Agenda packet — Gilroy City Council, January 27, 2025

January 27, 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, JANUARY 27, 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 [email protected] 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 [email protected] 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.

January 27, 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 [email protected].

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 [email protected].

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. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Proclamations and Awards

2.1. Presentation of Certificates of Commendation for Pajaro River Watershed Cleanup

2.2. Presentation of Retirement Proclamations to Marc Stelling, Michael Pardini, and Michael Beebe

3. COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE (Informational Only)

4. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

4.1. Presentation from the Gilroy Tennis Club/Tennis Center January 27, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda

4.2. 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 [email protected] 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.

5. 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 (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)
January 27, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda

6. BOARD AND COMMISSION INTERVIEWS

6.1. Interviews for Open Seats on Boards, Commissions, and Committees with Future Appointment on February 3, 2025

1. Staff Report: Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk

2. Possible Action:

Staff recommends the Council interview those applicants who could not attend the interviews held on Monday, January 6, 2025.

7. 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.

7.1. Approval of the Action Minutes of the January 6, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting

7.2. Approve the Donation of Maui, a Trained Therapy Dog from the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024

7.3. Adoption of an Ordinance Approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement Between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch Project to Extend the Term of the Development Agreement by Three Years

7.4. Approve a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2023-27 to Reduce the Number of Council Members Serving on the Downtown Committee.

8. BIDS AND PROPOSALS

8.1. Award a Three-Year Contract to Secure Guard Security Services in a Total Amount of $233,451 with an Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount of $77,817 for Park Patrol Security Services, with Up to Two, One-Year Extension Options

1. Staff Report: Matt Jones, Deputy Public Works Director

2. Public Comment

3. Possible Action:

City Council:

1. Approve the award of a three-year agreement with Secure Guard Security Services for Park Patrol Security Services in the amount of $233,451, with an annual not-to-exceed amount of $77,817 and with two, one-year extension options.

2. Authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.

8.2. Award a Contract to Apex Companies for the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project No. 25-PW-293 in the amount of $189,800; Approve a Budget Amendment; Approve a Project Contingency of $60,200; Approve a Total Project Expenditure of $250,000 for Construction; and Adopt a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget January 27, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 5 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda

1. Staff Report: Daniel Padilla, City Engineer

2. Public Comment

3. Possible Action:

1. Award a contract in the amount of $189,800 to Apex Companies for FY25 Small Trash Capture Devices Project (No. 25-PW-293); Approve a project contingency of $60,200; Approve a total project expenditure of $250,000; and Authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.

2. Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget in Fund 410 – Storm Drain Development Fund and in Fund 422 – Stormwater Management Fund.

9. PUBLIC HEARINGS

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS

10.1. Inclusionary Housing Policy Update

1. Staff Report: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director

2. Public Comment

3. Possible Action:

Receive update on inclusionary housing policy work.

11. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS

11.1. 2025 City Administrator Performance Evaluation Process

1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator

2. Public Comment

3. Possible Action:

Council appoints a three-member Council sub-Committee and direct them to:

1. Engage and interview a consultant to establish the annual City Administrator performance evaluation process;

2. Provide a recommendation to the full Council for a consultant tasked with creating and implementing an evaluation process for the City Administrator that utilizes industry standards and best practices and complies with the International City Management Association (ICMA) guidelines for the City Administrator to obtain certification as a Credentialed Manager (CM).

11.2. Approve Purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barriers

1. Staff Report: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator

2. Public Comment

3. Possible Action:

Approve the purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barrier Systems from Meridian Rapid Defense Group for a total of $295,682.11.

January 27, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 6 of 6 City Council Regular Meeting Agenda

12. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS

13. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS

14. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS

15. CLOSED SESSION

15.1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION. Pending Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 (3) (a), Gandolfi Investments, LLC v. City of Gilroy, et.al., Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara, Case Number 24CV444165, filed July 26, 2024.

16. 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).

17. ADJOURNMENT

FUTURE MEETING DATES
February 2025
3 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
12 Strategic Planning Study Session – 8:30 AM
24 Regular Meeting/Joint Meeting with GUSD - 6:00 p.m
March 2025
3 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
17 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
April 2025
7 Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m
21 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.

2.1 p. 7 of 173

2.1 p. 8 of 173

2.1 p. 9 of 173

2.1 p. 10 of 173

2.1 p. 11 of 173

2.1 p. 12 of 173

2.2 p. 13 of 173

2.2 p. 14 of 173

2.2 p. 15 of 173

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Interviews for Open Seats on Boards, Commissions, and Committees with Future Appointment on
February 3, 2025
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: City Clerk
Submitted By: Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk
Prepared By: Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION
Staff recommends the Council interview those applicants who could not attend the interviews held on Monday, January 6, 2025.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Due to the number of applicants who could not attend the meeting on January 6, 2025, staff recommends a supplemental interview be conducted.

BACKGROUND
Council held interviews for the Boards, Commissions, and Committees on January 6, 2025. Those interviewed on January 6 and January 27 will be considered for appointment at the February 3, 2025 Council meeting.

Those who have not been interviewed and whose applications are attached are listed below.

Arts and Culture Commission
Janette Vecchiarelli
Kelly Pfeffer

6.1 p. 16 of 173
Interviews for Open Seats on Boards, Commissions, and Committees with Future Appointment on February 3, 2025
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 January 27, 2025 Robert Butler
Steven Porter
Library Commission
Jeannie Stokes
Jo Anne Howell
Open Government
Blanca McMurray
Monikka O’Neil
Parks and Recreation Commission
Stephanie Okada-McCabe
Jorge Vargas
Personnel Commission
Catherine Cummins
Norma Hingle Flores
Physically Challenged
Marco Machado
Planning Commission
Anselmo Guevara
Eva Lurker
Stephanie Okada-McCabe
Alex Larson
Youth Commission
Zara Owens
Lysandra Jaimes
Lolita Jean Hardwicke
Thanmay Sarath

ALTERNATIVES
None.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Staff has informed those who did not attend the interviews on January 6, 2025, that

6.1 p. 17 of 173
Interviews for Open Seats on Boards, Commissions, and Committees with Future Appointment on February 3, 2025
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 January 27, 2025 Council will hold supplemental interviews on January 27, 2025.

NEXT STEPS
Council will make the appointment to the Boards, Commission, and Committees at their meeting on February 3, 2025.

Attachments:

1. Board, Commission and Committee applications for those not already interviewed.

6.1 p. 18 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Robert Butler

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Arts and Culture Commission Name: Robert Butler
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1957-08-21 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

EDUCATION: Chicago State University, B.A. Degree in Education, Music/Théâtre Knoxville College, Knoxville B.S. Business Marketing, Mathematics National University, SJ CA M.A.

Education TELEVISION/FILM/MUSIC VIDEO RADIO: West Coast Gospel Live Host & Producer KHVN Dallas TX Inspire Show Host & Producer KKDA Dallas TX FeedBack KSBW TV Show KGGR Dallas TX Mosaic KPIX TV Show KKMC Salinas CA The Afternoon Show KPIXTV Show Radio DJ Host Gilroy CA Front Runner KOMO New Performers WMAQ Singsation, Show WGN Kids Point TCI Math Answers San Jose COMMERICALS: Chris Cassara Clothing, Principal Actor Gilroy Chamber of Com. Principal Actor Faces International San Francisco CA THEATRE: West Side Story Knoxville TN The Wiz Chicago IL Wizard Of Oz Chicago IL Porgey & Bess Nashville TN Godspell Chicago IL Runaway Chicago IL The Acts Jerusalem Israel Lady Day San Jose CA Sound Of Music Los Angeles CA 7 Brides For 7Brothers Gilroy CA The Little Princess, Gilroy CA DIRECTED: Love Crucified Arose Gilroy CA The Wiz San Jose CA Love Found A Way Gilroy CA West Side Story San Jose CA And It Came To Pass Gilroy CA White Christmas San Jose CA The Wonder Of The Season Gilroy CA Lion King San Jose CA Judd Concert (Back Up Singer) San Jose CA GM Award Paramount Theater Oakland SKILLS SPECIAL INTEREST: Lead jazz vocalist, horseback riding, swimming, snow skiing, weightlifting, professional teacher degrees from college, BS, BA, MA, enjoy working with other people. baseball, bowling rollerblading, roller skating, biking, hiking, swimming, snorkeling, poker, card games, computer literate, square dance, southern accent. 6480 Barron Pl Gilroy, CA 95020 [email protected] Cell {408} 888- 2275
List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Presently a Board Member of the Gilroy Center for the Arts.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee?

6.1 p. 19 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Robert Butler

Page 2 of 2 ends

I wish to assist in providing the arts to the community in as many ways as possible. I have been successful producing concerts raising money for the homeless in GILROY through the South County Compassion Center.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? Most qualified maybe not but I come with many talents to share and years of experience giving me wisdom in many areas. I have worked with the City in Gilroy Parks and Rec. providing activities for afterschool and summer day camp for children. This position will be new to me but I am sure I will be a great access to the
School: / Grade: null

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 20 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Kelly Pfeffer

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Arts and Culture Commission Name: Kelly Pfeffer
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1978-03-12 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I have worked with two non profits in the city of Gilroy, M.A.N.O.S, and 6th Street Art studios. I am a visual artist and I have sold my art internationally. I own a music school here in Gilroy called ERock, I am always looking for ways to bring the arts to the underserved in our community as well as looking into new ways to make learning art fun and entertaining. I love problem solving, marketing and the business side of things.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

I have helped M.A.N.O.S plan their Chalkfest, I have also created a music festival in the summer for our music students to showcase their talents. We have worked with 6th street art studios and participated in their art walk, we ran an open Mic in local businesses to give a creative outlet to the community and attract more clientele to the local businesses while fostering an appreciation for the arts. We recently participated in Gilroy’s Downtown Business associations Christmas parade, we built a float, had our students sing on the North Pole stage and ran an informational booth for our music school. Most recently I have joined CMAP’s Board and look forward to sharing my knowledge and ideas to further progress the arts in our community through educational television.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? My goals are to make the arts accessible to all who seek it in our community. I also believe that facilitating the painting of murals and art installations throughout our city creates a greater society in whole.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee?

6.1 p. 21 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Kelly Pfeffer

Page 2 of 2 ends

My number one passion in life has always been the arts. Everything I have done and believe in has been to make the arts more accessible to all.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 22 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Steven Porter

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Arts and Culture Commission Name: Steven Porter
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1998-05-07 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I have been a lifelong advocate for the arts within our community as well as the community I lived in while I was in Colorado. I would love to be able to help grow the arts and culture within Gilroy through adding more diverse events within our town as well. I also believe in the beautification efforts within Gilroy and would love to help grow the efforts within the Parks and Recreation commission. While I may not have qualifications pertaining to either of these commissions, I do have the will to be able to help our city grow through art, culture, and the protection of our city parks, surrounding nature and historical culture.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Prior to graduating high school I was constantly involved within the art and culture within my education community. After moving to Colorado I once again became active within the vital LGBTQ+ arts and culture there as well. Regarding parks and recreation I was part of a high school club that would volunteer to help try and clean our parks and keep our urban areas clean as possible.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? While I have never been a member of any city commission before I have lived in Gilroy for a majority of my life. My family has been based here since the 40's and have been active members of Gilroy throughout the city's history. I used to love to hear my family reminisce about how Gilroy used to be. How their small town felt like a community of friends rather than a city full of people living there but commuting to their 9 to 5 and ignoring their city's wants and needs. I want to be able to help be the change that allows us to feel that way again in our modern city. I want to get involved within our community and see what the pocket communities in our city want to see. I want the people to be able to see themselves within the city they reside in no

6.1 p. 23 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Steven Taylor

Page 2 of 2 ends

Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 24 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - Janette Vecchiarelli

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Arts and Culture Commission Name: Janette Vecchiarelli
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1974-04-16 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

Worked in the film and entertainment industry for 20 years before moving to Gilroy.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

None at this time
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? Bringing more art and entertainment to Gilroy. More community engagement, events and activities.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I can bring a unique perspective to the committee from my behind the sciences work in entertainment.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of

6.1 p. 25 of 173
Library Commission Application - Sal Esposito

Page 2 of 2 ends

Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 26 of 173
Library Commission Application - Jo Anne Howell

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Library Commission Name: Jo Anne Howell
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1947-11-07 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

Part-time reference librarian at Gavilan College, love of the Gilroy public library.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Rebekah Children's service -- distribution of food through Second Harvest, various Gavilan College events.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? Get to know the issues facing the library
Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? Because I love the library
School: / Grade: null

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of

6.1 p. 27 of 173
Library Commission Application - Kay Spencer

Page 2 of 2 ends

Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 28 of 173
Library Commission Application - Jeannie Stokes

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Library Commission Name: Jeannie Stokes
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1961-05-22 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I have been a part time English and Reading college professor for the past 9 years (at San Jose City College, Mission College, and Chabot Colleges). I have spent the last 20 years of my life working in education to better not only the love of reading and writing, but to promote the utility and importance of these lifelong skillsets. I consider libraries my second home, and I know I can help in everything from acquisition to community engagement. In addition, I hold the following education degrees: BA English, MA Reading, MS Education - Emphasis on Educational Leadership. I also hold PT Teaching Crediential(s) in English and ESL. I have considered education and the pursuit of knowledge a constant in my life.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

I am new to Gilroy, so I have not begun my community efforts here, but in San Jose, I have volunteered with Sunday Friends and Sacred Heart on occasion. Most of my community work has been done at my colleges.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? I would like to help your Commission continue services to The City of Gilroy through more programs aimed to get out into the schools to encourage more participation in the library. I have recently moved to Gilroy after 40 years in San Jose, and I want to not only learn more about how the library affects/impacts the City, but to help increase this stewardship. My hope is that residents don't think of the Library as a simple place to get books, but they see it as THE resource for educational ideas: college planning, tutoring, mentoring, language classes, social gatherings, etc. I would also like to work with the City to attract adults/seniors to increase library usage through book clubs and community outreach.

6.1 p. 29 of 173
Open Government Commission Application - Ann Marie McCauley

Page 2 of 2 ends

I believe I am qualified because I read the appropriate information and have a proven track record for showing up. As a person who intends to eventually run for city council, I believe this gives the city an opportunity to "train" potential elects and create more qualified and knowledgeable council members.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 30 of 173
Open Government Commission Application - Blanca McMurray

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Open Government Commission Name: Blanca McMurray
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1963-04-05 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I' am committed to serve my community any way I can. I have been part of my husbands business in Gilroy for the last 25 years, donating my time for different Dental Clinics throughout California and outside the USA. Our business has served Gilroy by providing Oral Surgery in our South Valley Oral and Facial Surgery office located here in Gilroy. I have worked for the business as an Even planner, Marketing Coordinator, and Billing Assistant.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Food Truck coordinator for our "Food Truck Fly In" at the San Martin Airport, 2022, and 2023.

Gathering backpacks for children's back to school at Solorsano Middleschool. Collecting Christmas gifts for Rebekah Children's Services at our Gilroy Office.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? I would like to serve my community by volunteering my time. I would like to donate my time to serve my community and make a difference any way I can. I am open to learn new things and use my extra time for something worth doing.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I believe I can serve any way possible because I am willing to learn new things, I have an open mind and can take direction well. Although I don't experience in Government I would like to offer my time and efforts as a volunteer.

6.1 p. 31 of 173
Open Government Commission Application - Blanca McMurray

Page 2 of 2 ends


By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 32 of 173
Open Government Commission Application - Monikka O'Neil

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Open Government Commission Name: Monikka O'Neil
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1981-10-08 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I'm a CPA and currently sit on the Non-Profit board of directors for The Mary Elizabeth Inn (MEI) which serves to permanently house women in San Francisco that were subject to abuse. I've previously sat on the NP board of The Unity Care Group which serves to provide temporary housing for transitional aged youth across Northern California. I bring to bear a financial perspective and to these boards in addition to my passion to serve the community.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

No prior appointments to the community. As a resident of Gilroy for 4 years, I'd like to be involved in the development of the community.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? Create connections, expand my network, serve my community in the development and growth of Gilroy.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? My previous & current Non-Profit board experience as well as my professional background as a CPA.

6.1 p. 33 of 173
Parks and Recreation Commission Application - Robert Miller

Page 2 of 2 ends

6.1 p. 34 of 173
Parks and Recreation Commission Application - Stefanie Okada-McCabe

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Parks and Recreation Commission Name: Stefanie Okada-McCabe
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1983-04-30 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

Born and raised Gilroyan. Avid bodybuilder, past league tennis player, current league bowler and getting into pickleball as a family. I enjoy our parks and all they have to offer....with a love of outdoor activities.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Past building board of Appeals Past Physically Challenged Board What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? To aid in continuing the Gilroy vision and goals for the community by adding my background and expertise in architecture, planning and development.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? As a lifelong Gilroy resident, I possess a deep understanding of our community's needs and values. My diverse athletic background, from bodybuilding to tennis, bowling, and pickleball, showcases my passion for active living. I am eager to leverage this passion and knowledge to contribute to the enhancement of our parks and recreational offerings, ensuring they cater to the evolving needs of our community.

School: / Grade: null
 By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I

6.1 p. 35 of 173
Parks and Recreation Commission Application - Stefanie Okada-McCabe

Page 2 of 2 ends

understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 36 of 173
Parks and Recreation Commission Application - Jorge Vargas

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Parks and Recreation Commission Name: Jorge Vargas
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1980-12-21 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I have lived in Gilroy for three years and worked here for the past 12 years. As a parent of four children, each attending different schools within the Gilroy Unified School District, I am deeply connected to the community and invested in its growth and well-being. As a lifelong advocate for youth development and inclusivity, I am honored to apply for the opportunity to serve on the Parks and Recreation Commission. Growing up as a Latino in a community where access to organized sports was limited, I experienced firsthand the barriers that many underserved families face. This perspective has fueled my passion for creating equitable opportunities for all children and ensuring that no one is excluded from the benefits of recreational programs.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

President, Gavilan United F.C. (June 2024 – Present) Founded and manage a nonprofit soccer club dedicated to providing affordable, accessible opportunities for youth to engage in sports.

Assisted in organizing recreational activities and outreach programs for local youth, fostering inclusivity and community engagement at Miller Park, Christmas Hill Park and Gilroy Sports Complex.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? My primary goal is to ensure that Gilroy’s parks and recreational programs are accessible, inclusive, and reflective of the diverse needs of our community. As someone who grew up without access to organized sports and has since worked to create equitable opportunities for underserved youth, I am deeply committed to breaking down barriers to participation and fostering a sense of belonging for all residents.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee?

6.1 p. 37 of 173
Personnel Commission Application - Linda Allen

Page 2 of 2 ends

6.1 p. 38 of 173
Personnel Commission Application - Catherine Cummins

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Personnel Commission Name: Catherine Cummins
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1988-03-17 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

Hiring manager for another public agency.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Has sat on the personnel commission since 2018.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? To continue to support the city and attract committed well-qualified candidates to vacant city positions.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? My job experience and prior commission experience.

School: / Grade: null

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of

6.1 p. 39 of 173
Personnel Commission Application - Catherine Cummins

Page 2 of 2 ends

Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 40 of 173
Personnel Commission Application - Norma Hingle Flores

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Personnel Commission Name: Norma Hingle Flores
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1977-01-17 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:
15+ years of experience in HR focusing on Compensation
List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

N/a
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? Support the community.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I have been working in HR for over 15 years and dedicating my career to streamlining processes and designing compensation. The Personnel Comission is right up my alley. I will be able to keep doing what I love and contribute more meaningfully to the city and the community.

6.1 p. 41 of 173
Personnel Commission Application - Ann Marie McCauley

Page 2 of 2 ends

6.1 p. 42 of 173
Physically Challenged Board of Appeals Application - Marco Machado

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Physically Challenged Board of Appeals Name: Marco Machado
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
2024-06-19 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I am paraplegic.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Have served committee before
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? To improve accessibility to people with disabilities
Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? Because I know how it feels to not have access to things because of a disability 
By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of

6.1 p. 43 of 173
Planning Commission Application - BRIAN DAUENHAUER

Page 2 of 2 ends

6.1 p. 44 of 173
Planning Commission Application - Anselmo Guevara

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Planning Commission Name: Anselmo Guevara
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1965-08-19 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

Education Masters of Business Administration Bachelors of Science in Accounting Professional Experience 26 years of professional experience working for a Big Four accounting firm, and four hi-tech companies in Silicon Valley in the roles of consultant, auditor and risk management. I spent my last eleven years as a director of ethics & compliance. Residency I have resided in Gilroy for the last 29 years, and in Santa Clara County for the last 36 years.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

In the past, I have participated in community service through my employers. For example in 2023, I and a team built nine children playhouses through Habitat For Humanity; Habitat For Humanity in turn donated the playhouses to nine elementary schools in the San Francisco Bay Area. Other community involvement includes volunteering with Family Giving Tree, (Guadalupe River) Heritage Rose Garden, LifeMoves, and the various K-12 schools my children have attended in Gilroy.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? My goal is to help improve and have a greater role in the Gilroy community by volunteering my time and providing input on issues pertaining to Gilroy, the community where my family and I have lived for the last 24 years.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee?

1. As a professional consultant and employee, I evaluated issues in a span of 26 years for many organizations (both client organizations and employers) and provided input and/or recommendations to make something better. I'd like to share my expertise and have no doubt that I have the professional maturity to serve as a Commissioner of the City of Gilroy. 2. Working

6.1 p. 45 of 173
Planning Commission Application - Anselmo Guevara

Page 2 of 2 ends

for global hi-tech organizations allowed me to work with different ethnic groups in other countries and appreciate other cultures outside the United States. In the last several years, more ethnic groups have made Gilroy their home. It's been many years since I started appreciating other cultures, embracing diversity and breaking down stereotypes to become a responsible citizen and better person. 3. Other: No conflicts of interest Clean legal record or the ability to pass a background check if needed.

