November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 1 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
CITY COUNCIL
REGULAR MEETING
AGENDA
CITY CHAMBERS, CITY HALL
7351 ROSANNA STREET, GILROY, CA
95020
MONDAY, NOVEMBER 17, 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
COMMENTS BY THE PUBLIC WILL BE TAKEN ON AGENDA ITEMS BEFORE ACTION IS TAKEN BY THE CITY COUNCIL. Public testimony is subject to reasonable regulations, including but not limited to time restrictions for each individual speaker. **Please limit your comments to 3 minutes.** The amount of time allowed per speaker may vary at the Mayor’s discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda.
Written comments on any agenda item may be emailed to the City Clerk’s Office at [email protected] or mailed to the Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1 p.m. on the day of a Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and available for public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street prior to the meeting. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items received after the 1 p.m. deadline will be provided to the City Council as soon as practicable. Written comments are also available on the City’s Public Records Portal 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 challenge any planning or land use decision made at this meeting in court, you may be limited to raising only those issues you or someone else raised at the public hearing held at this meeting, or in written correspondence delivered to the City Council at, or prior to, the public hearing. Please take notice that the time within which to seek judicial review of any final administrative determination reached at this meeting is governed by Section 1094.6 of the California Code of Civil Procedure.
A Closed Session may be called during this meeting pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.9 (d)(2) if a point has been reached where, in the opinion of the legislative body of the City on the advice of its legal counsel, based on existing facts and circumstances, there is a significant exposure to litigation against the City.
Materials related to an item on this agenda submitted to the City Council after distribution of the agenda packet are available with the agenda packet on the City website at www.cityofgilroy.org subject to the Staff’s ability to
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 2 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
post the documents before the meeting.
KNOW YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE GILROY OPEN GOVERNMENT ORDINANCE Government's duty is to serve the public, reaching its decisions in full view of the public.
Commissions, task forces, councils and other agencies of the City exist to conduct the people's business. This ordinance assures that deliberations are conducted before the people and that City operations are open to the people's review.
FOR MORE INFORMATION ON YOUR RIGHTS UNDER THE OPEN GOVERNMENT
ORDINANCE, TO RECEIVE A FREE COPY OF THE ORDINANCE OR TO REPORT A
VIOLATION OF THE ORDINANCE, CONTACT THE OPEN GOVERNMENT COMMISSION STAFF AT (408) 846-0204.
If you need assistance with translation and would like to speak during public comment, please contact the City Clerk a minimum of 72 hours prior to the meeting at 408-846-0204 or e-mail the City Clerk’s Office at [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 regular meeting is outlined as follows:
1. OPENING
1.1. Call to Order
1.2. Roll Call
1.3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
1.4. Pledge of Allegiance
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 3 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
1.5. Invocation
1.6. Orders of the Day
1.7. Employee Introductions
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Proclamations and Awards
2.1. Open Government Week Proclamation
3. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
3.1. Annual Presentation by the Planning Commission
3.2. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY
COUNCIL
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons desiring to address the Council on matters within the Gilroy City Council’s jurisdiction but not on the agenda. Persons wishing to address the Council are requested to complete a Speaker’s Card located at the entrances and handed to the City Clerk. Speakers are limited to 1 to 3 minutes each, varying at the Mayor’s discretion depending on the number of speakers and length of the agenda. The law does not permit Council action or extended discussion of any item not on the agenda except under special circumstances. If Council action is requested, the Council may place the matter on a future agenda.
Written comments to address the Council on matters not on this agenda may be e-mailed to the City Clerk’s Office at [email protected] or mailed to the Gilroy City Clerk’s Office at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, Gilroy, CA 95020. Comments received by the City Clerk’s Office by 1:00 pm on the day of a Council meeting will be distributed to the City Council prior to or at the meeting and available for public inspection with the agenda packet located in the lobby of Administration at City Hall, 7351 Rosanna Street, prior to the meeting. Any correspondence received will be incorporated into the meeting record. Items received after the 1:00pm deadline will be provided to the City Council as soon as practicable. Written material provided by public members under this section of the agenda will be limited to 10 pages in hard copy. An unlimited amount of material may be provided electronically.
4. 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
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 4 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
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, 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)
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
All matters listed under the Consent Calendar are considered by the City Council to be routine and will be enacted by one motion. There will be no separate discussion of these items unless a request is made by a member of the City Council or a member of the public. Any person desiring to speak on any item on the consent calendar should ask to have that item removed from the consent calendar prior to the time the City Council votes to approve. If removed, the item will be discussed in the order in which it appears.
