey, Santa Clara and Watsonville charge various fees
for events, including an application fee. Each of these cities have created a
11.1
p. 28 of 264
Special Event Ordinance Update
City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 4 March 3, 2025
standardized method for event organizers to seek fee reductions or waivers. Each city
has a set application timeframe, and all aim to support community-enhancing events
hosted by non-profit organizations. The policies for each city are attached to this staff
report for review and reference.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may choose to direct staff not to continue to waive fees for events hosted by
non-profits in the downtown area, though this could have a negative community impact
and some events that are already being planned may need to be cancelled.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Since June 2024, there has been an impact to the General Fund of approximately
$154,089, based on the day-of event costs for police officers, traffic control teams, and
fire inspections. Fiscal impact of any direction by Council regarding ongoing fee waivers
or application of fees will be analyzed before adoption.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff sent a survey to 26 past event organizers and received responses from ten. Staff
also had informal conversations with five event organizers in preparation for 2025
events.
NEXT STEPS
1. If directed by Council, staff will return in April with a draft fee waiver policy.
2. Staff will hold a meeting with past event organizers to update them on changes that
have been made to the current process, as well as gather feedback on proposed event
zones and ordinance updates.
Attachments:
1. Proposed Event Zones
2. City of Morgan Hill, Monterey, Santa Clara, and Watsonville Fee Reduction and
Waiver Policies
11.1
p. 29 of 264
11.1
p. 30 of 264
11.1
p. 31 of 264
11.1
p. 32 of 264
11.1
p. 33 of 264
11.1
p. 34 of 264
11.1
p. 35 of 264
11.1
p. 36 of 264
11.1
p. 37 of 264
11.1
p. 38 of 264
11.1
p. 39 of 264
11.1
p. 40 of 264
11.1
p. 41 of 264
11.1
p. 42 of 264
11.1
p. 43 of 264
11.1
p. 44 of 264
11.1
p. 45 of 264
11.1
p. 46 of 264
11.1
p. 47 of 264
Page 1 of 5
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Create a Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation
Program and Adopt a Resolution Amending FY 2024-25
Budget to Appropriate Program Budget Adjustments
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department:Community Development
Submitted By:Sharon Goei, Community Development Director
Prepared By:Sharon Goei, Community Development Director
Christie Thomas, Housing and Community Services Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Promote Safe Affordable Housing for All
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive report, direct staff to create a Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation
Program, become a partner agency in the Santa Clara County Office of Supportive
Housing’s BMR Partnership Program, and authorize staff to execute the necessary
steps to preserve the affordability of BMR homes as outlined in the report, including
entering into loan agreements with and repaying Santa Clara County and executing
necessary documents as appropriate.
2. Adopt a resolution amending the FY 2024-25 budget to appropriate Pilot BMR
Preservation Program budget adjustments.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
With the continued State and national housing affordability crisis, the State has begun to
push cities more than ever to accomplish Housing Element Goals. In 2022 the State
formed the Housing Accountability Unit (HAU), which holds jurisdictions accountable for
meeting their Housing Element commitments and complying with State laws. The State
views enforcement of these laws to meaningfully and positively impact the provision of
housing in all communities. The Pilot BMR Preservation Program being presented will
help the City accomplish Housing Element goals, comply with State laws, preserve
affordable housing, and strengthen regional partnerships.
12.1
p. 48 of 264
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 5 March 3, 20251
8
8
5
Due to City funding challenges and historical BMR agreements that allow BMR homes
to be sold at fair market value, when BMR homes become available for resale, they are
sold at fair market value and lost from the City’s program. By becoming a partner
agency in the Santa Clara County Office of Supportive Housing’s (OSH) BMR
Partnership Program, staff proposes to create a Pilot BMR Preservation Program to
preserve affordability for low-income households. In essence, the City will purchase
BMR units when available, using a short-term bridge loan from Santa Clara County,
which will be paid back upon resale to a low-income household.
BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy’s citywide Below Market Rate (BMR) portfolio consists of
approximately 300 ownership single-family housing units within 12 developments. The
majority of the City’s current BMR portfolio was transferred to the City in 2016 upon the
closure of South County Housing and its successor to the housing portfolio,
Neighborhood Housing Services Silicon Valley. The City’s BMR portfolio has been
administered by a contractor, HouseKeys, serving as the City’s BMR Program
Administrator since 2017.