6.1 p. 46 of 173
Planning Commission Application - ALEX LARSON

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Planning Commission Name: ALEX LARSON
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1961-07-30 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

ALEXLARSON.COM - Alex's Life Story Alex Larson is a highly accomplished business leader with a 40-year track record of success, known for his persistence, dedication, and commitment to getting things done. A proud fourth-generation Gilroyan, Alex has deep roots in our community. His mother, Sandra Balanesi Larson, was a junior high school teacher in Gilroy, driven by her belief in making a meaningful impact on young lives. His father, Charles A Larson, was a Union Organizer for the United Brick and Clay workers, later transitioning to various roles, including a local car salesman. His twin Aunts were trailblazers, breaking the glass ceiling for women by working their way up to vice president auditor positions at a national bank, after helping to establish several local banks that were later sold for investor profit. Alex's other Aunt became one of the few women in management in the automobile dealership business. Alex and his brother, Charlie, grew up on Carla Way, just west of Las Animas Park which they helped to develop into the park it is today. Alex now lives just south of the park, off of Welburn Avenue.

Alex's leadership skills, strategic vision, and experience have made him a driving force in every project he undertakes. His long-standing involvement in the 4-H Youth Program, both as a participant and an adult leader, has instilled in him a deep sense of community service and ethical responsibility. As a seasoned businessman, Alex understands the importance of ensuring that ethical practices are at the forefront of every decision in the educational setting as well as in business and personal relations. His ability to navigate complex business situations and work with governmental agencies at the federal, state, county and local levels have resulted in succeessful practical solutions. Alex served as an integral part of the Gilroy Garlic Festival for over 40 years, as a volunteer and vendor. At the very first Garlic Festival in 1979, he co-chaired the Garlic Rosemary Fries booth alongside Joyce Patereau and Sandra Larson, raising funds for Bonanza Days, which featured one of the largest parades in California, a Queens contest, Jr.

King and Jr. Queen events, and numerous other activities supporting charity and community fun. Alex's selfless commitment to ethical practices in business, education, and personal relationships sets him apart as a trusted and valued leader in Gilroy. OPERATION FREEDOM

6.1 p. 47 of 173
Planning Commission Application - ALEX LARSON

Page 2 of 3 ends

PAWS Alex Larson embodies compassion and dedication, as demonstrated by his incredible efforts to support Operation Freedom Paws. This organization plays a vital role in empowering veterans and individuals with disabilities to lead fulfilling lives. Through the healing bond of service dogs, Operation Freedom Paws transforms lives, offering hope and support to veterans, first responders, children, and those grappling with complex trauma, disabilities, and illnesses.

Recently, Alex's commitment shone brightly when he raised an impressive $12,000 at an auction event in Gilroy, helping to further the mission of this life-saving LOCAL organization, in addition to generous annual donations for Mary Cortanis CNN Heroes Award Organization. ALEX spreading joy as SANTA CLAUS! Alex Larson is a dedicated volunteer who embodies the true spirit of giving year-round. Together with his brother, he generously donates to numerous local charities, contributing gift baskets as well as his time and talents. As Santa Claus, Alex has brought joy and smiles to countless children and families through organizations like Make-AWish, including appearances at the renowned Pusateri Christmas House, which has raised over $3 million for children in need. He also lends his Santa skills to local charities and schools, brightening the holidays for those seeking a jolly presence. With his twinkling eyes, infectious laugh, and heart full of kindness, Alex creates magical moments that families treasure for a lifetime. His performances not only bring Santa to life but also foster hope and happiness in the hearts of those in need. By spreading joy through his volunteer work, Alex helps make the world a little brighter—one visit at a time. Join him in his mission to bring smiles, warmth, and holiday cheer to all! RAPAZZINI WINERY EST. 1962 Rapazzini Winery embodies the essence of Gilroy’s rich heritage—wine, garlic, and deep family ties. The Balanesi Larson brothers, fourthgeneration Gilroyans, have been crafting wine with their family since childhood, continuing a proud Italian tradition. Alex and his brother Charlie extend warm, welcoming hospitality in the winery's stunning three-story, open-beamed Tasting Room, making every visit an enjoyable and memorable experience. Alex, a professionally trained chef, graduated at the top of his class in 1982 from The California Culinary Academy after attending Gavilan College. He went on to successfully own and operate a four-star ristorante and bar for nearly nine years, earning a prestigious Wine Spectator Award of Excellence for his wine selection and service. Now, as a winemaker, Alex channels his culinary expertise into creating exceptional, well-aged red wines, using predominantly Santa Clara Valley grapes. Rapazzini Winery proudly offers vintages from 2018, 2013, and 2007, featuring rare Italian and French Bordeaux varietals, including a Bordeaux blend and the renowned "Rockin' Rott Red," with its iconic Rottweiler label. The winery also offers crisp whites, along with almond, raspberry, and peach champagnes. After closing to the public in 2020 following the passing of their 78-year-old aunt, Rapazzini Winery reopened on February 19, 2024. The closure was a protective measure for the health of their surviving aunt, now 82, and their guests, as there was no safe way to enjoy wine tastings while wearing masks.

The family prioritized safety and well-being above all else, reflecting their deep care for both their loved ones and their community. THE GARLIC SHOPPE since 1985 Chef Alex and his brother, Charlie Larson, have proudly owned and operated The Garlic Shoppe in Gilroy for 25 of its 39 years. The Garlic Shoppe is a wonderland of all things garlicky, offering an impressive array of products that celebrate Gilroy’s world-famous garlic, grown locally and shipped across the globe. Since 1997, their website, GarlicShoppe.com, has brought the taste of Gilroy to the world, after starting the first garlic store in the world in 1985. Chef Alex, known for his culinary expertise from Grandma, Mom, 4-H National Winner and the California Culinary Academy in San Francisco has created over 40 unique food items, sauces, and seasonings under popular brands like Mama Raps, Garlic Dude, The Garlic Shoppe, and their fiery PSYCHO line. PSYCHO products include hot sauce, medium salsa, and roasted garlic and habanero mustard—each bursting with bold garlic flavor. These products are available wholesale to other retailers and their iconic shoppe. Over the years, the brothers have operated up to 22 Garlic Shoppes in malls around the Bay Area during the holidays, bringing the flavor of Gilroy to even more customers.

Having weathered the dot-com bust of 2000, the financial crash of 2008, the 2009-2012 real estate collapse, and the subsequent climb back to stability. Alex and Charlie have shown remarkable resilience and have survived and even thrived due to their hard work and experience. The COVID-19 pandemic brought unprecedented challenges, forcing them to close their businesses for months due to stringent Health Department regulations in Santa Clara County—especially concerning, given Gilroy’s position as a major crossroads for travel.

6.1 p. 48 of 173
Planning Commission Application - ALEX LARSON

Page 3 of 3 ends

Through it all, Chef Alex and Charlie, who manages GarlicShoppe.com, have learned to navigate difficult times, save during the good times, grow when its possible by good marketing and make the financials work. They continue to market Gilroy and its famous garlic to the world, ensuring that the iconic Garlic Shoppe remains a destination recognized by people everywhere. Ask a friend, and they’ve likely heard of or know the exact location of this beloved Gilroy landmark.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:
40 years Garlic Festival Volunteer and vendor, first Gilroy Visitors Bureau President, What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? To expedite, streamline, and help to maintain Gilroy's growth in a common sense, pragmatic way.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? My more than 40 years of Business in Gilroy and Property ownership have afforded me an insiders view of the workings of our City government. I want the best for the future of our children and grandchildren. The decisions being made now are going to determine the path for the future hundred years. Let do this right.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 49 of 173
Planning Commission Application - Eva Lurker

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Planning Commission Name: Eva Lurker
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1990-12-22 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

I have over a decade of experience in Human Resources, currently working at the large tech company, HPE. I’ve spent many years volunteering through both my sorority and local non profits like the Junior League of San Jose where I’ve also served on the Board. I am passionate about community and the betterment for all.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

In recent years I’ve spent my time volunteering through the Junior League where our focus has been on foster youth. We’ve partnered with organizations like the Bill Wilson Center and CASA.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? To feel a part of my local community and focus on the betterment for all. I love our town and want to not only be involved and invested, but to continue to see our community thrive.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I’m a mother of two young children who is passionate about the community I’m raising my family in. I have experience in business as well as community work and I’m driven to do what’s best for those we impact.

School: / Grade: null
 By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I

6.1 p. 50 of 173
Planning Commission Application - Eva Lurker

Page 2 of 2 ends

6.1 p. 51 of 173
Planning Commission Application - Stefanie Okada-McCabe

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Planning Commission Name: Stefanie Okada-McCabe
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
1983-04-30 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

As a passionate designer with a deep-rooted connection to Gilroy, I believe I possess the unique skills and perspective to contribute meaningfully to the city’s Planning Commission. My years of experience in urban planning and design have equipped me with a keen eye for detail, a strong understanding of zoning regulations, and a commitment to creating sustainable, aesthetically pleasing, and functional communities.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

Previously served on the building board of Appeals and the Physically Challenged Board. I am a member of the chamber and born and raised in Gilroy.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee?

1. Preserving Gilroy's Character: * Protecting historic districts and landmarks. * Supporting local businesses and economic development. * Enhancing public spaces and community amenities.

2. Promoting Sustainable Growth: * Encouraging smart development practices that minimize environmental impact. * Promoting affordable housing options for all residents. * Implementing climate-friendly policies and practices. 3. Fostering Community Engagement: * Ensuring transparent and inclusive decision-making processes. * Actively seeking input from residents and stakeholders. * Educating the public about planning issues and encouraging participation.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? As a lifelong Gilroy resident and passionate designer, I bring a unique perspective and skill set to the Planning Commission. My deep-rooted connection to our community, coupled with my expertise in design and urban planning, makes me uniquely qualified to contribute to shaping Gilroy's future. Local Knowledge and Passion: * As a native Gilroyan, I have a profound

6.1 p. 52 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Sean Ethan Diep

Page 2 of 2 ends

present, Regular Volunteer, City of Gilroy (Monthly City-wide Clean-up, Coastal Clean-up, Party in the Park, National Night Out, Breakfast with Santa, Adaptive Dance, etc) 2023-present, Regular Volunteer, Gilroy Center for the Arts (Art Walk, Artist Video Series, Easter Egg Hunt, Artist Receptions, etc) 2023-present, Regular Volunteer, Downtown Business Association (Gilroy Rodeo, La Ofrenda Festival, Beer Crawl, etc) 2023-present, Regular Volunteer, St. Catherine’s Parish Church (Reach Out Pantry, Reach Out Closet, etc) 2023-present, Regular Volunteer, Gilroy Prep School (Percussion Band, Middle School Dances, Book Fair, Library, etc) July 2024, Volunteer, Sacred Heart (Pack-a-Bag) April 2024, Volunteer, Gavilan College (Science Alive) June 2023, Volunteer, Gilroy Gardens (Nature Program)
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? As a Filipino-Vietnamese-Chinese American, I am passionate about spreading awareness about AAPI culture and heritage in the City of Gilroy. I would love to help the City promote AAPI culture through events and celebrations. I am sure the City of Gilroy will enjoy festivals celebrating rich AAPI cultures. I would live for Gilroy residents to enjoy delicious AAPI food and vibrant dances and events!
Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I am the optimal candidate to serve on the City of Gilroy Youth Commission because I am passionate about serving our City through various projects geared towards the promotion of AAPI culture and awareness. As a Gilroy citizen, I am dedicated to serving the Gilroy community through numerous volunteer work. Moreover, not only do I possess extensive leadership experience but also collaborative, organizational, and time management skills. I believe I will be able to contribute greatly to the betterment of our City by sharing my talents, knowledge, and experiences.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 53 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - LOLITA HARDWICKE

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Youth Commission Name: LOLITA HARDWICKE
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? No
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:
2009-03-18 Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:

As a 15-year-old passionate about contributing to my community, I believe I bring a unique perspective to the Youth Commission. At 14, I published my first fiction book, Red Watson and The Gifted Land, which is over 100 pages long. This accomplishment not only reflects my creativity and determination but has also inspired my peers, teachers, and community members to pursue their passions. I am deeply committed to engaging with and empowering young people. I can relate to the challenges and aspirations of today’s youth and aim to inspire them to pursue meaningful and impactful endeavors. Joining the Youth Commission, which meets every second Monday of the month, aligns perfectly with my dedication to making a difference.

Through this role, I hope to collaborate with like-minded individuals, share fresh ideas, and represent the voices of young people in a way that encourages positive change in our community.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

I have been involved in various community activities over the years. I was a member of the Teen Advisory Board at the Gilroy Library, where I contributed to youth-oriented initiatives. I also supported a friend during a panic attack, using skills I gained from studying psychology classes to better understand myself and help others facing similar challenges. Additionally, I participated in the STAR Arts Education program, initially as a performer. Last summer, I took on a different role by assisting the production team, which served as a valuable leadership experience. I have also volunteered at the Garlic Festival, supported activities at Gilroy Preparatory School, and contributed to the GPS Food Bank. These experiences have helped me grow personally and give back to my community
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee?

6.1 p. 54 of 173
Arts and Culture Commission Application - LOLITA HARDWICKE

Page 2 of 2 ends

My goal while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee is to contribute to the community especially the youth by supporting initiatives that create a meaningful impact. I aim to use my skills and experiences to collaborate with others in fostering positive change and addressing the needs of those we serve. I also aspire to grow personally and professionally by learning from the perspectives of fellow members and the community. Together, I believe we can build a stronger, more connected, and inclusive environment for everyone.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I believe I am well-suited to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee because of my genuine passion for making a positive impact in the community and my willingness to collaborate and learn from others. My background and experiences have given me a unique perspective and the skills to contribute meaningfully to our shared goals. I am committed to listening, understanding diverse viewpoints, and working with the team to create thoughtful solutions that benefit everyone. While I know there is always more to learn, I am confident that my dedication and eagerness to serve will allow me to support the mission of this group effectively. 
By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 55 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Lysandra Jaimes

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Youth Commission Name: Lysandra Jaimes
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? Yes
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

N/A Date of
Birth*:

Last 4 of
SSN:

N/A
List your qualifications for this appointment:

I am a leadership student, play on the school varsity girls soccer team, currently employed at InN-Out Burger, and have keep up with all As and Bs grades.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

During summer I volunteered at a youth soccer club, my position would be to coach kids who could not afford paying a club fee. I also have 50+ community service hours at the moment.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? My main goals are to experience working with the city, meeting new people, and all of the opportunities that come with working with the city.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? I am most qualified to work on the Commission due to my characteristic to work well with people. Working at In-N-Out requires great interactions with people, this allows me to have great charisma and work well with others.

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure

6.1 p. 56 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Lysandra Jaimes

Page 2 of 2 ends

under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 57 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Zara Owens

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Youth Commission Name: Zara Owens
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? No
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

N/A Date of
Birth*:

Last 4 of
SSN:

N/A
List your qualifications for this appointment:

I am currently in ASB, as a commissioner of Awareness, where I've been able to develop leadership skills and put on Multicultural Week at Christopher High School. I am founder and president of Key Club at my school, where I've been able to become more open and provide hours for almost 40 people at our most recent meeting. I also am academically on track and am organized and dedicated. I also will be attending a 2 week National Student Leadership Conference Architecture program, at Georgetown University. This is one of my biggest accomplishments, as I've always wanted to be an architect. I've also gained leadership experience recently this summer attending California Association of Student Leaders (CADA CASL) at UC Santa Barbara. I also serve as the Fundraiser Head for Black Student Union (BSU) at my school, and have been involved with the club for 3 years now.

List any service to the community including any prior appointments:

I am currently a tutor at a non-profit organization, Ciel. There, I am able to work with kids of all ages, grades, and personalities. I've learned so much since I started tutoring there during the summer. I've learned to be patient, inviting, and optimistic. Teaching children is one of the most rewarding and impactful things I've done. I love when they leave with a big smile and feeling of accomplishment, every time, it makes me feel so proud and accomplished. I always want to make sure that they feel proud of themselves and open to speak with me. One girl that I've tutored even drew me a flower and expressed how much she appreciates me, saying that she wants me to continue being her tutor. That statement was so heart warming and made me want to tutor even more, because I never realized how big of an impact I could have on young children.

What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee?

6.1 p. 58 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Zara Owens

Page 2 of 2 ends

To be more involved with Gilroy and participate in community service events. I enjoy meeting new people and would definitely be looking forward to doing so, upon my acceptance. One goal would be to get more in touch with the environment and people in Gilroy. For example, I believe that downtown could be the most eye-capturing spot in Gilroy. I want to help people feel invited and excited to go walking downtown. If there's any way we can improve that area, I'd absolutely love to help with that.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? As I've mentioned I have leadership experiences and I am willing to socialize and communicate on behalf of our community. I am organized and attentive as well. I am also very open to new ideas, people, and experiences, so I know that serving on this board would expand my overall knowledge and care for the community.
☐
By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 59 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Thanmay Sarath

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy
Board, Committee, & Commission Application
*All Commission, Board, and Committee applications are a public record.

Board/Committee/Commission of Interest: Youth Commission Name: Thanmay Sarath
Phone
number(s):
email
address*:

Are you a registered voter within the City limits? No
Physical
Address*:

Driver’s License
or
ID No.:

Date of
Birth*:

Last 4 of
SSN:

List your qualifications for this appointment:
•Started a Cyber Security Business, and helped small businesses to secure their digital presence. •Worked with The Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and identified and remediated security flaws in over 200 government systems. •Started Vets & Tech, to help veterans with technology. •Volunteered at Merill Gardens to help elderly with technology. •Volunteered at the Veteran Affairs Clinic in Monterey. •Currently in Youth Commission from 2023-2024. •Won EC2 Community Fund and started The Recycle Reward Program in the City of Gilroy and saved 3000 milk jugs from getting in the landfill. •Started LidLoop program in Gilroy to recycle coffee lids and create Christmas toys. •Level One Archery Coach for USA Archery
List any service to the community including any prior appointments:
•Started a Cyber Security Business, and helped small businesses to secure their digital presence. •Worked with The Department of Homeland Security, Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency and identified and remediated security flaws in over 200 government systems. •Started Vets & Tech, to help veterans with technology. •Volunteered at Merill Gardens to help elderly with technology. •Volunteered at the Veteran Affairs Clinic in Monterey. •Currently in Youth Commission from 2023-2024. •Won EC2 Community Fund and started The Recycle Reward Program in the City of Gilroy and saved 3000 milk jugs from getting in the landfill. •Started LidLoop program in Gilroy to recycle coffee lids and create Christmas toys. •Level One Archery Coach for USA Archery
What are your goals while serving on this Board/Commission/Committee? My goals whilst serving this commission are for Youth Empowerment: to advocate for initiatives for the youth of Gilroy with opportunities to develop leadership skills, access mentorship, and

6.1 p. 60 of 173
Youth Commission Application - Thanmay Sarath

Page 2 of 2 ends

participate in civic engagement. Community Partnership: to strengthen collaborations between the city, local businesses, and nonprofit organizations to create impactful programs. Lastly, Job Creation: through the CalWORKs Program, to focus on connecting youth with job opportunities and training resources.

Why are you the most qualified to serve on this Board/Commission/Committee? With extensive experience in leadership, community service, and environmental and technological advocacy, I am qualified for a position to serve on this commission. As the Youth Commissioner for 2023-2024, I have experience representing youth interests and encouraging civic engagement. My achievements include: Founded a cybersecurity company and partnered with federal agencies to strengthen digital security for more than 200 government systems.

Founding community programs like Vets & Tech, helping veterans with technology, and providing service hours at Merrill Gardens and the VA Clinic in Monterey. I have started several environment-linked projects, such as the Recycle Reward Program and LidLoop Program, and has contributed much toward sustainability in Gilroy. Being a Level One Archery Coach certified with USA Archery, demonstrating leadership and mentorship capability. My goals of youth empowerment, community partnerships, and job creation go in line with my proven ability to implement impactful programs and promote meaningful change. This diverse experience equips me to contribute valuably to the commission.

School: Monte Vista Christian School / Grade: 10th

By clicking on this box, I declare under penalty of perjury that I am currently a registered voter within the City limits of the City of Gilroy. Furthermore, I understand that this application and any attachments are subject to disclosure under the Public Records Act and must complete mandatory Open Government Ordinance Training. I further understand that members of the Planning Commission, Building Boards of Appeals, and Physically Challenged Board of Appeals are also subject to filing the Fair Political Practice Commission’s Statement of Economic Interest Form 700 relating to financial disclosures.

6.1 p. 61 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 1 of 7

COUNCIL ACTION MINUTES
MONDAY, JANUARY 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM

1. OPENING

1.1. Call to Order

1.2. Pledge of Allegiance
The Pledge of Allegiance was led by Council Member Bracco.

1.3. Invocation
The Invocation was led by Pastor Greg Quirke.

1.4. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
Interim City Clerk, Beth Minor announced the agenda was posted on Friday, January 3, 2025 at 3:45 PM.

1.5. Roll Call
Attendance Attendee Name
Dion Bracco, Council Member
Terence Fugazzi, Council Member
Carol Marques, Council Member
Zach Hilton, Council Member
Kelly Ramirez, Council Member
Tom Cline, Council Member
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
Absent None

1.6. Orders of the Day
There were none.

1.7. Employee Introductions
Sharon Goei, Community Development Director introduced Senior Planner Valerie Negrete.

2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Proclamations and Awards
There were none.

3. COUNCIL CORRESPONDENCE (Informational Only)
There were none.

4. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL

4.1. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT

ON THE AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER

JURISDICTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL
Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

Delmar Nielson asked the Council to form a committee to discuss the homeless issue within the city, in part due to the amount of garbage at Alexander Street and 9th Street.