5.1. Approve the minutes of the November 3, 2025 City Council Study Session and the November 3, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting
5.2. Authorization to Deaccession Artifacts from the Collection Managed by the Gilroy Museum
5.3. Acceptance of the Cash and Investment Report as of September 30, 2025
5.4. Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units (Z 25-02)
5.5. Claim of Curtis Crackel (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of the claim)
5.6. Claims of Yolanda Alanis and Tony Jose Alanis (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 5 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
the claims)
5.7. Consider the Approval of Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency to Proceed with a Habitat Plan Amendment
6. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
6.1. Award Two Opioid Remediation Grants, not-to-exceed $118,675 to Carry the Vision and $118,676 to Youth Alliance, for Opioid Remediation Services; Adopt a Resolution Amending the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget in the Opioid Settlement Fund by $237,352; and Authorize the City Administrator to Negotiate and Execute Final Grant Agreements
1. Staff Report:
Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Council:
1. Award two opioid remediation grants, reimbursement-based and not to exceed $118,675 to Carry the Vision and $118,676 to Youth Alliance, for opioid remediation services;
2. Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget in the Opioid Settlement Fund by $237,352; and
3. Authorize the City Administrator to negotiate and execute final grant agreements.
6.2. Award the Interim Aquatics Center Operator Contract to Swan Swimming, LLC for an Amount Not to Exceed $266,662 and Authorize the City Administrator to Complete Negotiations and Execute the Agreement
1. Staff Report:
Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
Award the interim aquatics center operator contract to Swan Swimming, LLC for an amount not to exceed $266,662 and authorize the City Administrator to complete negotiations and execute the agreement.
7. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
7.1. Introduce for First Reading by Title Only An Ordinance to Amend Board and Commission Terms and Appointment Processes
1. Staff Report:
Kim Mancera, City Clerk
2. Public Comment
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 6 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
3. Possible Action:
1. It is recommended that the City Council adopt an ordinance extending the current terms of all Board and Commission members whose terms are set to expire in even-numbered years by one year, thereby aligning all future term expirations with odd-numbered years;
2. Motion to read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading of the ordinance; and
3. Introduce the ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy to reflect all future terms will expire in odd-numbered years.
7.2. Receive Budget Report for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2025-26 (FY26) and Adopt a Budget Amendment Resolution
1. Staff Report:
Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
2. Public Comment
3. Possible Action:
1. Receive Budget Report for the First Quarter of Fiscal Year 2025-26 (FY26); and
2. Adopt a budget amendment resolution.
8. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
9. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
10. CLOSED SESSION
10.1. CONFERENCE WITH REAL PROPERTY NEGOTIATORS
Pursuant to Government Code Section 54956.8 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.8
Property: 7491 Railroad Street, APN 841-06-001
Negotiators: LeeAnn McPhillips, Assistant City Administrator, Administrative Services & Human Resources Director/Risk Manager; Sharon Goei, Community Development Director; Victoria Valencia, Economic Development Manager Under Negotiations: Price and Terms of Payment for Purchase and/or Lease
10.2. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL – ANTICIPATED LITIGATION Pursuant to Paragraph (4) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 Subdivision (3): One Case
11. 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).
November 17, 2025 | 6:00 PM Page 7 of 7 City Council
Regular Meeting
12. ADJOURNMENT
FUTURE MEETING DATES
December 2025
08 City Council Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
January 2026
05 26
City Council Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
City Council Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
February 2026
09 23
City Council Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
City Council Regular Meeting - 6:00 p.m.
Meetings are webstreamed on the City of Gilroy’s website at gilroy.city/meetings.
November 3, 2025 | 5:00 PM
1. OPENING
1. Call to Order
City of Gilroy
DRAFT
City Council
Minutes
Monday, November 3, 2025 | 5:00 PM
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Bozzo at 5:00 PM.
2. Roll Call
Attendance Attendee Name
Present Council Member Dion Bracco
Council Member Tom Cline
Council Member Terence Fugazzi
Council Member Zach Hilton
Council Member Carol Marques
Council Member Kelly Ramirez
Mayor Greg Bozzo
2. STUDY SESSION
1. CMAP Study Session
Communication and Engagement Manager Rachelle Bedell and Finance Director Harjot Sangha provided a report and presentation.