The BMR portfolio contains senior and single-family homeownership developments. The
portfolio homes were deed-restricted for 30 – 40 years (depending on development) and
sold to low-income households. As noted above, due to the diverse agencies that
originated the portfolio, the individual resale agreements are inconsistent in language
and requirements portfolio wide; however, the resale agreements are at least consistent
within each residential development.
For each unit in the portfolio, the resale value is determined following the calculation
method outlined in the resale agreement, and the City has the option to purchase the
home within a designated timeframe (typically within 90 days). Most of the BMR
portfolio resale agreements allow the homes to be sold at fair market value after a
certain time period.
Due to limited funding availability in the City within a short timeframe, coupled with
elevated fair market resale prices for BMR units, the City has not been able to purchase
BMR resale units, effectively limiting the opportunity to resell them to another low-
income-qualified household. However, a small number of BMR units, whose fair market
value is around $600,000 to $700,000, present a viable option for resale to low-income
households when paired with down payment assistance.
Most properties within the BMR portfolio are supported by down payment assistance
loans from various programs. Examples are the BEGIN and CalHome programs, which
originated from the State as grants to cities to provide deferred down payment
assistance to first-time low-income homebuyers. As these down payment assistance
loans are repaid, the funds are deposited into City ReUse accounts, allowing additional
down payment assistance loans to be issued. Loan payoffs are either deferred for 30
years or paid in full upon the home's sale. Because most BMR resale homes have been
12.1
p. 49 of 264
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 5 March 3, 20251
8
8
5
sold out of the program, the City has a healthy amount of ReUse funds available to
support additional down payment assistance loans.
ANALYSIS
In late 2024, staff began discussing a partnership opportunity with the Santa Clara
County Office of Supportive Housing to preserve affordable units and make
homeownership more accessible to low-income households. This led to the addition of
the Acquisition Loans to Partner Agencies component of the County’s BMR Partnership
Program. Staff proposes that the City of Gilroy create a Pilot BMR Preservation
Program by becoming a partner agency in the Santa Clara County Office of Supportive
Housing’s (OSH) BMR Partnership Program. A program and process overview are
presented below.
Program and Process Overview
When the City’s BMR Program Administrator receives notice that a BMR household
would like to sell their home, they would notify City staff and provide the calculated BMR
resale price due to the current household and other various transaction costs in
accordance with the resale agreement, make a site visit to view the general condition of
the unit, and order an appraisal and inspection of the home. Staff and the BMR Program
Administrator will make the determination based on above data as to whether the BMR
resale transaction would be a good fit for the Pilot BMR Preservation Program.
Once the BMR resale is determined to be a good fit, City staff would coordinate with
OSH staff, and OSH would provide the City with a 12-month bridge loan at 0% interest
to purchase the deed-restricted BMR unit. The City would then purchase the BMR home
at the calculated price due to the homeowner. The BMR Program Administrator would
administer the resale of the property to an eligible low-income household. Full
repayment from the City to OSH is expected within 12 months, with a possible
extension at County’s discretion.
Internal City staff time is limited to general oversight and minimal administrative
responsibilities with these transactions, as the City’s BMR Program Administrator would
process both the real estate acquisition and resale transactions from start to finish.
During the resale period, until the unit is sold, the City can utilize the Housing Trust
Fund (HTF) to cover unit holding costs including utilities, Homeowner Association dues,
and minor unit repairs as needed. The Housing Trust Fund would be repaid at resale.
The BMR home would be priced at fair market value and resold with a new 30 – 40 year
deed restriction (based on development resale agreement) to a low-income household.
At resale, from the sales proceeds, the City would pay off the bridge loan from OSH and
the Housing Trust Fund would be repaid for the various costs related to the resale.
To ensure affordability of a fair market value home for low-income households, OSH
would offer up to $250,000 in deferred down payment assistance to the new household.
Additionally, the City would provide up to $200,000 in deferred BEGIN or CalHome
12.1
p. 50 of 264
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 5 March 3, 20251
8
8
5
ReUse down payment assistance to the new household. Loan payoff is deferred for 30
years or due in full upon the sale of the home. The new household would obtain a first
mortgage from a lender approved by the City’s BMR Program Administrator.