7.1 p. 62 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 2 of 7
Terry Hernandez announced Pride Social South County is officially a nonprofit.

Ron Kirkish spoke regarding the problems surrounding the homeless encampments within the city.

Gregory Filios asked the Council to continue to build on the city projects that have already been started.

There being no further speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment.

5. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
Council Member Bracco
No Report
Council Member Fugazzi
No Report
Council Member Marques
No Report
Council Member Hilton reported Silicon Valley Clean Energy Authority JPA approved the agency’s participation in the California Public Utilities Commission Hourly Flex Pricing Pilot program.

Council Member
No Report
Council Member Cline
No Report
Mayor Bozzo
No Report

6. BOARD AND COMMISSION INTERVIEWS

6.1. Interviews for Open Seats on Boards, Commissions, and Committees with Future Appointment on January 27, 2025.

7. CONSENT CALENDAR

7.1. Approval of the Action Minutes of the December 9, 2024 City Council Regular Meeting.

7.2. Adopt a Resolution to Approve the Second Amendment to the Agreement for Maintenance of State Highways in the City of Gilroy and Authorize the City Administrator to Execute the Amendment.

Enactment No.: Resolution No. 2025-01.

7.3. Claim of James Hoey (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of the claim).

7.1 p. 63 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 7

7.4. Authorization for Mayor and Council Member Travel to the League of California Cities’ Mayors and Council Members Academy.

Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment MOTION: To approve Agenda Item Nos. 7.1-7.4.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

8. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
There were none.

9. PUBLIC HEARINGS

9.1. Introduce an Ordinance Approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement Between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch Project to Extend the Term of the Development Agreement by Three Years
Mayor Bozzo opened the Public Hearing.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed the Public Hearing.

MOTION: To determine that the First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement does not require independent CEQA review, beyond EIR Addendum #2, undertaken in connection with the adoption of the Fourth Operating Memorandum.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Tom Cline, Council Member
SECONDER: Carol Marques, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

MOTION: To read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Carol Marques, Council Member
SECONDER: Zack Hilton, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

7.1 p. 64 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 7
ABSTAIN:

MOTION: To Introduce an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Tom Cline, Council Member
SECONDER: Kelly Ramirez, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

10. UNFINISHED BUSINESS
There was none.

11. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS

11.1. Appointment of Councilmembers to the Downtown Committee.

Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment.

MOTION: To appoint Council Members Ramirez and Fugazzi to serve on the Downtown Committee.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Tom Cline, Council Member
SECONDER: Dion Bracco, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

11.2. Cities Association of Santa Clara County Membership Renewal Request.

Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment.

MOTION: To re-join the Cities Association of Santa Clara County.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Zach Hilton, Council Member
SECONDER: Tom Cline, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

7.1 p. 65 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 5 of 7
ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

11.3. Appointment of a Council Member to the Gilroy Gardens Lease Ad Hoc Committee.

Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment.

MOTION: To appoint Mayor Bozzo to the Gilroy Gardens Lease Ad Hoc Committee.

RESULTS: PASS: 7-0 ROLL CALL VOTE
MOVER: Tom Cline, Council Member
SECONDER: Terence Fugazzi, Council Member
AYES: BRACCO, FUGAZZI, MARQUES, HILTON, RAMIREZ,

CLINE, BOZZO
NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

12. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS

12.1. Request for an Update on the Status of Staff's Work to Complete the Housing Element Programs for 2024.

Mayor Bozzo opened Public Comment.

There being no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed Public Comment.

13. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
City Administrator, Jimmy Forbis noted the area by Alexander Street and 9th Street is Union Pacific Railroad property and the city cannot do any cleanup work due to it not being city property. He reminded everyone that there will be a strategic planning meeting on Wednesday, February 12, 2025 for the 2- year budget cycle discussion. He encouraged everyone to take time to complete the Community Survey. He also mentioned the passing of Proposition 36 and how it could help with retail thefts.

14. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
City Attorney, Andy Faber advised he had nothing to report. He read the Closed Session titles into the record.

15. CLOSED SESSION

15.1. 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.

7.1 p. 66 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 6 of 7

15.2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION.

Pending Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 (3) (a), Gandolfi Investments, LLC v. City of Gilroy, et.al., Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara, Case Number 24CV444165, filed July 26, 2024.

15.3. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS Pursuant to GC Sec. 54956.8 and GCC Sec. 17A.8
Property: Gilroy Gardens Theme Park, 3050 Hecker Pass Highway, Gilroy, CA (APN’s: 810-17-024, 810-17-026, 810-17-029, 810-17-030, 810-17-031, 810-18-002, 810-18-013, 810-19-005, 810-19-007, 810-19- 010, 810-19-011, 810-19-014)
Negotiators: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator; Victoria Valencia, Economic Development Manager
Other Party to Negotiations: Gilroy Gardens Family Theme Park, LLC Under Negotiations: Price and terms of payment for sale or lease.

15.4. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION.

Pending Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 (3) (a), Timothy Gavin v. City of Gilroy, Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara, Case Number 24CV428673, filed January 5, 2024.

15.5. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - PENDING LITIGATION.

Pending Litigation Pursuant to Paragraph (1) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 (3) (a), City of Gilroy v. Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara & Law Foundation of Silicon Valley v. Superior Court for the County of Santa Clara, Supreme Court of California, Case Numbers S282937 and S282950, review granted February 21, 2024.

The Council unanimously voted to go into the Closed Session. The Council then unanimously to stay in the Closed Session. Mayor Bozzo noted there was no reportable action.

16. ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION

17. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting was adjourned at 10:37 P.M.

7.1 p. 67 of 173
City Council Regular Meeting
Agenda
January 6, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 7 of 7
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/Beth Minor
Interim City Clerk

7.1 p. 68 of 173

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approve the Donation of Maui, a Trained Therapy Dog from the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Police
Submitted By: Pedro Espinoza, Police Chief
Prepared By: Luke Powell, Captain
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Ensure Neighborhood Equity from City Services

RECOMMENDATION
Approve the donation of Maui, a trained therapy dog, from the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Gilroy Police Department has been offered Maui; a working therapy dog donated by the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024 project. Adopted from the San Martin Animal Shelter and trained by Operation Freedom Paws, Maui will serve as a therapeutic resource to individuals to reduce stress and anxiety within GUSD schools, City departments, and the broader community. Maui is trained to detect elevated cortisol levels and provide calming interactions, helping individuals manage stress. The annual maintenance cost of $7,000 for Maui is included in the Police Department’s existing canine budget. This initiative aligns with the department’s employee wellness and resiliency program and strengthens community outreach efforts.

BACKGROUND
The Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024 selected a therapy dog project to benefit the Gilroy community. Maui was adopted from the San Martin Animal Shelter and received specialized training from Operation Freedom Paws in detecting elevated cortisol levels in individuals. Because of their sensitivity to human emotions, Therapy dogs like Maui

7.2 p. 69 of 173
Approve the Donation of Maui, a Trained Therapy Dog from the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024 City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 are proven to reduce stress and anxiety through interaction. Maui’s training allows him to recognize stress indicators and respond with calming actions, such as leaning into or placing his head on a person, fostering immediate relief and comfort to those in need.

The Police Department selects potential canine officer candidates through an interview process and supervisory recommendations. The compatibility between the officer and canine is crucial as the team spend almost every hour of their day together, goes home with the officer after working their shift, and forming deep bonds with their handler and immediate family. School Resource Officer Odell will serve as Maui’s primary handler, deploying him daily on Gilroy Unified School District campuses.

ANALYSIS
Maui’s role spans schools, City departments, and community events, providing comprehensive support:
• Schools: Maui will be a consistent presence on Gilroy Unified School District campuses, offering stress relief to students and staff. • City Departments: Maui will assist staff in the communications center, records unit, investigations, and other units as part of the Critical Incident Stress Debrief (CISD) and Wellness Team initiatives.
• Community Events: Maui will participate in programs such as Coffee with a Cop, Ice Cream with a Cop, and National Night Out, enhancing community engagement and promoting positive relations within our community.

Maui’s projected maintenance cost of $7,000 annually, includes food, supplies, and veterinary services, is already allocated in the Police Department’s budget for canine teams ensuring no additional financial impact.

Maui’s presence will enhance mental health support for students, staff, and employees while fostering stronger community connections through outreach and public engagement.

ALTERNATIVES
Staff researched and evaluated other therapy dog programs implemented by other law enforcement agencies and community organizations. These programs have consistently yielded positive responses from internal personnel and the public. The data and feedback gathered indicate significant reductions in stress levels and improved overall well-being for participants.

No alternative programs or approaches have demonstrated comparable success in achieving these objectives. While other wellness initiatives exist, none provide the immediate stress relief, emotional support, and community engagement benefits seen with therapy dog programs. The presence of a therapy dog, like Maui, offers a unique and proven method for enhancing mental health support and promoting positive community relations.

Given the demonstrated effectiveness of similar therapy dog programs and the absence

7.2 p. 70 of 173
Approve the Donation of Maui, a Trained Therapy Dog from the Leadership Gilroy Class of 2024 City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 of alternatives that can achieve the same outcomes, staff believe this initiative represents the best solution for addressing departmental and community wellness needs.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Maui’s annual maintenance cost of $7,000 is already included in the Police Department’s budget, which supports three canine teams. Maui fills a vacant position, resulting in no additional budget impact.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Therapy dog programs in other agencies have received overwhelmingly positive feedback from both internal personnel and the community. Staff anticipate similar outcomes for Maui’s deployment in schools, city departments, and community events, reinforcing trust and fostering positive relationships.

NEXT STEPS
If approved, Maui will begin his service immediately in schools, city departments, and public events. If the donation is not accepted, Maui may be returned to Leadership Gilroy for rehousing or remain with Officer Odell and his family. Upon acceptance of the donation, the attached donation form will be completed pursuant to the Donation Policy.

Attachments:

1. Donation Acceptance Form

7.2 p. 71 of 173

CITY OF GILROY

DONATION ACCEPTANCE FORM
Name of Donor: Gilroy Leadership Class 2024 and Operation Freedom Paws
Address: 7471 Monterey Street City: Gilroy State: CA Zip: 95020 Description of donation: Donation of Maui, a trained therapy dog.

Donor estimate of current value: $7,000.

Potential immediate acquisition/installation or any on-going maintenance or replacement cost: Ongoing care and feeding of the dog. Total upkeep cost not known.

Intended use: Use by the Police Department as a therapy dog in the course and scope of duties.

Conditions of acceptance or donor designation: None.

Remarks:

FOR CITY USE
Please Circle One: ACCEPTED / DENIED
Date City Administrator’s Signature
January 27, 2025
Date Submitted to Council Date Approved/Denied by Council Date Mayor’s Signature

7.2 p. 72 of 173

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Adoption of an Ordinance Approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement Between
the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the
Glen Loma Ranch Project to Extend the Term of the
Development Agreement by Three Years
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Community Development
Submitted By: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director Prepared By: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION
Adopt an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Development Agreement for the Glen Loma Ranch development was adopted in 2005 (Ordinance 2005-22) and has a 20-year term expiring on December 21, 2025.

Pursuant to Section 2.2 of the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement (GLR DA), the term may be extended for three years through an amendment to the GLR DA. The First Amendment to the GLR DA would extend the expiration date of the GLR DA from December 21, 2025, to December 21, 2028.

ANALYSIS
On January 6, 2025, the City Council held a public hearing and considered and introduced an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Development

7.3 p. 73 of 173
Adoption of an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 2 January 27, 2025 1 8 Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years. The City Council motioned to read the ordinance by title only, waived further reading of the ordinance, and introduced the ordinance with a 7-0 vote.

The City Council is now asked to adopt the proposed ordinance consistent with its January 6, 2025 action.

The ordinance will become effective on February 26, 2025, thirty (30) days following the date of Council adoption.

ALTERNATIVES
The City Council may decline to adopt the ordinance. However, this is not recommended because the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement (approved by City Council Resolution No. 2024-47 on October 7, 2024) acknowledged that the extension would be processed and approved in a timely manner.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Approval of this extension is consistent with the milestones identified in the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement. The staff time and resources necessary to prepare the documents were accommodated within existing appropriations and workplan, thus there is no new fiscal impact.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public hearings were held on the proposed amendment at the December 5, 2024 Planning Commission meeting and the January 6, 2025 City Council meeting. Public hearing notices were published in the Gilroy Dispatch. Public hearing packets are available through the City’s website.

NEXT STEPS
If adopted, the ordinance will become effective in 30 days on February 26, 2025.

Attachments:

1. Draft Ordinance Approving First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement

2. January 27, 2025 Ordinance Introduction Staff Report

7.3 p. 74 of 173
1 4854-5418-3918v1
ALF\04706099
ORDINANCE NO. 2025-XX

AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF

GILROY APPROVING THE FIRST AMENDMENT TO THE

DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF

GILROY AND GLEN LOMA CORPORATION FOR THE

GLEN LOMA RANCH PROJECT TO EXTEND THE TERM

OF THE DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT BY THREE YEARS

THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:

SECTION I.

RECITALS
A. By Ordinance 2005-22 adopted on or about November 21, 2005, the City of Gilroy approved a development agreement (the “Development Agreement”) pursuant to California Government Code sections 65864 through 65869.5 (“State Law”), by and between Glen Loma Corporation and various owners of property(collectively, “GLR”), to govern construction of a multi-phase project consisting of residential and commercial development for the Glen Loma Ranch project encompassing approximately 359 acres as more fully described in the Glen Loma Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) adopted on November 7, 2005 (the “Project”). The Specific Plan also sets forth the detailed development standards and guidelines and an implementation program for the development of the Project. Ordinance 2005-22 became effective on December 21, 2005, thirty (30) days after adoption, and on the same date, the Development Agreement took effect.

B. Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report (“EIR”) for the Project, which included the Specific Plan itself and the Development Agreement, which EIR was certified by the City Council on October 17, 2005, and for which Resolution No. 2005-81 was adopted on November 7, 2005 making the required findings for each significant effect and including a Statement of Overriding Considerations, and a mitigation/monitoring program was adopted in connection with the Project.

C. In 2014, the City Council adopted an addendum to the certified EIR (“Addendum #1”) modifying and removing certain mitigation measures.

D. In 2017, 2018, and 2022, the City and GLR entered into three Operating Memoranda pursuant to Paragraph 3.13 of the Development Agreement, each of which has become part of the Development Agreement.

E. On October 7, 2024, the City Council approved the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Development Agreement (“Fourth Operating Memorandum”) and also approved an

7.3 p. 75 of 173
2 4854-5418-3918v1
ALF\04706099
addendum to the EIR (“Addendum #2”) making further minor modifications and clarifications to the Development Agreement.

F. One provision of the Fourth Operating Memorandum requires that the City and GLR take all reasonable actions to extend the expiration date of the Term of the Development Agreement by three years, i.e., from December 21, 2025 through and including December 21, 2028. A First Amendment to Development Agreement (“First Amendment”), attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by this reference, has been prepared to effectuate that extension of the Term of the Development Agreement. The First Amendment makes no other changes to the Development Agreement, and thus does not require independent CEQA review, beyond that already undertaken in connection with the adoption of the Fourth Operating Memorandum.

G. A public hearing on the proposed First Amendment was held before the Planning Commission on December 5, 2024, for which public notice was given as provided by law and at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard, and following the hearing the Planning Commission recommended approval of the First Amendment.

H. A public hearing on the proposed First Amendment was held before the City Council on January 6, 2025, for which public notice was given as provided by law, and at which all persons desiring to be heard were given an opportunity to be heard. The City Council has duly considered all testimony received, both oral and written.

SECTION II.

FINDINGS AND DETERMINATIONS
On the basis of the foregoing Recitals and the specific conclusions set forth below, the City Council finds and determines that:

1. The Development Agreement as modified by the First Amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contained in the City’s General Plan and the Specific Plan.

2. The City has taken all steps required by State Law and by CEQA in order to approve the First Amendment.

SECTION III.

APPROVAL
The City Council hereby approves the First Amendment and authorizes the Mayor to execute the First Amendment, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit “A.”

7.3 p. 76 of 173
3 4854-5418-3918v1
ALF\04706099
SECTION IV.

EFFECTIVE DATE
This ordinance shall take effect and be in full force thirty (30) days from and after its adoption, and on that same date the First Amendment shall take effect.

SECTION V.

RECORDATION
Not later than ten (10) days after the City’s execution and acknowledgment of the First Amendment, the City Clerk shall submit the First Amendment to the County Recorder for recordation.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this day of ___________, 2025, by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCILMEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCILMEMBERS:

APPROVED:
___________________________
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
___________________________________
Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk

7.3 p. 77 of 173
Exhibit A

7.3 p. 78 of 173
4867-0861-9759v2 Page 1 of 4
ALF\04706099

FIRST AMENDMENT TO
DEVELOPMENT AGREEMENT – GLEN LOMA RANCH
This First Amendment (“First Amendment”) to the Development Agreement between City of Gilroy (“City”), Glen Loma Corporation, and the owners of Glen Loma Ranch (“Owners”; Owners together with Glen Loma Corporation are collectively referred to as “GLR”), dated November 21, 2005 (the “Development Agreement”) for the development of the Glen Loma Ranch Project, an area composed of approximately 359 acres of land (of which approximately 185 acres will be developed) northeast of Santa Teresa Boulevard and southwest of Uvas Creek, is entered into in consideration of the following recitals and mutual promises and conditions.

WHEREAS, the Development Agreement was approved by the City Council with the adoption of Ordinance 2005-22 on November 21, 2005 (the “Enacting Date”); and WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 1.1 of the Development Agreement, the Effective Date of the Development Agreement is 30 days after the Enacting Date, i.e., December 21, 2005, and pursuant to Section 2.2 of the Development Agreement, the Term of the Development Agreement expires on “the first to occur of the following dates: (a) the date which is twenty (20) years from the Effective Date, or (b) the date on which the development of the Project has been completed in accordance with this Agreement, including the construction the Public Improvement…”; and WHEREAS, Section 2.2. of the Development Agreement provides that an extension of three years to the term of the Development Agreement may be made by amendment to the Development Agreement; and
WHEREAS, the City and GLR agreed in the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Development Agreement, approved by the City Council on October 7, 2024, that they would take all steps reasonably necessary to extend the Term of the Development Agreement by three (3) years; and
WHEREAS, The Development Agreement and this First Amendment now apply to the remaining undeveloped areas of the Glen Loma Project more particularly described in Exhibit “1” attached hereto and incorporated herein by this reference.

NOW, THEREFORE, in consideration of the foregoing recitals and the mutual covenants and conditions contained herein, the City and GLR agree as follows:

1. In the above-quoted language in section 2.2 of the Development Agreement, the Phrase “the date which is twenty (20) years from the Effective Date” is hereby replaced with the following: “the date which is twenty-three (23) years from the Effective Date.”

2. Capitalized terms in this First Amendment that are not defined herein have the same meaning as in the Development Agreement.

7.3 p. 79 of 173
4867-0861-9759v2 Page 2 of 4
ALF\04706099

3. This First Amendment may be signed in Counterparts.

4. In all other respects, the Development Agreement remains in full force and effect unmodified by this First Amendment. In case of conflict between the Development Agreement and this First Amendment, the terms of this First Amendment shall prevail.

The parties execute this First Amendment as of ________________, 2025.

CITY:

City of Gilroy,
a California municipal corporation
By: __________________________
Greg Bozzo
Mayor
DEVELOPER:

Glen Loma Corporation,
a California corporation
By: __________________________
John M. Filice, Jr.

President
Approved as to Form:

By: __________________________
Andrew L. Faber
City Attorney

7.3 p. 80 of 173
4867-0861-9759v2 Page 3 of 4
ALF\04706099
OWNERS:

Filice Family Estate,
a California limited partnership
by its General Partner, Cugini Calabria LLC
a California limited liability company
By: ___________________________
John M. Filice, Jr.

Manager
Christopher Ranch LLC,
a California limited liability company
By: ____________________________
Name: ___________________
Title: ____________________
The Christopher Family Partnership,
a California limited partnership
By: ____________________________
Name: ___________________
Title: ____________________
D Christopher & Sons LLC,
a California limited liability company
By: ____________________________
Name: ___________________
Title: ____________________

7.3 p. 81 of 173
4867-0861-9759v2 Page 4 of 4
ALF\04706099
EXHIBIT “1”

PROPERTY DESCRIPTION
Real properties in the City of Gilroy, County of Santa Clara, State of California, described as follows:

Parcel P as shown on the map entitled "TRACT 10472 TOWN CENTER", recorded September 24, 2020, in Book 932, of Maps at Pages 55-61, Santa Clara County records.

APN: 808-58-002 and 808-58-003
and
Parcels B and C, as shown on the map entitled "Tract 10520, NEBBIOLO, MALVASIA & THE GLEN", recorded September 30, 2020, in Book 933, of Maps at Pages 13-26, Santa Clara County records.

APN: 808-58-005 (Parcel B) and 808-18-032 (Parcel C)

7.3 p. 82 of 173
State of California
County of ______________________________ }

CALIFORNIA ACKNOWLEDGMENT
©2018 National Notary Association
A notary public or other officer completing this certificate verifies only the identity of the individual who signed the document to which this certificate is attached, and not the truthfulness, accuracy, or validity of that document.

On _________________________ before me, _____________________________________________, personally appeared __________________________________________________________________ __________________________________________________________________________________, who proved to me on the basis of satisfactory evidence to be the person(s) whose name(s) is/are subscribed to the within instrument and acknowledged to me that he/she/they executed the same in his/her/their authorized capacity(ies), and that by his/her/their signature(s) on the instrument the person(s), or the entity upon behalf of which the person(s) acted, executed the instrument.

Here Insert Name and Title of the Officer
Name(s) of Signer(s)
Date
Signature _________________________________
Place Notary Seal and/or Stamp Above
CIVIL CODE § 1189
Completing this information can deter alteration of the document or fraudulent reattachment of this form to an unintended document.