CMAP Director Mike Sanchez provided a report and presentation.
2. Public Comment
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at 6:40 P.M.
Elia Salinas - commented on CMAP being part of the community and encouraged the Council to consider the option to continue the CMAP agreement.
Kevin Pfeffer - commented on programs and classes that CMAP has held.
Gary Walton - commented on the CMAP agreement and past conversations regarding the contract.
Kelly Pfeffer - commented on the jobs that CMAP provides.
Mike Sanchez - commented on the alternative option for the Council to consider.
Jeff Perkins - commented on CMAP financials.
Alex Larson - commented on communication problems between the City of Gilroy
November 3, 2025 | 5:00 PM
and CMAP.
With no further speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
The City Council provided direction to staff to review the needs of the community and work with CMAP to develop a future agreement that reflects clearly what services CMAP can provide, and what responsibilities the City may take over.
3. ADJOURNMENT
With no additional business before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 6:03 P.M I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gilroy on XXXXXXX, 20XX.
Kim Mancera
City Clerk
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
1. OPENING
1. Call to Order
City of Gilroy
DRAFT
City Council
Minutes
Monday, November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
The meeting was called to order by Mayor Bozzo at 6:15 PM.
2. Roll Call
Attendance Attendee Name
Present Council Member Dion Bracco
Council Member Tom Cline
Council Member Terence Fugazzi
Council Member Zach Hilton
Council Member Carol Marques
Council Member Kelly Ramirez
Mayor Greg Bozzo
3. City Clerk's Report on Posting the Agenda
City Clerk Kim Mancera reported on the Posting of the Agenda.
4. Pledge of Allegiance
Council Member Ramirez led the Pledge of Allegiance.
5. Invocation
Pastor Jesse Jimenez led the Invocation.
6. Orders of the Day
None.
7. Employee Introductions
Utilities Director Heath McMahon introduced Engineer I for SCRWA Jay Kantamneni.
Police Captain Luke Powell introduced Police Officer Michael DeFrates and Police Officer Camilla Aguilar.
2. CEREMONIAL ITEMS - Proclamations and Awards
1. Arbor Day Proclamation
3. PRESENTATIONS TO THE COUNCIL
1. PUBLIC COMMENT BY MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC ON ITEMS NOT ON THE
AGENDA BUT WITHIN THE SUBJECT MATTER JURISDICTION OF THE CITY
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
COUNCIL
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at 6:26 P.M.
Greg Felios - commented on the importance of voting.
Adam Jaso - commented on the presence of the homeless camps in the slew and who is responsible for the cleanup efforts.
Sherri Jaso - commented the presence of the homeless camps in the slew and the citations they have received.
Ron Kirkish - commented on the great work of street paving from Public Works and spoke about an assault on a Gilroy Police Officer in the community over the weekend.
Linda Berti - commented on ADU issues on her street.
With no further speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
4. REPORTS OF COUNCIL MEMBERS
1. 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, 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
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
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)
Council Member Bracco - wished Council Member Marques a Happy Birthday.
Council Member Fugazzi - no report.
Council Member Marques - congratulated the La Ofrenda committee for their great event.
Council Member Hilton - reported that the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) Policy Advisory Committee released the Draft Plan Bay Area 2050 and the Plan Bay Area 2025 Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for review and comment. He thanked VTA and staff for sponsoring and attending in the La Ofrenda festival and wellness fair this weekend. He reported from Silivon Valley Clean Energy (SVCE) that they do not receive federal funding and should have no direct impact from the government shutdown. He thanked SVCE and staff for sponsoring and attending the La Ofrenda festival and wellness fair this weekend. He also thanked City staff who worked the La Ofrenda festival and attended on their own for playing a part in the celebration.
Council Member Ramirez - congratulated the La Ofrenda team for the great festival.
She congratulated the Library for its Storywalk display ceremony. She encouraged her fellow Council Members to participate in a ride-along with the Gilroy Police Department.
Council Member Cline - no report.
Mayor Bozzo - reported from the Gilroy Gardens Board of Directors that he is looking forward to the meeting at the end of November, where they will hold a strategic planning session.