Please refer to the attachment for a transaction example.
If the BMR home cannot be resold to a low-income household within the 12-month OSH
loan period, the City can request a possible extension at County’s discretion and
continue to try to sell it. If a qualified low-income household is still not identified within
12 months, and the County does not approve an extension, the home would be sold at
fair market value to the highest bidder to a non-low-income qualified household. Upon
resale, the OSH loan would be paid off and the Housing Trust Fund would be repaid.
Affordable Housing Preservation
Preserving affordable housing is a priority within the City’s 2023-2031 Housing Element
goals, policies, and programs. Creating a program to preserve BMR homes helps the
City maintain the affordability of existing BMR housing units, supports homeownership
opportunities for low-income households, and preserves affordable housing for special
needs groups such as seniors.
Currently, a BMR resale unit in a senior housing development could benefit from a
program as described above. As staff from the City and OSH regularly explore potential
collaboration related to affordable housing, staff recognized this BMR resale as an
opportunity to partner with OSH to preserve the home for another low-income senior
household. This BMR resale would initiate the pilot program. As more BMR resales
occur, staff can utilize the framework established by the pilot program to preserve
additional BMR homes for low-income households in Gilroy.
As this program progresses and more households begin to apply, creating a large
applicant pool, the City will be able to resell most BMR homes without the need to
purchase first and then resell. At that point, the City will rarely need to take out the
County bridge loan and the overall City BMR program will be functioning on its own.
This bridge program is an interim way to keep BMR homes available to low-income
households.
Staff recommends that the Council receive this report, direct staff to create a Pilot BMR
Preservation Program, become a partner agency in the County BMR Partnership
Program, and authorize staff to execute the necessary steps to preserve the
affordability of BMR homes as outlined in the report, including entering into loan
agreements with and repaying Santa Clara County and executing necessary documents
as appropriate.
Staff will return to Council in 2026 to provide an update on the program and possibly
make the program an ongoing, regular part of the City‘s affordable housing efforts.
12.1
p. 51 of 264
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program
City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 5 March 3, 20251
8
8
5
ALTERNATIVES
The City Council could decide not to create a Pilot BMR Preservation Program.
However, this is not recommended as the program would assist the City in preserving
BMR homes for low-income households in Gilroy and help meet Housing Element
goals.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
For the program overall, the net fiscal impact to City funds is anticipated to be minimal,
since the sales proceeds would cover the bridge loan and various resale-related cost
and down payment assistance would be repaid.
Besides staff time at the creation of the pilot program, internal City staff time is
anticipated to be limited to general oversight and minimal administrative responsibilities
during acquisition and resale transactions as the City’s BMR Program Administrator
would process the acquisition and resale transactions from start to finish.
For the current BMR resale in a senior housing development, staff requests a budget
amendment in the amount of $101,000 to the Housing Trust Fund. This is the estimated
total of various resale-related costs, which includes the unit holding cost, minor repairs,
and transaction-related costs. It is basically the estimated cost besides the bridge loan.
The Housing Trust Fund is utilized to cover this cost at first, then subsequently repaid
from sales proceeds. The exact fiscal impact will be determined with the resale
transaction, but the net fiscal impact is anticipated to be minimal as explained above.
Staff does not anticipate another BMR resale during this fiscal year (FY 2024-25). For
the next fiscal year, staff will incorporate the Pilot BMR Preservation Program in the
budget development.
NEXT STEPS
Upon approval by the City Council, staff will proceed to create the Pilot BMR
Preservation Program and carry out the transaction for the current BMR resale.
Attachments:
1. Resolution for Budget Amendment
2. Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program Transaction Example
12.1
p. 52 of 264
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY
AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF GILROY FOR 2024-
2025 FISCAL YEAR
WHEREAS, the City Administrator prepared and submitted to the City Council a
budget for the City of Gilroy for Fiscal Years 2023-2024 and 2024-2025, and the City
Council carefully examined, considered and adopted the same on June 5, 2023; and
WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared and submitted to the City Council proposed
amendment to the budget for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 (FY25) for the City of Gilroy in the
staff report dated March 3, 2025, for the Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation
Program.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the expenditure appropriations
for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 in Fund 250 – Housing Trust Fund shall be increased by
$101,000.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 3rd day of March 2025 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
______________________________
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
Bryce Atkins, Acting City Clerk
12.1
p. 53 of 264
Resolution No. 2025-XX
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program Budget Amendment
City Council Regular Meeting | March 3, 2025
Page 2 of 2
CERTIFICATE OF THE CLERK
I, BRYCE ATKINS, Acting City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that
the attached Resolution No. 2025-XX is an original resolution, or true and correct copy
of a City Resolution, duly adopted by the Council of the City of Gilroy at a Regular Meeting
of said held on Council held Monday, March 3, 2025, with a quorum present.