OPTIONAL
Description of Attached Document
Title or Type of Document: _________________________________________________________ Document Date: ___________________________________________ Number of Pages: _________ Signer(s) Other Than Named Above: __________________________________________________ Capacity(ies) Claimed by Signer(s)
Signer’s Name: _______________________________
☐ Corporate Officer – Title(s): __________________
☐ Partner – ☐ Limited ☐ General
☐ Individual ☐ Attorney in Fact
☐ Trustee ☐ Guardian or Conservator
☐ Other: _____________________________________
Signer is Representing: ________________________
__________________________________________
Signer’s Name: _______________________________
☐ Corporate Officer – Title(s): __________________
☐ Partner – ☐ Limited ☐ General
☐ Individual ☐ Attorney in Fact
☐ Trustee ☐ Guardian or Conservator
☐ Other: _____________________________________
Signer is Representing: ________________________
___________________________________________
Signature of Notary Public
I certify under PENALTY OF PERJURY under the
laws of the State of California that the foregoing
paragraph is true and correct.

WITNESS my hand and official seal.

7.3 p. 83 of 173

Page 1 of 4 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Introduce an Ordinance Approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement Between
the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the
Glen Loma Ranch Project to Extend the Term of the
Development Agreement by Three Years
Meeting Date: January 6, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Community Development
Submitted By: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director Prepared By: Cindy McCormick, Planning Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION
Council:

1. Determine that the First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement does not require independent CEQA review, beyond EIR Addendum #2, undertaken in connection with the adoption of the Fourth Operating Memorandum.

2. Motion to read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading; and

3. Introduce an ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Development Agreement for the Glen Loma Ranch development was adopted in 2005 (Ordinance 2005-22) and has a 20-year term expiring on December 21, 2025.

7.3 p. 84 of 173
Introduce an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 4 January 6, 2025

BACKGROUND
Glen Loma Development: The Glen Loma Ranch Development is an approximately 359-acre property located in the western rolling foothills of Gilroy between Santa Teresa Boulevard and Uvas Creek. On November 7, 2005, the City of Gilroy adopted the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan (“Specific Plan”) and certified the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan EIR (“Specific Plan EIR”). At that time, the City of Gilroy and the Glen Loma Ranch Corporation (GLR) acknowledged that the development and construction of the Glen Loma Ranch development was a large-scale undertaking, necessitating a development agreement to eliminate uncertainty, secure orderly development, and meet the goals and objectives of the General Plan and the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan.

Glen Loma Development Agreement: Development agreements are contracts negotiated between project proponents and public agencies that govern the land uses that may be allowed in a particular project. On November 21, 2005, the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Ranch entered into a Development Agreement (GLR DA) for the development of the Glen Loma Ranch development (Ordinance 2005-22). The effective date of the GLR DA was December 21, 2005, with a 20-year term, expiring on December 21, 2025, or the date on which the development has been completed including the construction of public improvements. The GLR DA also allows for an extension of three years through an amendment to the GLR DA. In 2017, 2018, and 2022, the City and Glen Loma Corporation entered into three Operating Memoranda pursuant to Paragraph 3.13 of the GLR DA, each of which has become part of the GLR DA. On October 7, 2024, the City Council approved the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the GLR DA (Resolution No. 2024-47), which acknowledged that the extension would be processed and approved prior to or coincidentally with either Tentative Map TM 24- 03 or TM 24-02. Both tentative maps are tentatively scheduled for review and recommendation by the Planning Commission on January 16, 2025.

Environmental Assessment: Pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”), the City prepared an Environmental Impact Report for the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan (“Specific Plan EIR”), which was certified by the City Council on October 17, 2005, and adopted by the City Council on November 7, 2005 (Resolution No. 2005- 81). On May 19, 2014, the City Council adopted an addendum to the certified EIR (EIR Addendum #1), modifying Mitigation Measures #4, #23, #31, and deleting Mitigation Measures #32, and #42 (Resolution 2014-19). On October 7, 2024, the City Council adopted a second addendum to the certified EIR (EIR Addendum #2), finding that, under the current planned buildout of 1,467 residential units, Mitigation Measures 36, 37, 39, 41, 43, and 44 are not required and Mitigation Measure 34 has been satisfied through the installed signalization (Resolution No 2024-46). The proposed extension of the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement makes no other changes to the Development Agreement or to the Specific Plan EIR, and thus does not require independent CEQA review, beyond EIR Addendum #2. Therefore, the Project is not

7.3 p. 85 of 173
Introduce an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 4 January 6, 2025 subject to CEQA under the common sense exemption where it can be seen with certainty that there is no possibility that the activity in question may have a significant effect on the environment [State CEQA Guidelines Section 15061(b)(3)].

Planning Commission Review: On December 5, 2024, the Planning Commission held a noticed public hearing on the proposed Ordinance and recommended that the City Council adopt the Ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years.

ANALYSIS
Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement Amendment: The proposed amendment modifies section 2.2 of the GLR DA by replacing the phrase “the date which is twenty (20) years from the Effective Date” with the phrase “the date which is twenty-three (23) years from the Effective Date.” In all other respects, the Development Agreement remains in full force and effect, unmodified by the approved amendment. In case of conflict between the GLR DA and the approved amendment, the terms of the approved amendment shall prevail.

Findings: The proposed amendment is consistent with the objectives, policies, general land uses and programs specified and contained in the City’s General Plan and the Glen Loma Ranch Specific Plan. The City has taken all steps required by State Law and by CEQA in order to approve the proposed amendment.

ALTERNATIVES
The City Council could decide not to introduce the Ordinance; however this is not recommended because the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the GLR DA (approved by City Council Resolution No. 2024-47 on October 7, 2024), acknowledged that the extension would be processed and approved in a timely manner.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Approval of this extension is consistent with the milestones identified in the Fourth Operating Memorandum to the Glen Loma Ranch Development. The staff time and resources necessary to prepare the documents and publish the public hearing notices were accommodated within existing appropriations and workplan, thus there is no new fiscal impact.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
The public hearing for the proposed amendment was noticed in the Gilroy Dispatch on December 20, 2024.

7.3 p. 86 of 173
Introduce an ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Development Agreement between the City of Gilroy and Glen Loma Corporation for the Glen Loma Ranch project to extend the term of the Development Agreement by three years City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 4 January 6, 2025

NEXT STEPS
The ordinance approving the First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement is tentatively scheduled to be adopted by the City Council on January 27, 2025.

Attachments:

1. Draft Ordinance Approving First Amendment

2. First Amendment to the Glen Loma Ranch Development Agreement

7.3 p. 87 of 173

Page 1 of 2 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approve a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2023- 27 to Reduce the Number of Council Members
Serving on the Downtown Committee.

Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Prepared By: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Promote Economic Development Activities

RECOMMENDATION
Council adopt the resolution.

BACKGROUND
On May 1st, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-27, establishing the Downtown Committee (Committee). The Committee was established with a fifteen member body – five being City Council Members, and the other ten appointed by those five pursuant to the membership provisions in the above referenced resolution. As a result of the elections held on November 5, 2024, three Council Members appointed to the Committee were no longer able to serve. At the January 6, 2025 meeting, the City Council discussed the matter of appointing up to three Council Members to the City Council seats on the Downtown Committee. The Council ultimately appointed two members, and then provided direction to return to Council with a resolution amendment to have the number of City Council member appointees be reduced to four.

ANALYSIS
Attached is a resolution amending Resolution No. 2023-27, specifically the membership provisions reducing the total membership from fifteen to fourteen members, and the

7.4 p. 88 of 173
Approve a Resolution Amending Resolution No. 2023-27 to Reduce the Number of Council Members Serving on the Downtown Committee.

City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 2 January 27, 2025 total number of Council members from five to four. No other changes are made by adoption of the proposed amending resolution.

ALTERNATIVES
Council may modify or reject the resolution. This is not recommended as this is a resolution memorializing the decision made by Council on January 6, 2025.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
None.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item was discussed at the January 6, 2025 public City Council meeting, and was included on the publicly posted agenda for this meeting.

NEXT STEPS
If adopted, the resolution will be executed and the membership structure will be modified accordingly.

Attachments:

1. Proposed Amending Resolution

2. Resolution 2023-27

7.4 p. 89 of 173
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY
AMENDING RESOLUTION NO. 2023-27, ESTABLISHMENT OF THE

DOWNTOWN COMMITTEE, REGARDING THE NUMBER OF

APPOINTED CITY COUNCIL MEMBERS TO THE DOWNTOWN

COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, on May 1, 2023, the City Council adopted Resolution No. 2023-27 establishing the Downtown Committee; and
WHEREAS, the membership of the Downtown Committee was originally comprised of fifteen members, five of which were to be City Council Members appointed by the City Council from among its own membership; and
WHEREAS, after the November 5, 2024 elections and the seating of new Council Members, the City Council on January 6, 2025 appointed two new Downtown Committee members and directed the reduction of the number of Council Member appointees from five to four.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY the City Council of the City of Gilroy that Resolution No. 2023-27, establishing a Downtown Committee, particularly the section entitled “Membership”, is hereby amended to read as follows:

Membership. The total membership of the Committee shall be fourteen (14) members. The Committee shall consist of four Council Members as appointed by the City Council. Each appointed Council Member may appoint two additional members of their choice from the residential community, business owners or property owners from downtown Gilroy. Members shall serve for the term of the Committee as defined below. Public Members shall remain the same through the original expiration date of the Downtown Committee. Members of the Committee are tasked to complete the work of the Committee, with limited staff support as identified in the Powers and Scope section below.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of January 2025 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

______________________________
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:

Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk

7.4 p. 90 of 173
Resolution No. 2025-XX
Amending Resolution No. 2023-27, establishment of the Downtown Committee, regarding the number of appointed City Council Members to the Downtown Committee City Council Regular Meeting | January 27, 2025

Page 2 of 2 ends

CERTIFICATE OF THE CLERK
I, BETH MINOR, Interim 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, January 27, 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.
____________________________________
Beth Minor
Interim City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)

7.4 p. 91 of 173
RESOLUTION NO. 2023-27

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY

ESTABLISHING A DOWNTOWN COMMITTEE
WHEREAS, the City Council of the City of Gilroy wishes to create an Advisory Committee of members from the City Council and stakeholders in downtown Gilroy to provide recommendations and input into the completion of the adopted downtown recommendations of the City Council in the first year, and other downtown related activities in the second year; and
WHEREAS, for purposes of this Downtown Committee, downtown Gilroy is defined as the area bordered by First Street to the north, Tenth Street to the south, Eigleberry Street to the west, and Railroad Street to the east.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that the City Council of the City of Gilroy does hereby establish the Downtown Committee (Committee), with the duties, powers and structure as follows:

Membership. The total membership of the Committee shall be fifteen (15) members. The Committee shall consist of five Council Members as appointed by the City Council. Each appointed Council Member may appoint two additional members of their choice from the residential community, business owners or property owners from downtown Gilroy.

Members shall serve for the term of the Committee as defined below. Members of the Committee are tasked to complete the work of the Committee, with limited staff support as identified in the Powers and Scope section below.

Attendance and Vacancies. Council Members retain control of the seats that they appoint, and when such seats are vacated, the Council Member originally appointing that seat shall reappoint another qualifying candidate as described above to that seat. The Council Vacancy Policy on boards and commissions shall apply to the public members , including removal for excess absences.

Presiding Officers. Council Member Marques shall be the Chair of the Committee and preside over the meetings of the Committee. Council Member Tovar shall be Vice -Chair and perform the duties of Committee Chair in the absence of Chair Marques. The City Administrator will provide administrative support to the Committee.

Term. The Committee shall have a term of twenty-four (24) months, ending on April 30, 2025. At the expiration of the term, the Committee shall automatically be dissolved unless the term is extended by the City Council.

Meetings. The Committee shall initially hold meetings monthly. The meetings shall be held in the Gilroy City Council Chambers at 8:00 AM on the second Tuesday of each month, beginning in May 2023. The meeting schedule may be changed by the Committee to meet less frequently, for example, quarterly. The Committee may hold special meetings on an as-needed basis at the call of the Chair or as otherwise requested by the City Council. A quorum of the Committee shall consist of eight Committee members. The affirmative vote of a simple majority of the members present, which must include the

7.4 p. 92 of 173
Resolution No. 2023-27
Formation of Downtown Committee
City Council Regular Meeting | May 1, 2023

Page 2 of 3 ends

affirmative vote of at least three Council Members, shall be required for the Committee to take any action.

Powers and Scope. The Committee will have the authority and duty to:
a) Act in an advisory capacity to the City Council and City Administrator in matters pertaining to downtown Gilroy, as defined in the recitals above, with an initial focus on the outstanding downtown recommendations that were adopted by the City Council in October 2022. Once the work on those recommendations is prioritized and a workplan is underway by Committee members, other topics and recommendations relating to other downtown Gilroy subject matters may be explored;
b) Report back to the Council periodically at frequencies determined by the Committee, but no less than annually. The Committee has no authority to provide direction to City staff but may make recommendations to the full Council for their consideration of providing direction to staff; c) Identify problems and, with Council approval, study such problems, activities, and concerns regarding the downtown, hold forums on such problems, and recommend programs, policies, and procedures to the City Administrator and City Council which the Committee finds necessary or desirable;
d) Perform such other duties related to downtown Gilroy as may be directed by the City Council.

Operation of the Committee. The work of the Committee shall be performed by the members of the Committee. The City Council, by this Resolution, hereby dedicates City staff resources limited to performing administrative functions to support the Committee, which is limited to agenda preparation and posting, meeting attendance, and meeting minutes preparation. The Committee shall comply and be governed by the State Ralph M. Brown Act and all other applicable State laws and local ordinances and policies. The Committee has purely advisory functions, and the public members are not considered to be “public officials” for the purposes of the Fair Political Practices Act.

7.4 p. 93 of 173
Resolution No. 2023-27
Formation of Downtown Committee
City Council Regular Meeting | May 1, 2023

Page 3 of 3 ends

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 1st day of May 2023 by the following vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: BRACCO, CLINE, HILTON, MARQUES,

TOVAR, BLANKLEY
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS: NONE
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS: ARMENDARIZ
APPROVED:

Marie Blankley, Mayor
ATTEST:

Thai Nam Pham, City Clerk
Marie Blankley (May 3, 2023 17:08 PDT)
Marie Blankley

7.4 p. 94 of 173

CERTIFICATE OF THE CLERK
I, THAI NAM PHAM, City Clerk of the City of Gilroy, do hereby certify that the attached Resolution No. 2023-27 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, May 1, 2023, at which meeting a quorum was present.

IN WITNESS WHEREOF, I have hereunto set my hand and affixed the Official Seal of the City of Gilroy this Monday, May 1, 2023.

Thai Nam Pham, CMC, CPMC
City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
Seal)

7.4 p. 95 of 173

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Award a Three-Year Contract to Secure Guard Security Services in a Total Amount of $233,451 with
an Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount of $77,817 for Park
Patrol Security Services, with Up to Two, One-Year
Extension Options
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Public Works
Submitted By: Matt Jones, Deputy Public Works Director
Prepared By: Karen Gumin, Management Analyst
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION
City Council:

2. Authorize the City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The City of Gilroy initiated private park patrols in 2015 to address safety concerns in the parks. The current contract, awarded in 2019, will expire on January 31, 2025. A new Request for Proposals (RFP) was issued in October 2024, and ten proposals were received. Based on a thorough evaluation, staff recommends awarding a three-year contract to Secure Guard Security Services. This contract will continue to enhance public safety across the City’s 17 parks and 19 trails, covering over 310 acres.

8.1 p. 96 of 173
Award a Three-Year Contract to Secure Guard Security Services in a Total Amount of $233,451.00 with an Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount of $77,817 for Park Patrol Security Services, with Up to Two, One-Year Extension Options
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 January 27, 2025

BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy has utilized private security patrol services since 2015 to mitigate vandalism, trespassing and theft. Private patrol security services proved to be effective to enhance public safety, documenting graffiti, reduce vandalism, eject after hours trespassers and increase patrol activity. Additionally, the parks patrol routine security services include park closures and openings, securing restrooms and gates, responding to incidents and providing daily activity and incident reports to City management. In addition to the primary park locations, the contracted services include nineteen trails and facilities on patrol standby as needed at the City’s discretion.

The current contract with First Alarm Security and Patrol expires January 31, 2025. The new contract will ensure uninterrupted service and continued safety enhancements.

ANALYSIS
The RFP for Park Patrol Security Services was issued on October 14, 2024, and advertised through the City’s website and local news media. By the submission deadline of November 5, 2024, ten proposals were received. A three-member evaluation panel reviewed proposals based on the following criteria: 1. Cost of Services; 2. Staff Management Plan; 3. Safety Practices; 4. Proximity to Gilroy; 5. Expertise and Range of Services; and 6. Client References.

Based on the panel’s evaluation of the ten proposals, Secure Guard Security Services is the recommended contractor. Secure Guard Security Services was identified as the most qualified contractor, demonstrating exceptional experience and trained personnel.

The proposed hourly rate and total costs are competitive and aligned with City needs.

ALTERNATIVES
Council may choose to reject the recommended proposal. This is not recommended as either an extension to the existing contract, reduction of coverage, or additional staffing may be required.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Staff anticipates the total cost for the Parks Patrol Security Services to be approximately $77,817 per year, inclusive of labor and vehicle costs. Funding for the annual security services is included within the Public Works Department’s budget in the General Fund (100) and is within the existing appropriations.

It should be noted that the proposed annual fee of $77,817 is for the first three fiscal years of the contract and may vary if the contract is extended for one or two additional years. The total 3-year contract amount accounts for holiday pay rates in addition to the regular hourly rate of patrol services in a given year.

8.1 p. 97 of 173
Award a Three-Year Contract to Secure Guard Security Services in a Total Amount of $233,451.00 with an Annual Not-to-Exceed Amount of $77,817 for Park Patrol Security Services, with Up to Two, One-Year Extension Options
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 January 27, 2025 Date Amount
February 1, 2025 – January 30th,
2026 $77,817
February 1, 2026 – January 30th,
2027 $77,817
February 1, 2027 – January 30th,
2028 $77,817
Total 3-Year Contract $233,451

PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item is included on the public posted agenda for the January 27th, 2025 City Council meeting.

NEXT STEPS
Subject to City Council approval, the City Administrator will execute the contract with Secure Guard Services, along with the associated documents. The Parks Patrol Security Services contract will commence upon execution of the contract.

Attachments:

1. Agreement with Secure Guard Security Services for Park Patrol Security Services.

8.1 p. 98 of 173

8.1 p. 99 of 173

8.1 p. 100 of 173

8.1 p. 101 of 173

8.1 p. 102 of 173

8.1 p. 103 of 173

8.1 p. 104 of 173

8.1 p. 105 of 173

8.1 p. 106 of 173

8.1 p. 107 of 173

8.1 p. 108 of 173

8.1 p. 109 of 173

8.1 p. 110 of 173

8.1 p. 111 of 173

8.1 p. 112 of 173

8.1 p. 113 of 173

8.1 p. 114 of 173

8.1 p. 115 of 173

8.1 p. 116 of 173

Page 1 of 4 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Award a Contract to Apex Companies for the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project
No. 25-PW-293 in the amount of $189,800; Approve a
Budget Amendment; Approve a Project Contingency
of $60,200; Approve a Total Project Expenditure of
$250,000 for Construction; and Adopt a Resolution
Amending the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Public Works
Submitted By: Daniel Padilla, City Engineer
Prepared By: Mark Johnson, Environmental Programs Manager STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Maintain and Improve City Infrastructure

RECOMMENDATION

2. Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2024-25 budget in Fund 410 – Storm Drain Development Fund and in Fund 422 – Stormwater Management Fund.

EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The completion of this Project (No. 25-PW-293) will help the City make significant progress in meeting State requirements to prevent trash from polluting local waterways.

Under the Statewide Trash Provisions, municipalities are required to eliminate trash from the Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) by 2030. To meet an interim

8.2 p. 117 of 173
Award a Contract to Apex Companies for the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project No. 25-PW-293 in the amount of $189,800; Approve a Budget Amendment; Approve a Project Contingency of $60,200; Approve a Total Project Expenditure of $250,000 for Construction; and Adopt a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 4 January 27, 2025 1 8 or milestone requirement, the State mandates achieving at least 35% area coverage of targeted, high-priority areas by 2026. This project includes installing 80 certified trash capture devices in strategic locations to intercept trash and prevent it from entering the stormwater system, ensuring compliance with these regulations.

BACKGROUND
On April 7, 2015, the State Water Resources Control Board (SWRCB) adopted the Statewide Trash Provisions (Provisions) to address the pervasive issue of trash pollution in California's waterways. These provisions established a statewide water quality objective for trash, combined with a prohibition on trash discharges into state waters. The Provisions aim to improve water quality and protect aquatic life, public health, and recreational resources.

To enforce compliance, the SWRCB issued a Water Code Section 13383 Order on June 1, 2017. This order, titled "Order to Submit Method to Comply with Statewide Trash Provisions; Requirements for Traditional Small Municipal Separate Storm Sewer System (MS4) Permittees," outlines the initial steps municipalities must take to comply with the Trash Provisions. It offers two pathways for compliance:

Track 1: Installation of Full Capture Systems in storm drain networks to intercept trash before it enters water bodies.

Track 2: Implementation of a Full Capture System Equivalency approach, which combines partial capture systems with enhanced programs like street sweeping and public outreach to achieve comparable results.

In August 2017, the City elected to comply under the Track 1 option and identified catch basins in Priority Land Use Areas such as high density residential, commercial, and industrial zones along with the corresponding storm drain facility network where Full Capture Systems will be implemented.