5. CONSENT CALENDAR
Motion
Approve the consent calendar.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Kelly Ramirez
SECONDER: Council Member Carol Marques
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo NAYS: None
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
1. Approved the October 20, 2025 City Council Regular Meeting Minutes
2. Approve the 2025 Update to the City of Gilroy's Sewer System Management Plan (SSMP) in Compliance with State Water Resources Control Board Order WQ 2022-0103-DWQ
3. Award a Contract to Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County for $103,448 for South County Youth Task Force Community-Based Services for Youth
4. Authorize the City Administrator to Enter into a Ten-Year Master Service and Purchasing Agreement with Axon Enterprises, Inc., to Purchase the Axon Interview Room Recording System for $243,621
6. BIDS AND PROPOSALS
1. Award a Contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. for the FY26 CDBG Sidewalk and Curb Ramp Project No. 26-PW-303 in the amount of $156,820.00, approve a project contingency of $19,370.14, and approve a total project expenditure of $176,190.14 for Construction
City Engineer Nisha Pratel provided a report and presentation.
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at 6:49 P.M.
With no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
Motion
Award a contract to FBD Vanguard Construction, Inc. in the amount of $156,820.00, approve a project contingency of $19,370.14, approve a total project expenditure of $176,190.14 for the construction of the FY26 CDBG Sidewalk and Curb Ramp Project (No. 26-PW-303), and authorize the Interim City Administrator to execute the contract and associated documents.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Zach Hilton
SECONDER: Council Member Tom Cline
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
NAYS: None
7. PUBLIC HEARINGS
1. Introduction and First Reading of an Ordinance Amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units (Z 25-02) Planning Manager Michael Fossati provided a report and presentation.
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at 7:18 P.M.
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
With no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
Motion
Determine the proposed ordinance is statutorily exempt from the California Environmental Quality Act ("CEQA") pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(h) for the adoption of an ordinance regarding second units in a single-family or multifamily residential zone by a city or county to implement the provisions of Section 66314 and 66333 of the Government Code as set forth in Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Zach Hilton
SECONDER: Mayor Greg Bozzo
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
NAYS: None
Motion
Read the ordinance by title only and waive further reading of the ordinance.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Zach Hilton
SECONDER: Council Member Tom Cline
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
Motion
Introduce the ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code relating to accessory dwelling units.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Zach Hilton
SECONDER: Council Member Tom Cline
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
2. Consider Adopting an Urgency Interim Ordinance Prohibiting the Issuance of Tobacco Retailer Permits for a Period Not to Exceed Forty-Five (45) Days within the Downtown Specific Plan Area (M 25-13)
Planning Manager Michael Fossati provided a report and presentation.
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at 7:40 P.M.
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
Ashly Castillo - commented on not allowing more smoke shops in Downtown.
Saul Gonzalez - commented in favor of the urgency ordinance .
Gary Walton - commented in favor of adopting the urgency ordinance.
Ron Kirkish - commented on DA Rosen not wanting to prosecute on drug charges.
With no speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
Motion
Waive further readings and adopt an Urgency Interim Ordinance establishing a temporary prohibition on the issuance or approval of any new Tobacco Retailer Permits within the Downtown Specific Plan area within the City of Gilroy pursuant to Government Code Section 65858 and make findings, as incorporated in the ordinance, that adoption of the ordinance is necessary for the immediate preservation of the public health, safety, and welfare, particularly regarding the protection of minors within the Downtown Specific Plan area.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: Council Member Carol Marques
SECONDER: Council Member Tom Cline
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
NAYS: None
8. INTRODUCTION OF NEW BUSINESS
1. Update on Downtown Plywood Storefront Ordinance and Downtown Vacancy Ordinance Proposal
Community Development Sharon Goei provided a report and presentation.
Mayor Bozzo opened public comment at P.M.
Gary Walton - commented on past partnerships and collaboration regarding Downtown and what it takes to bring in new tenants.
Maria Aguilar - commented on hiring artists to paint murals or paintings on the plywood store fronts.
Ron Kirkish - commented on creating a Santana Row atmosphere in Downtown Gilroy.
With no further speakers, Mayor Bozzo closed public comment.
Report received.
November 3, 2025 | 6:00 PM
Council directed staff to revive, update, and strengthen the expired Gilroy City Code Chapter 5D, "Vacant Commercial Space in the Downtown Historic and Downtown Expansion Districts," without a vacancy tax at this time, but with additional consideration in the future if Council feels it is needed.
9. FUTURE COUNCIL INITIATED AGENDA ITEMS
None.