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official
Seal of the City of Gilroy this Date.
____________________________________
Bryce Atkins
Acting City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)
12.1
p. 54 of 264
Pilot Below Market Rate (BMR) Preservation Program
Transaction Example
Goal: Preserve Unit and Affordability for Low-Income Senior Household
Household Resale Agreement allows the home to be sold at Fair Market Value after 10
years. The agreement also requires the City to pay all transaction sales costs.
OSH will provide the City with a 12-month bridge loan for $520,354 at 0% interest. This loan
will cover the amount due to household and total closing costs and will be repaid at resale.
BMR Unit Fair Market Value price estimation based on Appraisal $670,000
Acquisition Transaction:
BMR Unit Acquisition Price (Household Purchase Price and CPI
calculated Equity Share $515,354 + closing costs $5,000)
$520,354
BMR Program Administrator Acquisition transaction fee (5% of
$515,354) - paid with HTF funds (fee to be repaid at resale)
$25,768
Total acquisition cost OSH Bridge Loan ($520,354) + HTF ($25,768)$546,122
Program Expenses:
BMR Program Administrator resale transaction fee (5% based on
$670,000)
$33,500
Estimated unit repair costs (paint, carpet, and roof) – paid with HTF
funds (holding cost to be repaid at resale)
$27,000
HOA dues for 12 months at $300 per month – paid with HTF funds
(holding cost to be repaid at resale)
$3,600
Utility costs for 12 months at $500 per month - paid with HTF funds
(holding cost to be repaid at resale)
$6,000
Closing Costs for Resale Transaction $5,000
Total expenses (HTF acquisition and program expenses = $62,368,
which will be repaid at resale)
$75,100
Resale Transaction
BMR Unit Fair Market Value $670,000
Acquisition Transaction ($546,122) and Program Expenses ($75,100)($621,222)
City equity share to HTF $48,778
Transaction to keep unit affordable to an eligible low-income household
New Deed Restriction Recorded
Resale at Fair Market Value $670,000
Down Payment Assistance Loan from the County to Household $250,000
Down Payment Assistance Loan from City BEGIN ReUse Fund to
Household (repaid after 30 years)*
$111,000
Low-income household will need 1st Mortgage from an outside
approved lender
$309,000
*To provide less down payment assistance and resell the home at a lower amount, the City can choose to forgo
equity share and sell the unit for $621,222; in that case, the City's down payment assistance loan would be $62,222.
12.1
p. 55 of 264
Page 1 of 3
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title:Presentation on Elected Officials' Roles in Emergency
Management
Meeting Date:March 3, 2025
From:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department:Administration
Submitted By:Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Prepared By:Andrew Young, Emergency Services and Volunteer
Coordinator
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Receive a presentation on the roles and responsibilities of elected officials in
emergency management and provide any feedback or direction as appropriate.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
In the event of a disaster or emergency, elected officials play a critical role in leadership,
policy direction, and public communication. This presentation will provide an overview of
the legal framework, best practices, and expectations for elected officials during
emergencies. The discussion will include their role in coordination with emergency
management personnel, decision-making responsibilities, and public messaging.
BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy is vulnerable to many hazards, including but not limited to, wildfire,
flooding, severe weather, and earthquakes. Elected officials are responsible for
ensuring the public safety and welfare of their communities. The duties of responding to
and recovering from incidents begin and end at the local level with public officials and
community members. Emergency management operations before, during, and after an
emergency or disaster are an essential function of local elected officials and local
government agencies.
12.2
p. 56 of 264
Presentation on Elected Officials' Roles in Emergency Management
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 March 3, 2025
The roles of elected officials include:
Understanding the City’s Emergency Operations Plan (EOP) and the structure of
the Emergency Operations Center (EOC).