ANALYSIS
This project was publicly advertised, and 3 sealed bids were received on December 18, 2024. A bid summary is provided below.

RANK COMPANY NAME TOTAL

BASE BID

BID ADDITIVE
ALTERNATE 1 TOTAL
1 Apex Companies $165,800 $24,000 $189,800
2 MBS Engineering $206,447 $56,000 $262,447
3 Silman Industries $263,524 $72,430 $335,954

8.2 p. 118 of 173
Award a Contract to Apex Companies for the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project No. 25-PW-293 in the amount of $189,800; Approve a Budget Amendment; Approve a Project Contingency of $60,200; Approve a Total Project Expenditure of $250,000 for Construction; and Adopt a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 4 January 27, 2025 1 8 The lowest responsive and responsible bidder was Apex Companies with a base bid of $165,800. Staff recommends awarding the contract to Apex Companies and including the additive alternate of $24,000 for a Total amount of $189,800. The additive alternate will cover maintenance that entails cleaning all trash capture devices and catch basins once per year for two years.

The locations were selected based on priority land uses in locations generating high trash volumes. The trash capture devices will be installed in, and in the vicinity of, the following streets:

1. Arroyo Circle

2. Cameron Blvd.

3. Camino Arroyo

4. 1050 Hecker Pass Road

5. Holloway Rd

6. Gilman Rd

6. Venture Way

ALTERNATIVES
The alternative to the staff recommendation is to reject all bids and not award the construction contract. This option is not recommended as staff does not believe it will lead to lower costs and it will make it more difficult to comply with the State Trash Provisions.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The Total Bid, including the Base Bid and Additive Alternate 1 is $189,800. Staff also recommends approval of a contingency in the amount of $60,200 for a total construction allocation of $250,000. Since this is a first-of-its-kind project that the City is embarking on, staff is proposing to establish this higher-than-normal contingency amount, and if not utilized, the City could repurpose to possibly install additional capture devices, which could further attain meeting the State requirements and deadlines.

The Stormwater Management Fund (Fund 422) is the recommended source for this project, which has sufficient fund balance to accommodate this project. This project was originally budgeted in the Capital Improvement Program using Storm Drain Development Fund 410, but a budget amendment will revise the amount and funding source (from Fund 410 to 422), primarily to preserve the Storm Drain Development funds for the impact fee program projects. A budget amendment resolution is included with the staff report and is summarized below.

Fund Description FY25 Amended Budget FY25 Recommended
Budget

8.2 p. 119 of 173
Award a Contract to Apex Companies for the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project No. 25-PW-293 in the amount of $189,800; Approve a Budget Amendment; Approve a Project Contingency of $60,200; Approve a Total Project Expenditure of $250,000 for Construction; and Adopt a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2025 Budget City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 4 January 27, 2025 1 8 Storm Drain Development
Fund (410)
$237,600.00 -
Stormwater Management
Fund (422)
- $250,000.00
Ongoing maintenance will be required on the trash capture devices. Public Works Operations staff will need to dedicate more time to cleaning the devices and the catch basins. Public Works will bring funding options to pay for the additional maintenance costs to the City Council for their consideration during the FY 25-26 and 26-27 Budget process.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
Not Applicable for this specific project.

NEXT STEPS
Upon Council’s approval of this contract, the contract will be executed, and staff will work with the contractor to complete this project. Upon completion of the trash capture devices installation and City acceptance, a new contract will be executed for the twoyear maintenance period. Staff will bring maintenance funding options to the City Council for consideration through the FY 25-26 and FY 26-27 Budget process.

Attachments:

1. Apex Companies – Agreement

2. Budget Amendment Resolution

8.2 p. 120 of 173

8.2 p. 121 of 173

8.2 p. 122 of 173

8.2 p. 123 of 173

8.2 p. 124 of 173
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 amendments to the budget for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 (FY25) for the City of Gilroy in the staff report dated January 27, 2025, for the award of the FY25 Installation of Small Trash Capture Devices Project No. 25-PW-293.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED THAT the expenditure appropriations for Fiscal Year 2024-2025 in Fund 422 – Stormwater Management Fund shall be increased by $250,000, in Fund 410 – Storm Drain Development Fund shall be decreased by $237,600.

PASSED AND ADOPTED this 27th day of January 2025 by the following roll call vote:

AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:

APPROVED:

Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Beth Minor, Interim City Clerk

8.2 p. 125 of 173

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Inclusionary Housing Policy Update
Meeting Date: January 27, 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
Receive update on inclusionary housing policy work.

BACKGROUND
The City of Gilroy’s 2023-2031 Housing Element includes a program to create an Inclusionary Housing Policy/Ordinance. The goal of the policy/ordinance is to develop housing incentives and appropriate requirements that will help facilitate moderate, low, very low, and extremely low affordable housing without significantly constraining housing production. Gilroy’s Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) for the 2023- 2031 planning cycle is 1,773 units, including 669 very low income, 385 low income, 200 moderate income, and 519 above moderate income units.

In April 2023, the City issued a Request for Proposals to develop an inclusionary housing framework. After reviewing proposals, the City selected ECONorthwest as the consultant and executed a contract with ECONorthwest in June 2023.

In November 2023, the consultant presented to the City Council a brief overview of the City’s affordable housing needs, examples of policies from other cities in the region, a summary of the legal context surrounding inclusionary housing, and an introduction to the concept of inclusionary housing feasibility. In November 2023, City staff and the consultant also hosted a community workshop focused on inclusionary housing.

10.1 p. 126 of 173
Inclusionary Housing Policy Update
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 In February 2024, City staff partnered with SV@Home to host a community workshop on the foundations of affordable housing.

ANALYSIS
In February 2024, ECONorthwest informed staff that it would be challenging under current economic conditions for developments to support below-market rate units.

Housing is primarily delivered by the private sector with profit interests that balance project risks. One would not want an inclusionary housing requirement to hinder or halt new development, nor leave untapped an opportunity to produce affordable housing. An inclusionary housing policy should be planned for improved economic conditions in the future where new housing developments in Gilroy would be financially feasible with an inclusionary requirement.

At workshops and events throughout 2023 and 2024, informal conversations with affordable housing policy specialists, such as the SV@Home Director of Policy, also suggested that the feasibility of an inclusionary housing policy is grounded in market reality and changing market conditions, and improved economic conditions would be needed to support an inclusionary policy.

With the suggestion from the consultant to plan to implement an inclusionary housing policy only after economic conditions have improved, and to avoid a decrease in overall housing development in the City, it became clear that staff had to seek alternative pathways to continue the work on policy development and affordable housing production. As staff actively participates in regional initiatives and continually explores affordable housing opportunities, staff pivoted and re-focused on a multijurisdictional/regional Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study being conducted by the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative.

In May 2024, staff began working with the Santa Clara County Planning Collaborative on a commercial nexus study and feasibility analysis. A commercial nexus study will demonstrate the impact of new commercial development on affordable housing needs and identify possible commercial linkage fees that could be used to develop affordable housing. In November 2024, the City entered into a Memorandum of Understanding with the Collaborative’s consultant and jurisdictions taking part in the study.

In December 2024, after participating further in the Planning Collaborative, staff saw the opportunity and recognized the benefits of joining a regional effort to complete the inclusionary housing study and gain further insights on changing economic and market conditions. As part of the regional Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study, staff joined the Collaborative on a residential nexus study, residential feasibility study and inclusionary analysis, in addition to the commercial nexus study and feasibility analysis. Conducting these studies as part of the regional collaborative also provides financial efficiency.

The Collaborative’s Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study will examine the feasibility and address the legal requirements of inclusionary housing and fee requirements by sharing

10.1 p. 127 of 173
Inclusionary Housing Policy Update
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 analysis and resources for the jurisdictions participating in this collaborative effort. This approach enables the City to participate in a regional initiative, providing analytical benefits due to the collective data gathered. This approach can also help promote the equitable distribution of housing opportunities, strategic utilization of resources, and the alleviation of affordable housing challenges throughout the region.

Staff has been planning to provide Council an update on the inclusionary housing policy work since 2024 and recommends that Council receive this update report on the inclusionary housing policy work.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Gilroy’s addition to the residential nexus and feasibility studies of the Collaborative requires approximately $33,000. Participating in the commercial nexus and feasibility studies was planned and required $29,148. There is sufficient funding in the department budget to support these efforts within existing appropriations. Conducting these studies as part of the regional collaborative allows analysis- and resource-sharing and provides financial efficiency.

NEXT STEPS
The Collaborative’s Grand Nexus and Feasibility Study is projected to be completed in fall 2025. Subsequent to the Study, staff will begin formulating an inclusionary housing ordinance/affordable housing policy and conduct outreach efforts, anticipated in the first half of 2026.

10.1 p. 128 of 173

Page 1 of 6 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: 2025 City Administrator Performance Evaluation Process
Meeting Date: January 27, 2025
From: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted By: Jimmy Forbis, City Administrator
Prepared By: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS Not Applicable

RECOMMENDATION
Council appoints a three-member Council sub-Committee and direct them to:

1. Engage and interview a consultant to establish the annual City Administrator performance evaluation process;

BACKGROUND
The City Council’s oversight of the City Administrator is a cornerstone of effective municipal governance. A well-structured and objective performance evaluation process is a powerful tool for setting clear expectations, measuring accomplishments, and promoting continuous improvement. Currently, the City lacks a formalized process for evaluating the City Administrator’s performance, which is in line with best practices for California municipal organizations. It's important to note that the current City

11.1 p. 129 of 173
Creation of a Process to Evaluate the Gilroy City Administrator City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 6 January 27, 2025 Administrator is striving to obtain his International City Management Association (ICMA) designation as a Credentialed Manager (CM). This credential requires an ICMAapproved evaluation process, which covers 14 core evaluation areas essential for effective local government management and leadership.

ANALYSIS
In developing a recommendation to the City Council, staff obtained information from cities in the region to understand how high performing cities evaluate their City Manager.

 Palo Alto
 Mountain View
 Cupertino
 Sunnyvale
 Santa Clara
 San Mateo

These cities implement best practices outlined in the Manager Evaluation Handbook created by ICMA (attached). The Handbook describes a process that enhances communication between the City Administrator and the Council regarding the administrator's performance in fulfilling assigned duties. It also establishes specific work-related goals, objectives, and performance measures for the upcoming year.

As the City Council prepares for the Fiscal Year 2026 and 2027 budget process, this is an ideal opportunity to align the City Administrator's performance with the Council's budget and work plan, which will be adopted in June 2025.

High-functioning organizations typically engage an expert consultant in this area, as many City Council members lack experience in evaluating an organization's chief executive. They also rely on a consultant to facilitate communication between the Council, the community, City staff, and the City Administrator. Also, an expert consultant can bring objectivity to the process as they are not a vested party.

Other Agency Researched Trends
In researching other entities that have established similar evaluation processes (Campbell, Los Altos, Menlo Park, Mountain View, Santa Clara, Sunnyvale, and Palo Alto), several trends have been identified as best practices utilized:

 Annual Review: Each agency conducts a yearly review of their City Manager.

Some agencies determine from year to year that the reviews may be more

11.1 p. 130 of 173
Creation of a Process to Evaluate the Gilroy City Administrator City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 6 January 27, 2025 limited in scope, depending upon external factors such as limited budget or time constraints.

 Performance Review Policy for City Manager: Only the larger agencies surveyed, such as Mountain View and Sunnyvale, have a formal written policy that details the process for City Manager performance review. Sunnyvale is reevaluating its current processes. The other agencies surveyed rely on past practices to guide the City Manager evaluation process instead of a written policy.
 Setting an Annual Time Frame and Schedule for Evaluation and Review: In the larger agencies, the City Manager review process begins by confirming the time frame and key milestones. Mountain View also sets a schedule that identifies when closed sessions and various Council meetings will be devoted to evaluation.
 Subcommittees: Several agencies utilize a subcommittee, which may, for example, consist of the Mayor and two other Councilmembers, to facilitate the evaluation process, work directly with the City Manager, give the evaluation to the City Manager, and negotiate the compensation. These subcommittees also serve to establish and drive the timeline for the evaluation process.

 City Managers prepare a summary report for the Council to serve as a tool for evaluation: In almost all cases, the City Manager must prepare a report to provide details of issues, significant accomplishments, and goals for the upcoming performance year. In some agencies, the City Manager directs the Executive Team (typically Department Heads) to provide information on their significant accomplishments and upcoming goals, which are included in the City Manager's report to the Council.

 Performance Evaluation Form: The larger agencies use an evaluation form for the City Manager to complete for Council review. In the case of one city, the evaluation is given to the City Manager, and each Council member also completes an evaluation form on the City Manager's performance. Other agencies rely on the City Manager's summary report for evaluation.  Question and Answer Session with the City Manager: In one agency, the Council works with its evaluation subcommittee to develop specific questions to ask the City Manager after the Council has received the City Manager's own report or performance evaluation. In a closed session Q&A with the Council and facilitated by the subcommittee members, each City Manager can answer Council members' questions. This Q&A session is factored in the

11.1 p. 131 of 173
Creation of a Process to Evaluate the Gilroy City Administrator City of Gilroy City Council Page 4 of 6 January 27, 2025 evaluation process timeline and allows for open dialogue with the Council and the City Manager in a structured format.

 Confidential Evaluation Report: The Council prepares and presents a confidential report to the City Manager in all cases. In all cases, this report is placed in the City Manager's confidential personnel file.

 Consultants: Half of the cities reported using a consultant to facilitate the evaluation process, particularly with a new City Manager. Consultants are used in some agencies to implement 360-degree reviews of the City Manager. Also, consultants assist the City Manager and Councils in setting performance goals for the upcoming year. One city has written into its policy that a consultant will be permitted to facilitate the more in-depth performance review process every three years.
 Goal Setting Process: Agencies report using a consultant to work with the Council in goal-setting processes for the agency and thereby determine the performance goals for the City Manager as a result of the goal-setting process.
 Closed Sessions: In all cases, closed sessions were set up with the evaluation subcommittee and/or the whole Council and the City Manager to discuss performance.
 Salary Surveys: In all agencies, the Council is provided with compensation information, which is used after the evaluation to help determine the appropriate compensation adjustment for the City Manager. Usually, Human Resources staff conduct compensation surveys or provide survey data based on agreed-upon local comparator agencies.
 Public Meetings to approve compensation adjustments: After the evaluation is complete and the compensation for the City Manager is agreed upon, the final approval for compensation is presented in a public Council meeting (as required by State law).

International City/County Management Association (ICMA) Recommendations Staff also pulled information from ICMA, the industry association for local government management. They produced an 18-page handbook for Manager evaluations (attached). It identifies as the key step the development of the rating instrument, and then guidance on how to evaluate performance.

11.1 p. 132 of 173
Creation of a Process to Evaluate the Gilroy City Administrator City of Gilroy City Council Page 5 of 6 January 27, 2025 It recommends that councils may find it helpful to use an independent consultant, especially if the elected body is not experienced in the performance evaluation process for local government. The handbook provides options and input into potential processes, but identifies that the elected body, in consultation with the manager, should customize the process to fit the organization and priorities of the local government.

Recommended Action
Based on this preliminary research, the City Administrator recommends that the City Council form a sub-committee consisting of the Mayor and two additional Councilmembers to develop a process for Gilroy’s City Council to evaluate its City Administrator.

Creating a sub-committee will allow for focused attention on developing a robust evaluation process. The sub-committee is also recommended to select a qualified consultant with relevant experience along with a strong positive reputation in establishing and administering executive performance appraisals for California municipalities. This consultant will provide expertise in designing an evaluation process and rating instrument that is equitable, results-based, and consistent with industry best practices.

The sub-committee would work closely with the consultant and the City Administrator to ensure the process is:
 Objective and aligned with the City’s strategic goals.  Focused on and considers performance and attainment of goals and milestones established for the City Administrator.
 Incorporates feedback from the community including City partners, local nonprofit, boards and commissions and the public.  Reflective of best practices within California municipalities.  Designed to provide actionable feedback for professional growth and organizational improvement.

Once the evaluation process is developed, it is recommended that the sub-committee present its recommendations to the full City Council for consideration and approval.

ALTERNATIVES
Council may choose to explore a different method for developing the evaluation process for the City Administrator. Staff recommends the proposed process because it aligns with industry best practices and is utilized by other reputable, high-performing cities.

11.1 p. 133 of 173
Creation of a Process to Evaluate the Gilroy City Administrator City of Gilroy City Council Page 6 of 6 January 27, 2025

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The formation of the committee does not create a fiscal impact. Securing a consultant will carry a cost in an amount that is not currently known, but such costs will be absorbed within existing appropriations.

PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item was included on the publicly posted agenda for this meeting, and the finalization of the process will be returning to Council in a public meeting in the future.

NEXT STEPS
If approved, staff will work with Council’s selected committee to implement the creation of the evaluation process.

Attachments:

1. ICMA Manager Evaluations Handbook.

11.1 p. 134 of 173
Manager Evaluations

HANDBOOK

11.1 p. 135 of 173
ICMA advances professional local government worldwide. Its mission is to create excellence in local governance by developing and advancing professional management of local government. ICMA, the International City/County Management Association, provides member support; publications, data, and information; peer and results-oriented assistance; and training and professional development to more than 9,000 city, town, and county experts and other individuals and organizations throughout the world. The management decisions made by ICMA’s members affect 185 million individuals living in thousands of communities, from small villages and towns to large metropolitan areas.

ICMA
777 North Capitol Street, NE
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002-4201
202-289-ICMA (4262)
icma.org
Copyright ©2013 by the International City/County Management Association. All rights reserved, including rights of reproduction and use in any form or by any means, including the making of copies by any photographic process, or by any electrical or mechanical device, printed, written, or oral or recording for sound or visual reproduction, or for use in any knowledge or retrieval system or device, unless permission in writing is obtained from the copyright proprietor.

11.1 p. 136 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK iii
Definition of Terms ............................................................................................................iv Members of the Task Force on Manager Evaluations........................................................iv Preface............................................................................................................................... 1 Executive Summary ........................................................................................................... 2 Successful Evaluation Tips ...............................................................................................3 Introduction....................................................................................................................... 4 The Purpose of Manager Evaluations................................................................................ 4 Basic Process .................................................................................................................... 4 How to Initiate ................................................................................................................4 How to Proceed ...............................................................................................................5 Frequency and Timing of Manager Evaluations .................................................................7 What Others Are Doing: Survey Results ........................................................................... 9 Failure to Undertake Evaluations ......................................................................................9 Lack of a Credible Evaluation Process ............................................................................. 10 Lack of Knowledge of the Council-Manager Form of Government ..................................... 10 Lack of Communication ................................................................................................. 10 Supplemental Approaches .............................................................................................. 10 Self-Evaluations ............................................................................................................. 11 Periodic Check-ins ......................................................................................................... 11 360-Degree Assessments ................................................................................................ 11 Conversation Evaluation System .....................................................................................12 Data-gathering/Software Resources ............................................................................... 12 Conclusion ....................................................................................................................... 13 Sample Evaluation Forms for Local Government CAOs .................................................. 13 Other Resources .............................................................................................................. 13 Contents

11.1 p. 137 of 173
Definition of Terms
• The term local government, as used in this handbook, refers to a town, village, borough, township, city, county, or a legally constituted elected body of governments. • The term manager refers to the chief executive officer (CEO) or chief administrative officer (CAO) of any local government who has been appointed by its elected body to oversee dayto-day operations. • The terms elected officials, elected body, and board refer to any council, commission, or other locally elected body, including assemblies, boards of trustees, boards of selectmen, boards of supervisors, boards of directors, and so on.
• The term manager evaluation refers to the appraisal or assessment conducted by the elected body of the manager’s performance in achieving organizational goals and implementing policy.

Members of the Task Force on Manager Evaluations
Peter B. Austin
McHenry County, IL
Chair
Kay James
Canandaigua, NY
Vice-Chair
John J. Caulfield
Lakewood, WA
Scott M. Coren
Darien, IL
Richard J. Downey
Kronenwetter, WI
John J. Duffy
Matanuska-Susitna, AK
Mark A. Kunkle
Ferguson Township, PA
Michele E. Meade
Livingston Township, NJ
Nancy E. Novak McMahon
Vienna, VA
Richard J. Schuettler
Harrisburg, PA
James R. Stahle
Alamogordo, NM
Greg R. Sund
Ellis County, KS
Kevin D. Trease
Dewey, OK
Brian J. Valentino
Hazlet, NJ
AJ Wilson
Fallbrook, CA
Amanda Relyea
Nolensville, TN
Staff Liaison
Jane C. Cotnoir
Portland, ME
Editor

11.1 p. 138 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 1
Preface
The evaluation of the manager is a key component of any well-run local government, yet the value of a quality evaluation process and the responsibility for that activity is often overlooked.

Even in communities that are considered to be professionally governed, the performance evaluation of the local government manager can be an afterthought.

The 2012–2013 Executive Board of the International
City/County Management Association (ICMA), led by
President Bonnie Svrcek, acknowledged the need for
local government managers and their elected bodies
to put more focus on the manager evaluation process.

Accordingly, it created a task force of managers from
around the United States, representing over a dozen
communities, to develop a Manager Evaluations Handbook that would assist managers and their boards in this critical task.

Managers are encouraged to review this handbook
with an eye toward working with their elected bodies
to develop formal, mutually agreed-upon processes
for their own evaluations. This handbook, however,
is also intended to highlight the value of a formal
manager evaluation process and to assist local elected
officials in the design of an effective evaluation tool.

11.1 p. 139 of 173
2 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
Executive Summary
The periodic evaluation of the local government
manager by the elected body is an important
component of a high-performance organization.

The evaluation should contain performance goals, objectives, and targets that are linked to the elected body’s established strategic plans, goals, and priorities, and it should focus on the manager’s degree of progress toward organizational outcomes. To be fair, it must be based on criteria that have been communicated to the manager
in advance. Sample or generic evaluation forms, if used, should be customized to reflect these criteria.