10. CITY ADMINISTRATOR'S REPORTS
No report.
11. CITY ATTORNEY'S REPORTS
No report.
12. CLOSED SESSION
Assistant City Attorney Houston announced the closed session item 12.1.
City Council adjourned to closed session at 8:47 P.M.
Motion
Remain in closed session.
RESULT: Passed
MOVER: None
SECONDER: None
AYES: Council Member Dion Bracco, Council Member Tom Cline, Council Member Terence Fugazzi, Council Member Zach Hilton, Council Member Carol Marques, Council Member Kelly Ramirez, Mayor Greg Bozzo
1. CONFERENCE WITH LEGAL COUNSEL - ANTICIPATED LITIGATION – Significant exposure to litigation pursuant to Paragraph (2) of Subdivision (d) of Government Code Section 54956.9 and Gilroy City Code Section 17A.11 Subdivision (3): One Case.
13. ADJOURN TO OPEN SESSION
Assistant City Attorney Houston announced that there was no reportable action.
14. ADJOURNMENT
With no additional business before the Council, the meeting was adjourned at 9:00 P.M I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing minutes were duly and regularly adopted at a regular meeting of the City Council of the City of Gilroy on XXXXXXX, 20XX.
Kim Mancera
City Clerk
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Authorization to Deaccession Artifacts from the Collection Managed by the Gilroy Museum
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator Prepared by: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Council approval to deaccession the artifacts identified by the Gilroy Museum.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
BACKGROUND
The City received a request from the Gilroy Museum requesting to deaccession a list of items from the Museum's inventory, a common practice for museums. Attached to this staff report are a cover letter, a deaccession report, and the list of items being considered for deaccessioning as presented to the Arts and Culture Commission.
At their regular meeting on October 14, 2025, the Arts and Culture Commission adopted a recommendation to the City Council to approve the de-accessioning of the items listed in the report.
The Gilroy Museum intends to sell the majority of its items. Proceeds from the sale will be added to the endowment, generating future interest income to support the museum's operations.
ANALYSIS
ALTERNATIVES
Council may approve, modify, or reject the deaccession of any and all items from the deaccession request.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Minor revenue to the museum endowment. Specific amounts are not known until the item is offered for sale. Some items may be too damaged or undesired for sale or donation, and may be discarded.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item was discussed at the October 14, 2025, public meeting of the Arts and Culture Commission and was included on the publicly posted agenda for that meeting.
NEXT STEPS
The Gilroy Museum will be advised of the result of any Council action on this matter.
Attachments:
1. Deaccession List for the City Council
2. 10-14-2025 ACC Deaccession Report from Gilroy Museum
3. Deaccession Visual List to ACC 10-14-2025
Gilroy Museum Deaccession List
2025
Museum No. Artifact Deaccession Reasons
751A, 751B Two bent wood pews from the Presbyterian Church on 5th and Church Street in Gilroy
Pews are nearly 9 feet long. Storage space is limited and the space better used by items with greater historical value. 3840 Eight, Standard Electric Time Classroom Clocks Deaccession multiple artifacts due to storage limitations. 3841 A&B Two, Standard Electric Time Control clocks from the Eliot Elementary Schools. Used as the master clock for controlling alarm bells.
Large clocks and cases nearly six feet tall; space constraints and size make storage and display prohibitive.
3848, 3849A,
3849B, 3850
Four Victorian chairs, two chairs require recovering Poor condition, no local historical value, not important to museum mission
3134 Small (gold painted) wood and glass medical cabinet Poor condition, glass not tempered, safety hazard 4256 A-D Four, Regency style chairs No local historical value, not pertinent to museum mission 4251 Victorian walnut cylinder desk (roll top) with bookcase above. Space constraints both storage and display 3845 Upholstered Empire style armchair Space constraints both storage and display 8368 1900 Eastlake style chair Space constraints both storage and display 6421, 9029, Two wooden desk chairs, two chairs have non-functioning mechanisms
Condition problems, limited historical value, and storage constraints
9029, 7769,
4659, 3140
Four oil paintings, non-Gilroy topics or artists No local historical value, not pertinent to museum mission 627 Colored panorama photograph titled on "Carquinez Bridge on the Pacific Highway between Vallejo and Crockett."
No local historical value, not pertinent to museum mission 6031 Lithograph of Archbishop Allemany, first Archbishop in California.