Ensuring legal compliance with emergency declarations, mutual aid agreements,
and resource allocation.
Providing leadership and policy direction while avoiding interference with tactical
operations.
Engaging in effective public communication to provide timely and accurate
information to the community.
Supporting recovery efforts and long-term resilience planning.
ANALYSIS
The presentation will outline the key responsibilities of elected officials before, during,
and after a disaster, as outlined in the attached Elected Officials Guide. These
responsibilities include:
Before a Disaster:
Prioritizing emergency preparedness in government operations and budgeting.
Familiarizing themselves with emergency plans, the jurisdiction’s EOC, and their
role in emergency management.
Encouraging community preparedness and participation in emergency drills.
During a Disaster:
Supporting emergency management officials and facilitating interagency
communication.
Issuing emergency declarations and making policy decisions when necessary.
Ensuring accurate and timely public communication.
Coordinating with local, county, state, and federal officials to obtain necessary
resources.
After a Disaster:
Leading the recovery process and ensuring adherence to codes and regulations.
Supporting long-term recovery efforts, including economic recovery and
infrastructure rebuilding.
Holding public meetings to address community concerns and provide guidance.
Facilitating access to state and federal disaster relief programs.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no direct fiscal impact associated with receiving this presentation.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
This presentation is part of ongoing efforts to educate the City’s leadership and the
12.2
p. 57 of 264
Presentation on Elected Officials' Roles in Emergency Management
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 March 3, 2025
public on emergency management. Additional outreach efforts may include public
workshops, community engagement initiatives, and informational materials distributed
via the City’s communication channels.
Attachments:
1.Guide to Elected Official's Roles in Emergency Management
2.City of Gilroy Emergency Operations Plan
12.2
p. 58 of 264
12.2
p. 59 of 264
12.2
p. 60 of 264
12.2
p. 61 of 264
12.2
p. 62 of 264
12.2
p. 63 of 264
12.2
p. 64 of 264
12.2
p. 65 of 264
12.2
p. 66 of 264
12.2
p. 67 of 264
12.2
p. 68 of 264
12.2
p. 69 of 264
12.2
p. 70 of 264
12.2
p. 71 of 264
12.2
p. 72 of 264
12.2
p. 73 of 264
12.2
p. 74 of 264
12.2
p. 75 of 264
12.2
p. 76 of 264
12.2
p. 77 of 264
12.2
p. 78 of 264
12.2
p. 79 of 264
12.2
p. 80 of 264
12.2
p. 81 of 264
12.2
p. 82 of 264
12.2
p. 83 of 264
12.2
p. 84 of 264
12.2
p. 85 of 264
12.2
p. 86 of 264
12.2
p. 87 of 264
12.2
p. 88 of 264
12.2
p. 89 of 264
12.2
p. 90 of 264
12.2
p. 91 of 264
12.2
p. 92 of 264
12.2
p. 93 of 264
12.2
p. 94 of 264
12.2
p. 95 of 264
12.2
p. 96 of 264
12.2
p. 97 of 264
12.2
p. 98 of 264
12.2
p. 99 of 264
12.2
p. 100 of 264
12.2
p. 101 of 264
12.2
p. 102 of 264
12.2
p. 103 of 264
12.2
p. 104 of 264
12.2
p. 105 of 264
12.2
p. 106 of 264
12.2
p. 107 of 264
12.2
p. 108 of 264
12.2
p. 109 of 264
12.2
p. 110 of 264
12.2
p. 111 of 264
12.2
p. 112 of 264
12.2
p. 113 of 264
12.2
p. 114 of 264
12.2
p. 115 of 264
12.2
p. 116 of 264
12.2
p. 117 of 264
12.2
p. 118 of 264
12.2
p. 119 of 264
12.2
p. 120 of 264
12.2
p. 121 of 264
12.2
p. 122 of 264
12.2
p. 123 of 264
12.2
p. 124 of 264
12.2
p. 125 of 264
12.2
p. 126 of 264
12.2
p. 127 of 264
12.2
p. 128 of 264
12.2
p. 129 of 264
12.2
p. 130 of 264
12.2
p. 131 of 264
12.2
p. 132 of 264
12.2
p. 133 of 264
12.2
p. 134 of 264