The purpose of the evaluation process is to
increase communication between the members of the
elected body and the manager concerning the manager’s performance in the accomplishment of assigned duties and responsibilities, and the establishment
of specific work-related goals and objectives for the
coming year. Thus, all members of the elected body
should participate in the process, both by individually completing the rating instrument and by discussing
their ratings with the other board members in order to
arrive at a consensus about performance expectations.

There is no one correct way to conduct a manager
evaluation. The key is to ensure that the evaluation
takes place in a regular, mutually agreed-upon manner
and is viewed by all as an opportunity for communication between the elected officials and the manager.

It may be useful, particularly if the members of
the elected body are inexperienced in the performance
evaluation process, to use a consultant to help the
elected body prepare for and conduct the manager’s
evaluation.

11.1 p. 140 of 173
Performance evaluations will allow you to
A. Recognize the accomplishments of the manager and
show appreciation for the unique contributions to
the organization
B. Clearly identify areas where the manager is
doing well
C. Clearly identify areas where the manager can
improve his or her performance
D. Specify definite actions that will allow the manager to make additional value-added contributions to the
organization in the future.

E. Obtain the manager’s own opinions on progress and
his or her individual contribution to collective actions and achievements.

Discussing tasks that the manager performs well
• Gives the manager insight into self-awareness, interests, and motivation • Gives the manager recognition and appreciation for
achievements
• Creates a positive climate for the remainder of the
review.

Reminders:
• Listen intently.
• Reinforce the manager’s performance.
• Emphasize facts; provide concrete examples and
specific descriptions of actions, work, and results.
• Give only positive feedback during this part of the
evaluation.
• Acknowledge improvements that the manager has
made.
• Praise efforts if the manager has worked hard on
something but failed because of circumstances
beyond his or her control.
• Describe performance that you would like to see
continued.

Discussing areas that need improvement
• Gives insight into how the manager feels about
change, improvement for growth
• Allows you to express any concerns you have about
the manager’s overall performance and performance
in specific areas
• Lets you challenge the manager to higher levels of
achievement.

Reminders:
• Keep the discussion focused on performance.
• Describe actions and results that do not meet
expectations.
• Describe areas where the manager can make a
greater contribution.
• Describe any situation or performance observed
that needs to be changed; be specific.
• Tell the manager what needs to be done if a specific
change of behavior needs to take place.
• Focus on learning from the past and making plans
for the future.
• Keep this part of the discussion as positive and
encouraging as possible.

Do’s and Don’ts
DO:
• Spend a few minutes warming up in which the
agenda is laid out so everyone is reminded about
what to expect. Give an overview.
• Always start with the positives. Be specific.
• Explain the ratings in all areas: Talk about how the
consensus was arrived.
• Be honest. Tell it like it is.
• Be a coach, not a judge. Managing employees is a
lot like being an athletic coach. Effective coaching
involves a lot more than just score keeping. Simply
providing the score at the end of the game doesn’t
improve performance.
• Discuss with the manager his or her reactions to the
ratings, making clear that you are interested in his or her feelings and thoughts.
• If appropriate, develop an improvement plan that
includes areas of deficiency, developmental needs.

DON’T:
• Rate the manager without the facts. Ratings should
be on actual results.
• Be too general.
• Sidestep problems. Document performance problems and clearly identify what needs improvement. • Be vague or generalize the reasons for the performance scores. Clear and specific examples of results should be available.
• Ambush the manager by identifying deficiencies or
problems that have never been addressed in informal discussions prior to the formal evaluation. • Minimize the manager’s concerns or discount his or
her feelings.

Successful Evaluation Tips1
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 3

11.1 p. 141 of 173
4 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
Introduction
There is some irony in the fact that managers’
evaluations are often less formal and less structured than those of the managers’ employees.

While the manager may oversee the evaluation of
hundreds of employees within an organization, his or
her own performance evaluation becomes the task of
elected leaders who are often not formally trained in the evaluation process or who have narrow or conflicting
definitions of good performance. The fact that an elected body with numerous members is charged with the task
of evaluating the manager makes the need for a clear
and agreed-upon evaluation process even more important. And a thoughtful and structured evaluation process that is supported by all involved parties enhances the
ongoing communication that is fundamental to effective
board/manager relationships.

A manager’s evaluation should contain performance
goals, objectives, and targets that are linked to the
elected body’s established strategic plans, goals, and
priorities and should focus on whether the manager has
achieved the desired organizational outcomes.

Sometimes the tone of a performance review can
be unduly influenced by the manager’s last success or
failure. Judging performance on the basis of a single
incident or behavior is a common problem that can
arise in any organization. But a single incident or
behavior should not be the sole focus of a performance
evaluation. That is not to discount the importance
of how a manager handles high-stress, higher-profile
issues, which is an important aspect of a manager’s
responsibility. However, day-to-day leadership, which is also a key responsibility of the manager, can sometimes go unnoticed even though it provides the foundation in
which high-stress, high-profile issues are handled.

ICMA has developed a list of 14 Practices for
Effective Local Government Leadership that is
recommended to members who are considering their
own professional development needs and activities. The
core areas represent much of what local government
managers are responsible for on an everyday basis,
and competency by the manager in these practices is
central to an effective, high-performing, professionally managed local government. It is therefore the
recommendation of ICMA’s Task Force on Manager
Evaluations that competency in the ICMA Practices also
be considered in the manager’s performance evaluation.

There is no one way, let alone one single correct
way, to conduct an effective manager evaluation.

This Manager Evaluations Handbook will present
traditional evaluation approaches that have proven to
be successful, along with some alternative methods that may be good for your local government. Again, the key
is to ensure that the evaluation takes place in a regular, mutually agreed-upon manner and is viewed by all as
an opportunity for communication between the elected
officials and the manager.

The Purpose of Manager
Evaluations
High-performance local governments embrace an
ethos of continual improvement. Conducting regular
appraisals of the manager’s work performance is part
of the continual improvement process.

The purpose of the evaluation process is to
increase communication between the members of the
elected body and the manager concerning the manager’s performance in the accomplishment of his or her assigned duties and responsibilities and the establishment of specific work-related goals, objectives, and performance measures for the coming year. The evaluation process provides an opportunity for the elected body to have an honest dialogue with the manager
about its expectations, to assess what is being accomplished, to recognize the manager’s achievements and contributions, to identify where there may be performance gaps, to develop standards to measure future performance, and to identify the resources and actions
necessary to achieve the agreed-upon standards.

Keeping the focus on “big picture” strategic goals and
behaviors rather than on minor issues or one-time
mistakes/complaints leads to better outcomes.

Given that good relationships promote candor
and constructive planning, the performance appraisal
also provides a forum for both parties to discuss and
strengthen the elected body–manager relationship,
ensuring better alignment of goals while reducing misunderstandings and surprises. When elected bodies conduct regular performance appraisals of the manager, they are more likely to achieve their community’s goals and objectives.

Basic Process
Ideally, the performance appraisal process for a manager is the natural continuation of the hiring process.

How to Initiate
Prior to the recruitment of candidates, the elected
body typically develops the goals and objectives for

11.1 p. 142 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 5
the position of manager. Then, during the selection
process, the candidate and the hiring body meet to
discuss these items along with the long- and shortterm needs and issues of the community. Through these conversations, the basic tenets of the manager’s
performance evaluation are identified. At this point,
the performance appraisal process just needs to be
formalized. When the employment offer has been
accepted, the employment agreement should include
the requirement and schedule for the manager’s
evaluation.
(Excellent tools for preparing the employment
agreement are contained in the ICMA Recruitment
Guidelines for Selecting a Local Government Administrator and the ICMA Model Employment Agreement.) The employment agreement should stipulate that
the performance evaluation will be a written document
and that all parties will meet to discuss the contents in person. It should also identify the frequency with which evaluations will take place (e.g., annually, semi-annually). By including this information in the employment agreement, the hiring body ensures that communications between the manager and the elected body will be consistently scheduled, and that initiatives and objectives can be reviewed and updated on a regular basis.

It is especially critical for the elected body to come
to consensus on the initial expectations of the newly
hired manager so that priorities can be assigned and
progress measured. Those issues that were important
during the hiring process will logically factor into the initial evaluation process. Then, in the succeeding
years, the document can be revised to reflect the latest accomplishments and newest challenges.

Of course, priorities may shift during the year. If
that happens, make it clear to the manager that new
or changed priorities are being added into the evaluation process.

If, with the passage of time, elections have taken
place and the board that is conducting the evaluation is not the same board that did the hiring, it is important that the newly elected officials immediately
be introduced to the established performance goals,
measures, and evaluation process. This can be done as
part of the orientation process for new board members, included in the discussion of the form of government and the role of the manager. If a new member has no experience in conducting performance evaluations, he or she will need to receive training before participating in this process.

If performance evaluations were not discussed
during the hiring process, either the manager or the
elected body may request that an evaluation process be instituted, and the specifics for conducting the evaluation can then be agreed upon outside of
the provisions of the employment agreement. If the
request is made by the elected body, it is important to emphasize that the purpose of the evaluation process
is to serve as a tool for organizational improvement,
not as a means of punishing the manager or setting
the stage for termination. While elected officials, especially those newly elected, may sometimes wish for a change in management, the performance evaluation
process should not be used to effect such a change.

How to Proceed
A number of issues should be considered when preparing for the evaluation process, including how to develop the rating instrument (and whether to use an
outside consultant), how to use the rating instrument,
and whether the evaluation should be conducted in
private or in public.

Developing the Rating Instrument
Unlike most employee performance evaluations, in
which the employee is evaluated by a single executive
or supervisor, the manager’s evaluation is conducted
by a group of individuals acting as a body. As each
elected official likely has different expectations, the board members must first come to a consensus on
measures and definitions to be used.

Using a consultant. If the members of the elected
body are inexperienced in the performance evaluation process, it might be helpful at this point to use an independent consultant to assist in preparing for and
conducting the manager’s evaluation. A consultant
could be used in a variety of ways.

When designing the evaluation instrument, a consultant should solicit each elected official’s full participation by asking for examples and details for each rating category. Whether this is accomplished by interviewing
each official individually or by facilitating a group session, it is important to ensure that all voices are heard.

Use of an independent consultant is especially helpful if there is a lack of cohesion among elected officials.

Once the consultant has collected the information,
the elected body and manager should meet in person
to discuss the findings. It is recommended that the
in-person conversation with the manager to review the
evaluation be conducted by the elected body with the
assistance of the consultant but not by the consultant
alone.

11.1 p. 143 of 173
6 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
If funds are limited, a consultant could be used in
a limited engagement to prepare an evaluation system
and then train the elected officials on how to conduct
an evaluation, which the officials may manage themselves after the first year.

If the elected body decides to use a consultant, the
Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM)
may be a source of referrals, as may be state municipal leagues or the local government’s regular employment consulting firms. If a recruiter was used to assist with the hiring process, the recruiter’s agreement
could be extended to include the setup of the initial
evaluation process.

It is recommended that the evaluation process NOT
be facilitated by the local government’s corporation
counsel, municipal clerk, or human resources director
because these individuals are not independent parties.

In almost all cases, their positions have either a reporting or a cooperating relationship with the manager, so involving them in the manager’s evaluation may damage relationships that are necessary for the effective and efficient operation of the local government
Proceeding without a consultant. If a consultant
is not used to facilitate the development of the
evaluation instrument, the elected body may wish to
begin by reviewing the format and process used for
the other local government employees and considering
the same or a revised method. It is important to
understand, however, that a manager is evaluated
in additional ways. Because of this key difference,
flexibility is needed to add any necessary components
intended to assess varied goals and objectives and to
facilitate a dialogue between the elected body and the
manager.

To be fair, the evaluation must be outcome based,
using criteria that have been previously communicated
to the manager and that incorporate the elected
body’s priorities. The use of a prefabricated generic
evaluation form (even the sample forms found at the
end of this handbook) is not recommended without
some customization to reflect these priorities.

Measure observable behaviors and progress
toward goals
The manager’s job is to achieve the organization’s
goals and implement the policies that have been determined by the elected body. Evaluating the manager’s effectiveness in achieving the goals necessarily means
that the elected body must have determined and
communicated the goals to the manager in advance,
ideally through a strategic planning process.

The members of the board must be in agreement
about their expectations of the manager. Furthermore,
both the manager and the board must understand
what the expectations are.

The performance criteria established by the board
for each of the prioritized functional areas need to be The manager’s success in achieving the
goals set by the elected body is related to
his or her competencies and behaviors with
respect to the specific functions identified as
the responsibility of the manager. Defining
the strengths of the manager and identifying
areas for improvement are part of the
evaluation process. ICMA has a list of 14 core
areas critical for effective local government
management and leadership. While this
list, the ICMA Practices for Effective Local
Government Leadership, was developed
for the purpose of ICMA’s Voluntary
Credentialing professional development
program, the elected body might find it
helpful for identifying the specific observable
behaviors to be used in the manager
evaluation. It is suggested that the elected
body select what it believes to be the most
important areas for achieving its goals and
evaluate the manager’s performance in these
areas. The ICMA Practices are as follows (click
here for descriptions):

1. Personal and Professional Integrity

2. Community Engagement

3. Equity and Inclusion

4. Staff Effectiveness

5. Personal Resiliency and Development

6. Strategic Leadership

7. Strategic Planning

8. Policy Facilitation and Implementation

9. Community and Resident Service

10. Service Delivery

11. Technological Literacy

12. Financial Management and Budgeting

13. Human Resources Management and
Workforce Engagement

14. Communication and Information
Sharing

11.1 p. 144 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 7
specific and observable by the members of the elected
body. If the criteria are quantifiable, they should
be expressed in objective, measurable terms. For
example, the manager saved 10% on the new project.

If the criteria are qualitative and subjective, they can be expressed in terms of the desired outcome. For
example, members of the community and employees
frequently commented on the manager’s fairness during this evaluation period.

Using the Rating Instrument
The usefulness of any performance evaluation
depends almost entirely upon the understanding,
impartiality, and objectivity with which the ratings
are made. In order to obtain a clear, fair, and accurate rating, an evaluator must clearly differentiate between the personality and performance of the manager being
rated, making an objective and unbiased assessment
on the basis of performance alone. Fairness requires
the ability to identify both the strengths and weaknesses of the manager’s performance and to explain these constructively to the manager.

When an evaluation is completed by a group of
people, it is important that it reflect the consensus
opinion of all members. All members of the elected
body should participate in the manager evaluation
process in order to arrive at a consensus. This consensus can be accomplished by having each member individually rate the manager, followed by a group
discussion to arrive at a final consensus rating for
each measure. Alternatively, if consensus cannot be
reached, each member can individually complete the
rating form, and then one member (or the consultant,
if one is used) can collect the forms and compile the
results and comments into one document, followed
by group discussion. It is important that each member’s ratings, whether positive or negative, be backed up with specific comments and examples so that the
whole group understands the reasoning behind them.

If individual comments—those that do not necessarily represent the sentiments of the elected body as a whole—are to be included in the final document that
will be discussed with the manager, the board should
decide in advance whether those comments will be
anonymous or attributed to the individuals making
them.

It is important to keep in mind that performance
evaluation is just one part of the communication
toolbox between the manager and elected officials. It is intended to enhance that communication, not to result
in a periodic written “report card” that is an end in
itself. In addition, nothing in the evaluation ought ever to be a surprise. Ongoing conversations should be held
throughout the year (assuming that the evaluation is
done annually) to help the manager understand if he
or she is on course or if any midseason corrections are necessary. Ideally, the items in the evaluation will have already been touched on in these conversations, so the
evaluation will serve as a written summary of them.

Public versus private evaluations
When deciding whether to conduct the evaluation
process in a public or an executive/closed session, the elected officials, manager, and legal counsel should
review state law. When possible, it is recommended
that the performance evaluation process occur in executive/closed session between the elected body and manager; however, many states have specific regulations about whether and when the public may be excluded
from attending a meeting involving the elected body or
from having access to certain records involving a public employee. Such “sunshine” laws were first created to
increase public disclosure by governmental agencies.

The purpose is to promote accountability and transparency by allowing the public to see how decisions are made and how money is allocated.

While all states have such laws, the exact provisions of those laws vary. For example, specific legislation may require that all government meetings be open to the public or that written records be released
upon request. In many states, all local government
records are available for review by the public, including evaluation documents and notes, unless they are specifically exempted or prohibited from disclosure by
state statutes.

Regardless of whether the evaluation is conducted
in a public or an executive/closed session, each state’s statute will dictate certain procedures for meeting
notification, recording of minutes, and disclosure of
decisions made. These procedures should be reviewed
by the elected officials, manager, and legal counsel
and followed throughout the evaluation process.

However, all final decisions or actions related to
the manager’s performance (e.g., employment agreement changes, compensation) should be made in a public setting.

Frequency and Timing of
Manager Evaluations
As previously noted, the manager evaluation process,
including the frequency and timing of the evaluations,

11.1 p. 145 of 173
8 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
will ideally have been discussed as part of the employment agreement at the time of the manager’s hiring. It is recommended that the initial formal evaluation not
take place until the elected officials and the manager
have worked together for a year; however, short,
less formal evaluations are recommended on a quarterly basis. After that, at least one formal evaluation (still with quarterly informal evaluations) should be
conducted per year, as longer intervals create a higher likelihood of miscommunication and surprises.

It is further recommended that the formal evaluation be scheduled during the least busy time of year for both the manager and the elected officials, avoiding both the budget preparation season (particularly if the manager’s compensation is tied to the evaluation)
and the election season (lest the manager’s evaluation become an election issue). The scheduling should also allow adequate time for newly elected members
of the board to become familiar with the manager’s
performance.

Relationship of Evaluation to Compensation
The primary purposes of a manager’s performance
evaluation are

1. To provide a tool for communication between the
elected body and the manager

2. To provide an opportunity for the elected body to
specifically indicate levels of satisfaction with the
manager on mutually identified and defined performance priorities

3. To provide an opportunity for the manager to learn
and improve

4. To allow for fair and equitable compensation
adjustments based on a review of performance in
achieving mutually identified priorities and on the
elected body’s level of satisfaction with the manager’s overall performance.

Performance evaluations that are tied directly to
compensation decisions are often distorted by those
decisions and therefore result in less-than-honest communication between the elected body and the manager. This happens primarily because

1. Elected officials wishing to offer upward compensation adjustments may feel obliged to embellish the evaluation in a positive manner to justify the
compensation decision to the public.

2. Elected officials not wishing to adjust compensation may feel obligated to justify their decision with negative comments about performance matters that actually are not a major concern to them.

3. The manager may be reluctant to seek full clarification on issues raised in the evaluation for fear it could result in a reconsideration of the compensaBenefits of executive session/closed meeting to evaluate manager’s performance
• Provides a venue for handling issues that are
best discussed in private, and ensures confidentiality until a decision is made regarding the manager’s performance
• Provides a forum that is not unduly influenced
by outside sources
• Promotes a free-flowing discussion of comments by the elected body and manager • Ensures the respect and privacy of personnel dealings between the elected body and manager
• Improves communication between the elected
body and the manager
• Reduces opportunity to politicize the performance evaluation process • Provides a forum for the elected body and
the manager to talk openly about topics that
warrant special attention, such as succession
planning, senior staff performance, and executive compensation • Enables elected officials to challenge the manager without fear of undermining his or her authority in the community
Benefits of an open session/meeting to
evaluate manager’s performance
• Can build transparency and trust by enabling
members of the public to view the process
• Can reduce claims of inappropriate agreements and “secrets” • Can improve elected body, manager, and
citizen relationships
Benefits of providing a public summary once
the process is completed
• Lets the public know how the elected body
evaluates and views the manager
• Ensures transparency and public accountability
• Promotes the embodiment of ICMA’s commitment to openness in government • Provides the organization with another opportunity to earn the public’s trust

11.1 p. 146 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 9
tion decision.

To avoid these distortions in communication, a balanced evaluation is necessary. That is, the evaluation should provide the opportunity for open communication and at the same time be used for compensation decisions related to identified performance achievement and corrective actions by the manager. To this end, a balanced evaluation would

1. Establish a clear set of performance expectations
prior to the evaluation period.

2. Include a midterm evaluation without any consideration of compensation in order to focus on clarity of communication and performance to date.

This evaluation would allow the manager to take
steps to address areas of performance that were of
concern to the elected body; it would also help to
eliminate misunderstandings and miscommunication between the elected body and manager.

3. Use a full-term evaluation to evaluate the level of
performance satisfaction for the entire performance
period and thus provide the basis for a fair and
equitable compensation decision.

Often, factors other than the performance evaluation form the basis of compensation decisions. These nonperformance considerations include

1. The economic climate of the community and
region

2. The general status of compensation decisions in
the private sector of the community

3. The compensation decisions for other employees of the local government

4. A general review of the competitive position
of the local government in the local government’s
market area

5. A comparative salary review.

In summary, the performance evaluation of a
professional manager can provide input into compensation decisions by the local elected body. However, the communication value of an evaluation is best
served by a periodic evaluation not directly tied to
compensation.

The Evaluation Results
The evaluation serves as the written, formal record
of the conversation between the manager and elected
body and consists of two important sections. The first
section is the elected body’s appraisal of the manager’s performance with respect to the previously agreed-upon goals for the period under review as well
as the general performance of the organization. The
second section contains an agreed-upon list of the
goals to be accomplished during the next appraisal
period as well as any specific performance areas identified for improvement.

What Others Are Doing:

Survey Results
In developing this handbook, the task force surveyed
a sample of local government managers within the
United States to obtain information on current evaluation practices. The key findings of the survey suggest that the evaluation process is a problem for a sizeable number of managers. Fortunately, though, most respondents did not report problems with their evaluations and took the time to comment on key aspects of successful appraisals. These comments provide clues
to the common pitfalls related to the evaluation process and, more importantly, suggestions for improving the process. This section of the handbook describes
these survey findings.