No local historical value, not pertinent to museum mission
67.8.11 Framed colored Grace Line map of Calif., Mexico, and Central America by Jo Mora.
No local historical value, not pertinent to museum mission
67.7.4/7729A
67.7.5/7729B
Two framed advertising pictures for Goodrich and Palmer & Goodrich tires which hung in a local tire shop.
Little historical value, not pertinent to museum mission
66.4.1 Wooden filing cabinet with 12 drawers. Needs repair Needs repair, so no display value; space constraints prevent storage
67.2.2 Walnut bookcase with 2 glass doors. Needs repair, non-tempered glass, so no display value; space constraints prevent storage
67.7.3 Large mahogany desk with 7 drawers Repurposed as office equipment so needs deaccession
61.1.9 St. Stephens pew rail with bible holders Pew rail is 10 feet long, and display and storage space limited 4252 A&B Two headboards and footboards of walnut spool bedsteads. Limited space prevents display & storage 950 Large square grand piano, needs reconditioning and tuning, moving and restoration costs beyond Museum budget
Occupies space better used by objects with more historical value.
Miscellaneous abandoned property: chairs, framed pictures Objects were never accessioned but left at the museum.
Gilroy Museum Staff Report
for the
Arts & Culture Commission
October 14, 2025
Recommendation
The Gilroy Museum recommends that the Arts & Culture Commission approve the items listed for deaccession. The Gilroy Museum also asks that the Arts & Culture Commission recommend the Gilroy City Council approve the list of items for deaccession.
Summary
The Gilroy Museum has more than 25,000 artifacts in its collection. The collection belongs to the people of Gilroy, and the Gilroy City Council serves as the peoples’ trustee for the collection. These objects, photographs, works on paper, and books have been assembled during the museum’s 62-year lifetime.
The donations have come from Gilroy residents or their descendants, and the artifacts reflect aspects of life in Gilroy and its environs. The museum’s incoming and present artifacts are constantly being evaluated for their importance to the museum’s mission, their historical value, their condition and usefulness within the museum, and the space available for housing artifacts. The Gilroy Museum Collection Committee is tasked with this evaluation, and it is composed of four museum volunteers and the Museum Manager. This committee meets as needed to assess new artifacts and to evaluate artifacts already in the collection. At meetings on May 13, 2023, and June 11, 2025, the Collection Committee recommended removal (deaccession) of the attached list of artifacts. Since the Arts & Culture Commission is the museum’s representative to the City Council, the Gilroy Museum is seeking the Commission’s approval for deaccession of the listed artifacts, and a recommendation that the City Council approve these artifacts for deaccession.
Background
Deaccession is the process by which museums remove items from their collections. This process typically involves deliberation and approval by both the museum’s Collection Committee and by the governing board or trustees. At the Gilroy Museum, the process begins with the Collection Committee, and then agreement is solicited from the Arts & Culture Commission, and finally from the collection trustees, the Gilroy City Council. Once deaccession has been approved, the museum is free to dispose of the items by any and all means such as: sale, trade, loan, donation, return to donor, or disposal.
Since the Gilroy Museum has an established trust with the City of Gilroy, all proceeds from the sale of items will be deposited in the trust for the benefit of the museum collection. The preferred disposal mechanism is the sale of items or acceptance of a donation. Depending on the artifact, other alternatives will be evaluated prior to final disposition.
Items considered for deaccession are evaluated by the Collection Committee using established criteria.
The Gilroy Museum lists these criteria as the following:
• The artifact does not support the Gilroy Museum’s mission. • The condition of the artifact presents a threat to the collection, it is too large for storage, or it is too damaged such that the cost of conservation outweighs the historical value. • The collection has multiple copies of an artifact. The artifacts that then have the poorest condition are recommended first for deaccession.
• The artifact occupies a large storage space, is not a candidate for display, and its retention precludes collection of more historically significant items. • An artifact may be deaccessioned due to changes to the Gilroy Museum’s collection policy, emphasis, or collection trends.
The artifacts recommended for deaccession meet one or more of the listed criteria above.
Artifacts Recommended for Deaccession
Gilroy Museum’s Report
Arts & Culture Commission
October 14, 2025
Photographs Objects Books & Archives
Two pews from the
Presbyterian Church on 5th
and Church Street in Gilroy,
California. Made of wood with
bent plywood as the body.
Dated 1871.
#751A, 751B
Two, Standard Electric Time
Control clocks from the Eliot
Elementary Schools. Used as
the master clock for controlling
alarm bells. Wood case with
door. Wall mounted. #’s 3841 A
& 3841 B
Eight, Standard Electric
Time Classroom Clocks
from the Gilroy Unified
School District, 1923
#3840
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Upholstered 1890
Victorian armchair
with carved walnut
frame. #3848
1890 Upholstered
Victorian armchair
with castors on
front legs #3850
1890 Upholstered
Victorian
armchair #3849B
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
1890 Upholstered
Victorian
armchair #3849A
Small (gold painted) wood
and glass medical cabinet
from Dr. David Barton's
medical office on 5th
Street in Gilroy, CA. #3134
A Victorian walnut
cylinder desk (roll top)
with bookcase above.
#4251
Four, Regency style
chairs with olive
green velvet seats.
c-1939 #’s 4256A-D
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Upholstered Empire
style armchair once
owned by Harry E.
Maggard (1887-1939),
manager at the Gilroy
Hot Springs Resort in
1930. #3845
1900 Eastlake style
chair of Walter &
Josephine Gouzenne
Sargent. #8368
Leather upholstered and
adjustable oak desk chair
with Greek key design on
the legs. Owned originally
by Walter Fitzgerald, and
later by lawyer, Sidney S.
Johnson, Gilroy City
Attorney. #6421
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Reproduction of painting by
Raeburn, "Boy with Rabbit",
framed #4659
1957 Oil painting titled
"Stormy El Toro" by
Grace Ward #7769
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
1920 Oil painting on board
with a Native American motif
done by Joseph Sylvia of San
Jose, CA. #4314
Oil painting of floral still life by
Crooks. #3140
Framed colored Grace Line
map of Calif., Mexico, and
Central America by Jo Mora.
#67.8.11
1880 Large framed
lithograph of Archbishop
Allemany, first Archbishop
in California. #6031
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Framed colored panorama photograph titled on a plaque "Carquinez Bridge on the Pacific Highway between Vallejo and Crockett." 1927 #627
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Framed advertising poster for
Goodrich Tires that hung at the
Forsyth machine shop in Gilroy,
CA circa 1900 – 1920
#67.7.4/7729A
1893 Framed advertising poster; G & J Tires,
Buckeye Tires, Palmer & Goodrich Co: Plaster
frame. Once hung in Forsyth Machine Shop in
Gilroy, CA. circa. 1900-1920 #67.7.5/7729B
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Small wooden desk chair used by Gilroy
Justice of the Peace, Leon Tupper Thomas
(1885-1965). The chair was used in his
chambers during his tenure as J.P. #9029
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Wooden filing cabinet with 12
drawers belonged in Judge Leon
Thomas's office in City Hall.
Large square piano built by Hallet, Davis and Company,
Boston, Massachusetts. Used in an elementary school
for Gilroy kindergarten class in Gilroy, California. Built 1871 #950
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Walnut bookcase with 2 glass doors.
#67.2.1 Not pictured: Small
wooden table holding the bookcase.
#67.2.2
Large mahogany desk with 7 drawers. (34'' x 60")
#67.7.3
Pew rail with bible holders, wood. Plaque
honoring Harry Bannister adhered to end.
St. Stephen’s Episcopal Church,
Measurements 30” Wide x 120” Length
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Two brown leather
armchairs. No Number
Painted white wooden
armchair. No number
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Wooden office chair.
No Number
Partial picture of a headboard and
footboard. No Number
Headboard or foot board of a bed.
No number
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
Two headboards and footboards of walnut spool bedsteads. #4252 A&B
Gilroy Museum’s Recommended Deaccessions
Arts & Culture Commission Report
October 14, 2025
End
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Acceptance of the Cash and Investment Report as of September 30, 2025
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Finance
Submitted by: Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
Prepared by: Rosemary Guerrero, Finance Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Develop a Financially Resilient Organization
RECOMMENDATION
Accept and file the cash and investment report as of September 30, 2025.
BACKGROUND
The quarterly investment reports are prepared pursuant to the City’s investment policy to keep the City Council apprised of the City’s investment activities.
ANALYSIS
As of September 30, 2025, the City’s cash and investments totaled $188.7 million, of which primary investments include: $35.3 million in the Local Agency Investment Fund (LAIF), $89.2 million in US Treasury securities, $21.3 million in other Federal Agency, and $27.8 million in the California CLASS PRIME Fund.