The most common challenges managers and
elected bodies face with the evaluation process revolve around four general areas: failure to undertake evaluations, lack of a credible appraisal process, lack of knowledge of the council-manager form of government, and lack of communication. Each of these topics is briefly discussed below.

Failure to Undertake Evaluations
Employee appraisals are a standard feature of most
workplaces. They serve as a means of enhancing
employee performance as well as the overall effectiveness of the organization. Indeed, employee appraisals serve similar purposes as performance measures of programs and services. In both cases, we seek to
identify opportunities for continual improvement.

Yet people avoid completing performance appraisals,
most likely because properly completed appraisals
require time and effort. Other reasons for avoidance
may include fear of criticism or the underlying stress
associated with the appraisal process. Neglecting to
undertake regular performance appraisals, however,
can lead to underachievement. Worse yet, failing to
complete appraisals on a regular basis can lead to
unfounded assumptions that all is well when it is not.

It is therefore important to establish a regular pattern of appraisals.

The survey responses identified two methods to
help ensure that appraisals are conducted on a regular
basis. The most common method is to place a require11.1 p. 147 of 173
10 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
ment for an annual evaluation within the employment
contract. The requirement should also specify a time
of year—often a time that is less busy than others.

The other method is to establish an appraisal time at a regularly scheduled annual meeting, such as a board
retreat. But while this method achieves the goal of a
scheduled appraisal, it is a less satisfactory approach because it may easily dilute the focus necessary for a
good appraisal.

Lack of a Credible Evaluation
Process
Another common challenge that survey respondents
noted is the lack of a credible evaluation process. Problems include lack of structure, little to no preparation, and limited understanding of appraisals, both purpose
and process. Process issues may be addressed through
formal training of both the manager and council. Training can be accomplished through work sessions with human resource professionals. Another approach is
to team up with CEOs and board members of locallybased institutions that have the same challenge and jointly sponsor training programs. Although not as
effective as training, the use of standard evaluation
forms, customized to a community’s goals, is another
way of ensuring a more structured process. Lastly, most managers who are satisfied with their appraisal processes noted that one member of the elected body, typically the mayor, provided active oversight of the process and kept discussions on point and on track.

Lack of Knowledge of the
Council-Manager Form of
Government
Lack of knowledge about the community’s form of
government and/or the day-to-day work of the manager is another factor that was cited as hindering quality appraisals. In this case, providing information as early as possible to newly elected officials about
the form of government is recommended. This can
include meeting with those officials and discussing the manager’s duties and responsibilities as well as taking them on field visits. Another approach is to partner
with the statewide municipal league and/or municipal
clerks association to provide seminars on the form
of government. Managers can also use opportunities
such as community functions to inform the general
public about its form of government. Some jurisdictions use the “policy governance” model, whereby the explicit roles of the manager, elected body, and
other key staff such as attorney are clearly defined and documented. Removing misunderstandings and filling
informational voids about the form of government can
greatly improve appraisals because such efforts clarify the duties and responsibilities of both the manager
and the board.

Lack of Communication
Perhaps the most important ingredient for successful appraisals is effective means of communications between manager and elected officials. As in any
human relationship, effective communication is key
to understanding and removing faulty assumptions.

Achieving superior levels of communication requires
active listening and regularity. And the benefits of
such attention are high. For instance, survey respondents noting the most satisfaction with the appraisal process use a wide variety of means to regularly communicate with their elected bodies. They meet with elected officials on an individual basis and talked with them regularly via telephone. These same managers
provide regular written and verbal reports, typically
at each board meeting, that discuss the progress on
council goals and objectives, strategic plans, and
prior evaluation topics, as well as on operational and
special topic issues. More detailed reports are provided on a quarterly basis. In addition, many managers meet
with their elected bodies more than once a year with
a single-issue focus to discuss progress, redefinition, and resourcing of established goals and objectives,
strategic plans and efforts, etc. These additional meetings provide time to focus on progress and reduce the probability of end-of-year surprises.

Creating an effective organization takes time and
effort. It also requires regular evaluation of services and operations. Evaluating employee performance,
especially the manager’s, is a vital element of successful organizations. Objective appraisals can be achieved with an accurate understanding of the manager’s and
elected officials’ duties and responsibilities. Communicating regularly and effectively through a variety of means is a vital element of successful organizations
and employee appraisals.3
Supplemental Approaches
The basic process for evaluations may be supplemented or expanded by using other tools, such as self-evaluations, periodic check-ins, 360-degree assessments, and conversation evaluations.

11.1 p. 148 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 11
Self-Evaluations
It is recommended that a self-evaluation component be
included in whatever type of evaluation is used. The
purpose of a self-evaluation is for the manager to reflect upon his or her level of performance in achieving the
organizational objectives, including both internal and
external accomplishments and challenges in handling
specific tasks and taking organizational direction. In a public setting, process and perception can be as important as outcomes, and managers should include all three in a self-evaluation. Thus, a manager’s self-evaluation should make clear to elected officials the process by which the manager pursued individual goals, and
the perceptions of both the manager and stakeholders
of the manager’s success or failure in meeting those
goals. A manager’s self-evaluation should be customized to the needs of each governmental entity.

Periodic Check-ins
There is a management philosophy that says there
should be no surprises during an evaluation. Managers
should be continually evaluating, assessing, measuring, and communicating with employees. Providing this type of continuous evaluation is a greater challenge, however, for elected boards because it requires the participation of all board members—since the
manager reports to a group and not a single individual
supervisor. If a process is in place for formal evaluations of the manager, such evaluations likely occur just once per year. The annual evaluation can be a
stressful time for all involved, and it can also be a
challenge to remember all that has occurred over the
past year. Moreover, it is easy for annual assessments
to skew toward recent events, challenges, and successes while deemphasizing activities that occurred nine or ten months ago. In reality, an elected body’s
perception of a manager’s job performance is often
viewed through lenses crafted by the “crisis of the
day” or by how smoothly the last board meeting went.

A more workable alternative is periodic check-ins.

Periodic check-ins, such as once per quarter, can
help reduce the stress and minimize the surprises that
can come when a manager’s performance is evaluated
only annually. A periodic review of a manager’s work
plan can help remind the elected body of the manager’s
long-term goals (as set by the organization) so that both parties can evaluate the manager’s progress toward
meeting those agreed-upon goals. If progress on the work plan has slowed down or other challenges have arisen
along the way, a quarterly check-in offers the manager
an opportunity to self-reflect on his or her performance as well as a forum to explain delays. It can also provide the manager the opportunity to remind the board of the
14 core areas noted in the ICMA Practices for Effective Local Government Leadership that are critical and are
part of operating effectively on a day-to-day basis.

A periodic check-in on the manager’s work plan is
also important when faces on the elected board change,
such as after an election, resignation, or reassignment of committees. By apprising the new board members of
the manager’s work plan, the manager is making certain that the new officials understand and are supportive of the projects or goals that he or she is working on. 360-Degree Assessments
Another form of appraisal process is the 360-degree
assessment, which is sometimes referred to as a “selfdevelopment” tool. Generally speaking, the 360-degree assessment consists of an employee obtaining feedback from supervisors, subordinates, and peers. In this case, the manager completes a self-evaluation as well,
with a sample of the workforce providing the subordinate feedback. In some instances, feedback is also obtained from those outside the organization, such as
citizens who have frequently worked with the manager and use the jurisdiction’s services regularly.

Some jurisdictions include the 360-degree assessment as part of the manager’s appraisal process. The ICMA Voluntary Credentialing Program also uses this
method as part of maintaining the credential; however,
ICMA’s assessments ask only behavioral questions.

They do not cover progress toward organizational goals.

In most cases a 360-degree assessment is conducted digitally via the Internet. Raters are provided evaluation forms that are returned to an independent
third party via the Internet in order to ensure anonymity and confidentiality.

One of the chief benefits of the 360-degree assessment process is that it provides feedback on competencies that are not regularly seen and therefore are not discussed in the typical performance appraisals.

For instance, line staff will see behaviors that elected officials do not see and vice versa. Thus, a manager’s
performance may be improved because it is evaluated
from several different perspectives. However, if the
360-degree assessment is used as part of the appraisal
process, caution should be taken so that the evaluation doesn’t become a measure of the manager’s popularity with staff or the public. The manager works for the elected officials and should be evaluated by them
on the basis of their stated expectations.

11.1 p. 149 of 173
12 ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK
Conversation Evaluation System4
This version of an evaluation is a conversational
session between the manager and the elected officials. For situations where there is tension among the elected officials or between the manager and the
elected body, a facilitator can be used.

Step #1: Create Factors
The elected officials divide themselves into subgroups—normally an equal number of officials in each. The number of groups should be small, so for
a board with 7 members, there would be a group
of 3 people and a group of 4 people. With larger
boards—say a county board with 20 people—there
might be more groups. Where the situation involves a
mayor and other elected officials, the mayor can move
between the two groups or can be part of one group.

The manager makes up his or her own group.

The elected official groups are given a single question that they can respond to with a number of factors:
“What should members of the elected body expect
of the manager?” The groups place their answers on
a flipchart page. The manager also gets a question:
“What do you think the elected body ought to expect
of the manager?,” to which he or she can also respond
with a number of factors listed on a flipchart page.

Step #2: Reach Consensus on the Factors
The subgroups come back together and discuss each
of the factors they listed. They work to combine their
lists to arrive at between 10 and 15 factors.

Step #3: Assign Weight Values for the Factors
The group divides again, and the subgroups assign
points to each of the factors from Step #2. They are
given a total of 300 points and may assign from 10 to
30 points to each factor, but each factor must be given an even number of points. More points are given to
those items that are a higher priority.

Step #4: Reach Consensus on Weight Values for
the Factors
The subgroups come back together again with the
point values they have from their discussions. During this conversation, the entire group tries to come to a consensus on how the point values from Step #3
should be allocated.

Step #5: Assign Rating to Each Factor for the
Actual Performance of the Manager
The elected officials distribute points to each of the
factors on a 1–5 scale, on which 5 is far exceeds
expectations, 4 is exceeds expectations, 3 is achieves
expectations, 2 is below expectations, and 1 is far
below expectations. For example, a 30-point factor
would have the following scale:
30–28 Far exceeds expectations (5)
28–26 Exceeds expectations (4)
26–24 Achieves expectations (3)
24–22 Below expectations (2)
22–20 Far below expectations (1)
These points are totaled, and then added to the
points from the section below.

Step #6: Select Goals
The board—collectively and in consultation with the
manager—comes up with the list of goals for the manager. Together they then assign another 100 points to the goals for the year. So, for example, 50 points could be assigned to Goal #1, Goal #2 could get 20 points,
and Goal #3 could get 20 points, leaving 10 points for
Goal #4.

The points from the above 5 steps would be added
to the 100 points possible from step number 6 and
would be totaled for an overall score using the chart
below:
400–360 Far exceeds expectations
359–320 Exceeds expectations
319–280 Meets expectations
279–240 Below expectations
239–200 Far below expectations
In summary, this is a conversational evaluation.

The evaluators review the factors each year and
everybody owns them. From year to year the factors
are revised as necessary to reflect the feelings of the elected body, which can change each year.

Data-gathering/Software
Resources
Performance evaluation software can be an effective
tool for the elected body to prepare manager evaluations. A wide variety of programs are available, enabling elected bodies to have as much or as little
input into the rating categories as they wish. Some
programs come with rating categories already provided
for a variety of positions, some allow the customer to
provide the categories, and some are a hybrid. This
flexibility allows the elected officials to create a customized rating tool that works best for them.

11.1 p. 150 of 173
ICMA MANAGER EVALUATIONS HANDBOOK 13
Some evaluation software programs allow for multiple raters and some for a single rater. If the program only allows for a single rater, all elected officials convene to discuss each category, agree on the rating, and offer comments, while one elected official enters the rating
and comments into the software program. In this case,
there needs to be trust among the elected officials that all opinions are being heard and recorded. It is then important that all elected officials review the final draft and offer feedback before it is given to the manager.

If a multiple-rater system is used, elected officials
will be completing the evaluation away from the rest
of the elected body, so it is recommended that there
be group discussion beforehand to ensure consistency
in the meaning of the rating categories as in opinions
about the manager’s performance. The elected officials
should also meet after they have entered their ratings
because the evaluation is a group activity, not a multiple individual activity.

A word of warning regarding the multiple-rater
system: It may be difficult to make sure that everyone
fully participates in the process. Elected officials won’t be informed by each other’s comments, and consensus
can be hard to achieve. Thus, if some elected officials provide more commentary than others, it could skew
the overall evaluation.

Even with the use of performance evaluation software, an in-person conversation between the elected body and the manager is needed to review the evaluation and discuss the results.

As noted above, a wide variety of software programs are available, including • Online survey tools such as Survey Monkey
• Performance evaluation software (SHRM can
recommend)
• NeoGov online performance evaluation module
Conclusion
Communication. That is the essential element to maintaining a good relationship between an elected board and the appointed manager. Communication comes in
many forms, but the board’s evaluation of the manager is a formalized method of communication that should not be overlooked.

The task force that was formed to develop this
handbook compiled and considered the best practices
for manager evaluations. The group shared numerous
ideas and learned a great deal from each other. The
final product demonstrates that just as each manager
and board are unique, so too must be the evaluation
process for each manager. While there are common
methods of evaluation, the tools and methods used
to evaluate one manager in one community may not
be appropriate for another manager in a neighboring
community. To maximize legitimacy and effectiveness
and to enhance communication, a manager’s evaluation needs to be tailored to the issues and stated goals of the elected body.

That said, the task force also agreed that there
are some standard elements—notably, the ICMA
Practices for Effective Local Government Leadership—
that would enhance any evaluation. These 14 core
competencies are the framework for what a manager
does on a day-to-day basis, and they warrant
acknowledgment in the evaluation process.

Finally, while this handbook offers a variety of
ideas on the manager evaluation process, the most
important takeaway is that the evaluation must take
place and that the process must be mutually agreed
upon. There are many ways to get this done, but the
manager and the board both deserve the structured
communication that the evaluation provides.

Sample Evaluation Forms for
Local Government CAOs
• Sample Appraisal of Performance
• Sample Manager Evaluation Form
• Sample Manager Performance Evaluation
• Sample County Administrator Performance Evaluation
Other Resources
• ICMA Practices for Effective Local Government
Leadership
• Recruitment Guidelines for Selecting a Local
Government Administrator
• ICMA Model Employment Agreement
• ICMA Code of Ethics with Guidelines
Notes
1 Adapted from City Manager Performance Review, Successful Evaluation Tips, City of Mountlake Terrace, WA
2 Integrity is not simply concerned with whether the manager’s behavior is legal; it also addresses the issue of personal and professional ethics: “Demonstrating fairness, honesty, and ethical and legal awareness in personal and professional relationships and activities.” ICMA members agree to abide by the ICMA Code of Ethics.
3 Perkins, Jan. “Case Study: It’s (Gulp) Evaluation Time.” PM, July 2005. http://icma.org/Documents/Document/Document/3602
4 Adapted and used with permission from Lewis Bender, PhD, Professor Emeritus, Southern Illinois University, Edwardsville, [email protected]

11.1 p. 151 of 173
@ICMA
facebook.com/ICMAorg
linkedin.com/company/icma
icma.org/kn
777 North Capitol Street, NE
Suite 500
Washington, DC 20002–4201
800-745-8780
icma.org

INTERNATIONAL CITY/COUNTY MANAGEMENT ASSOCIATION

11.1 p. 152 of 173

Page 1 of 3 ends

City of Gilroy

STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Approve Purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barriers Meeting Date: January 27, 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
Approve the purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barrier Systems from Meridian Rapid Defense Group for a total of $295,682.11.

BACKGROUND
A vehicle incursion barrier is a physical barrier that prevents unauthorized vehicles from entering a restricted area. Vehicle incursion barriers are used to protect people and property from the risk of injury or crime.

Meridian Rapid Defense Group LLC (MRDG or MERIDIAN) is a privately-held limited liability company (LLC) in operation for over ten years. MRDG holds national and international patents on its products. MRDG manufactures, sells, rents and distributes its patented best-in-category portable vehicle mitigation barrier solution. The products and all materials are made in the USA. The MRDG technology and products provide many unique and extraordinarily effective features to prevent vehicle ramming by stopping and debilitating vehicles used in terrorism and other vehicular attacks.

ANALYSIS
With the rise in catastrophic incidents occurring at large gatherings in the nation, as well as the increase in attendance at special events occurring in the City of Gilroy, staff has

11.2 p. 153 of 173
Approval of the Purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barriers
City of Gilroy City Council Page 2 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 begun researching best practices for safety and security, as well as ways to decrease risk.

In order to secure events occurring on public streets, vehicle incursion barriers are required. Historically, city staff and event organizers have utilized large vehicles, and most recently concrete barriers, to block vehicle access during events. When vehicles are utilized, they must be staffed and easily moveable in case of an emergency. Due to staffing availability, this is not always achievable. When concrete barriers are used, cranes are needed to remove them, thus leaving roads completely blocked in case of emergency.

Staff began researching moveable vehicle incursion barriers with the following criteria in mind:
• barriers must be easily moveable in case of emergency • barriers should be sufficient enough in strength and size to stop a 20-ton vehicle from driving into a pedestrian zone
• barriers should be easy to set up/tear down to reduce staff time Meridian Rapid Defense Group (MRDG) was the only company that carried items that met the above criteria. MRDG brought their equipment to the City of Gilroy for a staff demonstration and review. Staff from various departments attended the demonstration to see how the equipment worked. Following this review, staff, to include police, fire, and public works, believe this equipment will meet the road closure needs of the City and provide the best protection for event attendees, staff, and the community overall.

MRDG's barriers are thoroughly tested, certified, and proven. The Archer 1200 Barrier is the only portable barrier solution to hold certifications in both the U.S. and Europe with both the U.S. Department of Defense and European PAS 68 crash test standards for deployment of unanchored barriers on hard surfaces.

Equipment included in Trailer Kit 1000 (full GSA list and details in attachment 1):
• 8 Archer 1200 Barriers; 2 Archer Field Tow Bars; 1 Archer Manual Hauler 2.0; seven (7) 4-foot cables; 1 Rapid Gate Kit, 7 ADA Cable Protectors, 1 Archer Manual Hauler Mount, 2 ADA Cable Protector holders, 1 Wayfinding Package, and 2 Beam Gate Beam Holders.
• Drop Deck trailer carries all necessary equipment including the Archer Manual Hauler, Field Tow Bar and Arrestor Cables.

Staff is recommending the approval of the purchase of two (2) Archer Barrier Trailer Kits and two (2) additional Rapid Gates from Meridian Rapid Defense Group for a total of $295,682.11, pursuant to Section 4.10 cooperative purchases -through the General Services Administration (GSA) purchasing cooperative program. The barriers are patented, and Meridian is the sole source of these devices.

11.2 p. 154 of 173
Approval of the Purchase of Vehicle Incursion Barriers
City of Gilroy City Council Page 3 of 3 January 27, 2025 1 8 ALTERNATIVES
Council can choose not to approve the purchase, though this is not recommended by staff at this time. The sole source purchase is due to the proprietary nature of the product. Other products were evaluated, but the MERIDIAN product was deemed the most suitable for Gilroy. The product can only be purchased from MERIDIAN.

FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
The purchase of the vehicle incursion barriers is included in the fiscal year 2024-25 (FY25) budget in the General Fund (100). A total of $300,000 was approved by the City Council via the mid-cycle budget adjustment for vehicle incursion barriers.

NEXT STEPS
If approved, staff will place the order. There is a lead time of about 45 days to receive the equipment. Once received, staff will set up training with MERIDIAN and staff will become certified to use the devices.

Attachments:

1. MERIDIAN Quote

2. MERIDIAN GSA Price List

3. MERIDIAN Signed Certification Award

11.2 p. 155 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group Sales LLC
177 E. Colorado Blvd
Suite 200
Pasadena CA 91105
United States
Quote
#QUO-S-10968
11/18/2024
QUO-S-10968
1 of 2
Bill To Ship To
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy CA 95020
United States
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy CA 95020
United States
Date Expires Shipping Method Sales Rep
11/18/2024 02/16/2025 Freight Out Perrin S Lee
Item Price Level Quantity Rate Amount
TRLKIT1000 Meridian Archer Trailer Kit 1000 2 0.00
T1000 Meridian 8-Barrier Drop Deck
Trailer - 1000
GSA 2 34,247.85 $68,495.70
AB1200 Archer 1200 Mobile Barrier GSA 16 6,513.75 $104,220.00 AMHA003-2 Archer Manual Hauler 2.0 GSA 2 1,925.18 $3,850.36 AFTB001 Archer Field Tow Bar GSA 4 574.18 $2,296.72
AACN4F022 Archer Arrestor Cable – 4 ft. GSA 14 574.18 $8,038.52 RGATEKIT Archer Rapid Gate Kit GSA 2 12,540.18 $25,080.36 AMB1200WSP Marketing Frame Package GSA 2 5,785.18 $11,570.36 WAYF-001 Wayfinding Frame GSA 16 0.00
WF3C Caution - Caution GSA 16 0.00
WF4PTO Caution - Pedestrian Traffic Only GSA 16 0.00
WF2STP Caution - Stop GSA 16 0.00
WF1RC Caution - Road Closed GSA 16 0.00
ACP003ADA 3 Channel ADA Cable Protector GSA 14 574.18 $8,038.52 End of Group 0.00 $231,590.54
RGATEKIT Archer Rapid Gate Kit GSA 2 12,540.18 $25,080.36 MCTR002 Annual Certified Training 1 3,995.00 $3,995.00
F Freight Charges 1 11,595.00 $11,595.00
Subtotal $272,260.90
Tax (9.13%) $23,421.21
Total $295,682.11
Notes:

11.2 p. 156 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group Sales LLC
177 E. Colorado Blvd
Suite 200
Pasadena CA 91105
United States
Quote
#QUO-S-10968
11/18/2024
QUO-S-10968
2 of 2
Wire Transfer Instructions:

Meridian Rapid Defense Group Sales LLC
Account Number: 568605235
Bank Name: Chase Bank, N.A.

Wire Routing : 021000021
ACH Routing : 322271627
Check Remittance:
530 New Los Angeles Ave #115-345
Moorpark, CA 93021

11.2 p. 157 of 173
August 6, 2024

11.2 p. 158 of 173

11.2 p. 159 of 173

11.2 p. 160 of 173

11.2 p. 161 of 173

11.2 p. 162 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 1 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

GENERAL SERVICES ADMINISTRATION
Federal Acquisition Service
Authorized Federal Supply Schedule Catalog/Price List
On-line access to contract ordering information, terms and conditions, up-to-date pricing, and the option to create an electronic delivery order is available through GSA Advantage!™, a menu-driven database system. The INTERNET address for GSA Advantage!™ is: http://www.GSAAdvantage.gov.

Multiple Award Schedule
Code J: Security & Protection
J05. Security Systems Subcategory
SIN 334290L Physical Access Control Systems (PACS) – Legacy SIN SIN OLM Order Level Materials (OLM)
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC.
177 E Colorado Blvd FL 2
Pasadena, CA 91105-1986
Phone: 626-204-6402
Fax: 626-628-2134
http://www.betterbarriers.com
Contract Number: 47QSWA19D001F
Period Covered by Contract: November 19, 2023 through November 18, 2028 Business Size: Small Business
Contract Administrator: James Miller
Phone: (626) 204-6402
Email: [email protected]
Pricelist current through Modification #PS-0027, effective October 11, 2024

11.2 p. 163 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 2 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

ABOUT MERIDIAN RAPID DEFENSE GROUP
Meridian Rapid Defense Group LLC (MRDG or MERIDIAN) is a privately-held limited liability company (LLC) in operations for over ten years. MRDG holds national and international patents on its products. MRDG manufactures, sells, rents and distributes its patented best-in-category portable vehicle mitigation barrier solution. The products and all materials are made in the USA. The MRDG technology and products provide many unique and extraordinarily effective features to prevent vehicle ramming by stopping and debilitating vehicles used in terrorism and other vehicular attacks.

The keystone element of the anti-terrorism solution is the Archer 1200 barrier and accompanying products as described in more detail below. MERIDIANS's current customers include local, state and federal agencies, military installations and facilities, major police departments, commercial and industrial businesses, and a broad range of entertainment, cultural, civic, educational and sporting events. MRDG's barriers are thoroughly tested, certified, and proven. Indeed, the Archer 1200 Barrier is the only portable barrier solution to hold certifications in both the U.S. and Europe with both the U.S. Department of Defense and European PAS 68 crash test standards for deployment of unanchored barriers on hard surfaces.

The Meridian Archer 1200 is the center point barrier of the anti-terrorism vehicle mitigation and prevention solution to vehicle-ramming attacks and all other improper vehicle intrusion situations. The Archer 1200 Barrier is easily and rapidly deployed through the use of the Archer Field Tow Bar and/or Archer Hauler. The Archer 1200 barriers may be configured in varying numbers and patterns and connected with Arrestor Cables.

The absolutely best-in-industry exemplary features of the Meridian products and technology for crowd safety include:
--rapid deployment of portable barriers with unmatched stopping capabilities for all vehicles; --delivery and flexible positioning requiring no heavy equipment/cranes and by one person with no team needed;
--modular design so that one or more barriers can be placed, and then easily moved into different configurations in response to changing needs and conditions while denying terrorists the advantages of pre-attack tactical planning;
--the Archer 1200 is 100% reusable with a lifetime guarantee. The barriers can be reused immediately after any impact;
--unlike fixed bollards, the Archer 1200 barriers are non-lethal to the driver and minimize shrapnel spray.

The barriers thus preserve the opportunity for authorities to capture the instigator and protect evidence, as well as protect a driver in an accidental scenario;

11.2 p. 164 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 3 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov --the configuration of the barriers enable ease of authorized pedestrian traffic and appropriate vehicles access. One person can deploy the barriers to block a street, roadway or pathway from vehicle access but permit unobstructed pedestrian access. One person can then separate the barriers as needed to provide access by an authorized vehicle and then immediately return the barriers to the appropriate positions to again block all unauthorized vehicles but allow pedestrians to walk though unobstructed. --the MRDG barriers avoid the problems of fixed concrete bollards and the inefficient, dangerous, vulnerable and uninsured use of police and other vehicles as blockades; --the MRDG solution does not require electricity to operate, or heavy equipment or hydraulics.

Archer 1200 United States Letters Patent No. 8,215,866.

11.2 p. 165 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 4 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

CUSTOMER INFORMATION
1a. Table of Awarded Special Item Number(s):

SIN DESCRIPTION
334290L Physical Access Control Systems (PACS) – Legacy SIN OLM Order Level Materials (OLM)
1b. Lowest Priced Model Number and Price for Each SIN: Part Number AGP001 - $37.63 1c. Hourly Rates: Not applicable.

2. Maximum Order: $250,000

3. Minimum Order: $0

4. Geographic Coverage (Delivery Area): Domestic and overseas delivery.

5. Point(s) of Production (city, county, and state or foreign country): USA.

6. Discounts from List Prices or Statement of Net Price: GSA Net Prices are shown on the attached GSA Price List. Negotiated discount has been deducted and the IFF has been included.

7. Quantity/Volume Discounts: None.

8. Prompt Payment Terms: Net 30 Days

9. Foreign Items: None.
10a. Time of Delivery: 30 days after receipt of order.
10b. Expedited Delivery: Customers are encouraged to contact the contractor for the purpose of requesting accelerated delivery.
10c. Overnight and 2-Day Delivery: Customers are encouraged to contact the contractor for the purpose of requesting accelerated delivery.
10d. Urgent Requirements: Customers are encouraged to contact the contractor for the purpose of requesting accelerated delivery.

11. F.O.B Point(s): Origin, Freight Prepaid and Add
12a. Ordering Address: 177 E Colorado Blvd FL 2 Pasadena, CA 91105-1986 12b. Ordering Procedures: For supplies and services, the ordering procedures, information on Blanket Purchase Agreements (BPAs) are found in Federal Acquisition Regulation (FAR) 8.405- 3 13. Payment Address: 177 E Colorado Blvd FL 2 Pasadena, CA 91105-1986

14. Warranty Provision: Lifetime warranty.

11.2 p. 166 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 5 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

15. Export Packing Charges: Not applicable.

16. Terms and conditions of rental, maintenance, and repair: Lifetime warranty for maintenance and repair.

17. Terms and conditions of installation: None.
18a. Terms and conditions of repair parts indicating date of parts price lists and any discounts from list prices: Lifetime warranty for maintenance and repair. 18b. Terms and conditions for any other services: Not Applicable.

19. List of Service and Distribution Points: Not Applicable.

20. List of Participating Dealers: Not Applicable.

21. Preventive Maintenance: Not Applicable.
22a. Environmental attributes, e.g., recycled content, energy efficiency, and/or reduced pollutants: Not Applicable.
22b. Section 508 Compliance: As Applicable.

23. Unique Entity Identifier (UEI) Number: CLWHGG9NJ187

24. System for Award Management (SAM): Meridian Rapid Defense Group is registered in SAM.

11.2 p. 167 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 6 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

OFFERED GSA PRODUCTS AND PRICING
The rates shown below include the Industrial Funding Fee (IFF) of 0.75%.

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI
GSA

PRICE COO
AB1200 Archer 1200
Barrier
An unanchored “drop-and-stop” vehicle barrier for rapid deployment on roadways and hard surfaces. Meridian’s ultimate rapidly deployable Archer 1200 Barrier™ can augment fixed-inplace HVM (Hostile Vehicle Mitigation) barriers or be utilized as a primary security system for entry points, roadways and perimeters.

Manufactured of high strength, ballistic rated steel, the Archer 1200 Barrier™ is easily installed by one person without the need for cranes, heavy equipment, electricity or hydraulics. Simply offload and place the barriers— no anchors or assembly are required.

The Archer 1200 Barrier™ is an ideal application for: • areas of mass gatherings • campuses • stadiums and sports arenas • police and fire departments • military bases and installations • industrial plants • transportation centers • financial facilities and offices.

EA $6,513.75 USA
AFTB001 Archer Field Tow
Bar
The Archer Tow Bar is an adjustable, levering attachment with dual-grip handles that allows one person to move and deploy the barriers. An easy, two point connection interface provides almost instant tow bar hook up or removal. Each tow bar comes equipped with a heavy duty stay pin.

EA $574.18 USA
AACN4F022 4’ Arrestor Cable

2.0 The reflective MERIDIAN Arrestor Cables use technology from aircraft carriers to absorb the kinetic energy of a moving vehicle and pull the barriers into play for vehicle mitigation without loss of life. They are attached to barriers in 4-foot segments and can be up to three-ply across strung between two barriers. The reflective cables were designed specifically keeping safety in mind without compromising the mechanical properties of a sling rope. The arrestor cable is manufactured using only the highest grade extra improved plowed steel and vinyl coated in neon yellow that aids in visibility as well as abrasion protection and flexibility. The vinyl coating not only protects the users’ hands and makes the wire easier to handle, but it also seals in any lubrication on the wire rope, increasing it useful life. Each wire rope cable is attached to the barriers by two G-100 Swivel self-locking hooks. The selflocking hooks each have a working load limit of 5,700 pounds and are able to swivel during load, a feature which allows the barriers to roll upon impact, ensuring the safety of the work area.

EA $574.18 USA

11.2 p. 168 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 7 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI GSA PRICE COO
AMHA003-2 Archer Manual
Hauler 2.0
The newest and most advanced MERIDIAN® Hauler has all the hallmarks of MERIDIAN’s products’ maintenance free and one [1] person ease of use. The Hauler is a rugged barrier dolly that can traverse a variety of surfaces from asphalt to gravel to unimproved dirt roads. The Hauler features a 3,000 lb. rated jack and is manufactured using high strength and corrosion resistant aluminum T6 6061. Using aluminum has allowed us to decrease the weight of the Hauler by 35% while still providing a lifetime warranty on any component of the hauler. The new Hauler was upgraded with an aluminum core solid thread wheel that will guarantee the hauler will last as long as the life of the barrier.

The new hauler brakes are also now adjustable so as the tires slowly wear over time one can simply readjust the brakes, so they are making contact with the tires. The new upgraded leverage action is simple in that it only requires the placement of the extension rod into the barrier receiver and locking the pin in place. Once the leverage Hauler is secured, then a simple swingaction moves the barrier into position. Safety is the key so when lifting the barrier, the leverage action is fast up and slow down with the all-purpose brake being deployed.

EA $1,925.18 USA
ABG001-2 Archer Beam
Gate 2.0
The Archer Beam Gate 2.0 is the easiest active protection and check point gate to deliver, set up, and install. Its patented design can be a standalone product or when used with Archer 1200 Barriers can be extended for greater lineage coverage or with expansive configurations. The Archer Beam Gate is ideal for events, check points, construction sites, and command center egresses. The Beam Gate can be expanded from 14 to 20 feet using adjustable netting. The adjustable netting is coated in a vibrant safety yellow to not only protect the cable itself but also improve the visibility of the net for any oncoming traffic. The deployment and operation of the Beam Gate requires no
electricity or hydraulics and is easily deployable in 15 minutes. It is easily transportable to multiple locations, affords maximum flexibility to meet the unique requirements of the facility and space, and can be maintained easily and inexpensively by one person. The Archer Beam Gate system pivots a full ninety degrees vertically to allow ease of access for large vehicles. The Archer Beam Gate system can also be locked in the vertical position and in the horizontal position in case there is a need for the beam to stay upright or locked downed for extended periods of time. Incorporated into the Archer Beam Gate are the Technical Specifications of: one Archer 750 Barrier, one Archer 750 Ingot Barrier, one Archer 750 Receiver Barrier, one Archer 750 Pivot Barrier, a Archer Ingot Cart and Counterweights, a marketing frame, an Archer Hauler 2.0, two beams, and one netting.

EA $48,245.18 USA

11.2 p. 169 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 8 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI GSA PRICE COO
ACP001ADA Channel ADA
Cable Protector
Channel ADA Cable Protectors is an ADA compliant cable
protector that protects cables and hoses up to .75” of their outside diameter. Dog bone connectors can extend to any desired length.

It has a reinforced hinged lid for easy cable replacement and is available with ADA compliant ramps. It also has a patented 5 bar tread surface for added traction and a modular interlocking design.

EA $574.18 USA
ATUPLK001 Archer Touch-Up
Paint
MERIDIAN’S Archer Touch-Up Paint is matched the paint of the Archer 1200 Barrier ordered, and can be used to make periodic touch-ups when needed. Includes exactly 6 cans of spray paint.

EA $188.17 USA
ACPR001 Custom Paint and
Rust Prevention
Meridian offers 8 different colors for our Archer 1200 barriers, but we can do any RAL custom color. With custom color we also include a rust preventative in specific sections of the Archer 1200 Barrier that cannot be powder coated, so they remain bare carbon steel. Carbon steel will naturally rust with just the humidity in the air and even more so when it rains, so we offer a rust preventative coating that will prevent the barriers from rusting for 2000+ hours.

EA $72.37 USA
AMB1200WSP Wayfinding
Package
Each Wayfinding Package contains a set of 8 collapsible Wayfinding Frames and 32 preprinted signs. When in the raised position, the frames work to communicate with passing people and vehicles. The preprinted signs come inside a wayfinding box that store and protect the signs while they are not in use. When Archer Barriers are to be moved, the frame is to be lowered so it rests on the back kick plate for easy storage. Keeping the frame on the barriers will help with the speed of deployment during setup. The frames can be colored to match the barriers so that they complete the correct safety look and feel for the community.

EA $5,785.18 USA
AGP001 Graphics Package MERIDIAN’S Graphics Package includes the customer’s choice of a customized logo. Please note: If Graphics Package is not chosen the Archer 1200 Barrier will come with a reflective MERIDIAN branded logo. All MERIDIAN branded logos are
MUTCD compliant. GSA amount is priced for 1 logo only.

EA $56.94 USA

11.2 p. 170 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 9 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI GSA PRICE COO
MRDGRGATEArcher Rapid
Gate
The Archer Rapid Gate is the fastest active protection and check point gate to deliver, set up, and install. Its patented design can be a standalone product or when used with Archer 1200 Barriers can be extended for greater lineage coverage or with expansive configurations. The Archer Rapid Gate is ideal for events, check points, construction sites, and command center egresses. The Rapid Gate can be expanded from 10 to 14 feet using adjustable netting. The adjustable netting is coated in a vibrant safety yellow to not only protect the cable itself but also improve the visibility of the net for any oncoming traffic. The deployment and operation of the Rapid Gate requires no electricity or hydraulics and is easily deployable in 10 minutes. It is easily transportable to multiple locations, affords maximum flexibility to meet the unique requirements of the facility and space, and can be maintained easily and inexpensively by one person. The Archer Rapid Gate system also pivots horizontally 180 degrees to allow ease of access in both directions of traffic. The Archer Rapid Gate system can also be locked in the open position and in the closed position in case there is a need for the beam to stay closed or locked downed for extended periods of time.

Incorporated into the Archer Rapid Gate are the Technical Specifications of: four Archer 1200 Barriers, four marketing frames, directional traffic signs, five beams, one net, one Rapid Gate cart, and one Archer Manual Hauler 2.0 for easily
maneuverability.

EA $38,595.18 USA
MRDGRGATEKITArcher Rapid
Gate Kit
The Archer Rapid Gate Kit provides the flexibility to install the Rapid Gate System on any existing Archer 1200 Barriers. The kit was design to easily bolt onto the Archer 1200 Barriers, making each barrier multifunctional. The entire kit can be stored on the Rapid Gate carts and rolled away using the Archer Hauler. The Archer Rapid Gate can be expanded from 10 to 14 feet using adjustable netting. The adjustable netting is coated in a vibrant safety yellow to not only protect the cable itself but also improve the visibility of the net for any oncoming traffic. The deployment and operation of the Rapid Gate requires no electricity or hydraulics and is easily deployable in 10 minutes. It is easily transportable to multiple locations, affords maximum flexibility to meet the unique requirements of the facility and space, and can be maintained easily and inexpensively by one person. The Archer Rapid Gate also pivots horizontally 180 degrees to allow ease of access in both directions of traffic. The Archer Rapid Gate can also be locked in the open position and in the closed position in case there is a need for the beam to stay closed or locked downed for extended periods of time. Incorporated into the Archer Rapid Gate Kit are the Technical Specifications of:
four marketing frames, directional traffic signs, five beams, one net, and a Rapid Gate cart. The additional purchase of an Archer Manual Hauler 2.0 is recommended for easy maneuverability.

EA $12,540.18 USA

11.2 p. 171 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 10 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI GSA PRICE COO
MRDGTRLKIT1000Archer Trailer Kit
1000
The new MERIDIAN Archer Trailer Kit 1000 has been
equipped with everything needed for certified deployments of up to 8 barriers. The newest upgraded Drop Deck trailer carries all necessary equipment including the Archer Manual Hauler, Field Tow Bar and Arrestor Cables. The Kit includes 8 Archer 1200 Barriers; 2 Archer Field Tow Bars; 1 Archer Manual Hauler 2.0; seven (7) 4-foot cables; 1 Rapid Gate Kit, 7 ADA Cable Protectors, 1 Archer Manual Hauler Mount, 2 ADA Cable Protector holders, 1 Wayfinding Package, and 2 Beam Gate Beam Holders.

EA $115,795.18 USA
MRDGAGUARD Archer Guard The Archer Guard is a crash cushion system that can be rapidly deployed by one person on roadways and in tight positions to protect workers in construction zones, in overhead work, maintenance work, flaggers and manholes. Due to the mobility of the Archer Guard the system can be moved easily on rolling construction operations as no heavy equipment of forklifts or drivers are required once deployed in the field. The Archer Guard consists of 3 Archer 1200 Barriers, six (6) 4-foot Arrestor Cables, 2 Archer Field Tow Bars, 1 Archer Manual Hauler 2.0, 3 Wayfinding Frames, and reflective directional inserts.

EA $28,945.18 USA
MRDGTRL7616NWArcher Guard
Trailer
The Archer Guard Trailer from MERIDIAN ensures Archer
1200 Mobile Barriers can be deployed in under ten minutes. To transport and deploy the equipment, the Archer Guard Trailer lowers to the ground, allowing the Archer 1200 Barriers to roll off at street level and eliminating the need for forklifts or heavy equipment. Once the trailer is lowered to the ground, take the Archer Hauler off its convenient trailer mount, and off-load the barriers one at a time. This trailer allows for single-person deployment, making this the perfect trailer for mobile barrier deployment in work safety zones. The arrestor cables can easily be stored inside the storage compartment in the front of the trailer.

EA $24,120.18 USA
MRDGAGUARDKITArcher Guard
Trailer Kit
The Archer Guard Trailer Kit is the ideal solution to protect workers in construction zones, overhead work, maintenance work, or manholes. The Archer Guard Trailer Kit consists of two Archer Guards systems and the Archer Guard Trailer, ensuring the equipment needed to block off traffic in both directions is on the trailer. Easily move from one side of the road to the next with the Archer Guard Trailer.

EA $82,020.18 USA
MRDGBCRADLE Beam Gate Beam
Cradles
The Beam Gate Beam Cradles make moving the Beam Gate
from one location to another smoother, safer, and more efficient.

The Beam Cradles are installed on the Meridian Trailer fenders and allow the user to easily secure the Archer Beam Gate 2.0 beams on the trailer.

EA $477.68 USA
MFR# MRDGHMOUNT Archer Hauler
Mount
The Archer Hauler Mount provides the user a location to store the hauler when it is not in use. The Hauler Mount is installed on the Meridian trailer, ensuring that everything needed for a deployment is on the trailer.

EA $381.18 USA

11.2 p. 172 of 173
Meridian Rapid Defense Group, LLC. Contract #47QSWA19D001F 11 For more information on ordering from Federal Supply Schedules click on the GSA Schedules link at www.gsa.gov

MFR PART
NO

PRODUCT

NAME PRODUCT DESCRIPTION UOI GSA PRICE COO
MRDG-T1000 Archer T-1000
Drop Deck Trailer
MERIDIAN manufactures and provides specially designed
trailers that carry everything needed for a 4, 6, and 8 Archer Barrier certified deployment. The newest and most advanced trailer is the T-1000 Drop Deck trailer. This trailer is 75 inches wide and readily carries 8 barriers without any tie downs to hold the barriers in place. Instead, the simplicity of e-track shoring bars keeps the barriers locked in when the barriers are being transported. The advantages and advances of this dual axle and four wheel trailer are: 1) it can be operated for one person deployments with a 24 inch swing tailgate; 2) the trailer is both Hydraulic and Air based with solar charging capabilities; 3) upon release of the safety catch the trailer can be lowered and raised with the pressing of the remote control; and 4) the trailer has a heavy duty diamond deck which allows for superior durability. All metal components are powder coated for the toughest of environments with two 10-inch storage
compartments.

EA $34,247.85 USA
AMB1200WS Wayfinding
Frame
The Archer Directional Signage frames are collapsible frames which when in the raised position work to communicate with passing people and vehicles. Keeping the wayfinding frame on the barriers will help with the speed of deployment during setup.

The frames can also be colored to match the barriers so that they complete the correct safety look and feel for the community.

EA $627.25 USA

11.2 p. 173 of 173

Gilroy City CouncilJanuary 27, 2025

Gilroy City Council
January 27, 2025