In addition, there is approximately $15.1 million in cash, of which $13.8 million is held by Fiscal Agents in the Trustee capacity for various bond issues, including bond proceeds, debt service reserves, bond payments, and other post-employment benefits (OPEB) and pensions. The majority of this balance ($7.3 million) consists of the City of Gilroy’s share of the Acquisition and Construction Funds for the SCRWA Plant Expansion Project, and the remaining portion primarily consists of the Section 115 Trusts for OPEB and pension ($6.3 million). The fiscal year-to-date interest earnings are $2.0 million,
which includes accrued interest as well as amortization of the discount on the securities held, with an effective rate of return is 3.9%.
ALTERNATIVES
None.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There are no direct fiscal impacts to receiving and filing the quarterly cash and investment report. This is an activity included in the Finance Department’s annual work plan.
Attachments:
1) Cash and Investment as of 09302025 - Signed
City of Gilroy
Investment Report
september 2025
TABLE OF CONTENTS
1. PORTFOLIO SUMMARY REPORT.......................................................................................... 1 - 3
2. INVESTMENTS BY ISSUER REPORT................................................................................... 4 - 6 3 INVESTMENT ACTIVITY…………………………………………………………………………….. 7 - 8
4. QUARTERLY MOVEMENT OVER THE LAST TWELVE MONTHS........................................ 9
5. MOVEMENT OVER THE LAST TWO YEARS - GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION.................... 10
6. INVESTMENT PORTFOLIO - GRAPHICAL PRESENTATION................................................ 11 - 12
7. INTEREST EARNINGS: FISCAL YEARS 2016 - 2026............................................................ 13
City of Gilroy
Portfolio Management
September 30, 2025
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408)846-0294
Portfolio Summary
% of
Portfolio
Book
Value Investments
Market
Value
Par
Value
Days to
Term Maturity
YTM
360 Equiv.
YTM
365 Equiv.
LAIF 35,277,344.67 35,277,344.67 35,277,344.67 20.32 1 1 4.182 4.240 Federal Agency Non-Amortized 21,250,000.00 21,248,412.50 21,250,000.00 12.24 599 401 4.278 4.337 Treasury Notes Securities 89,698,300.00 89,340,014.14 89,208,746.30 51.38 486 203 4.186 4.245 California Class 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 16.06 1 1 4.284 4.343 173,620,756.23 100.00%
Investments
174,110,309.93 173,750,436.57 323 154 4.212 4.271
15,090,232.59 15,090,232.59 15,090,232.59 1 1 0.000 0.000 188,710,988.82
Cash & Monies Held with Fiscal Agents
Passbook/Checking
(not included in yield calculations)
Total Cash and Investments 189,200,542.52 188,840,669.16 323 154 4.212 4.271 Current Year
September 30
616,814.76
Fiscal Year To Date
1,990,453.40
Average Daily Balance
Effective Rate of Return
194,402,830.47 201,140,728.20
3.86% 3.93%
Total Earnings Month Ending
6 Month T-Bill Benchmark: 3.72%
NOTES:
1. The Maturity Aging Factor of the City's Portfolio = 5.13 months.
2. The unrealized gain resulting from an increase in Market Values obtained from U.S. Bank of all Securities (excluding LAIF) = $129,680.34
3. The LAIF balance shown includes $5,865,563 in bond proceeds from the Gilroy Library 2010 Bonds that can be used exclusively for the construction of the library.
This is to certify that this schedule of investments is in compliance with the City of Gilroy's investment policy and that there are adequate funds available to meet the City's budgeted and actual expenses for the next six months.
__________________________________________________ ____________________ Harjot Sangha, Finance Director
Reporting period 07/01/2025-09/30/2025
11/06/2025
YTM
Par Value Book Value 365
Maturity
Date
Stated
Market Value Rate
September 30, 2025
Portfolio Details - Investments
Average
Balance Issuer
Portfolio Management
City of Gilroy
Days to
Maturity
YTM
CUSIP Investment # 360
Purchase
Date
LAIF
SYSLAIF01 LAIF01 LAIF - City of Gilroy 20,484,576.25 20,484,576.25 20,484,576.25 4.240 4.182 4.240 1 SYSLAIF03 LAIF03 LAIF - Industrial Dev. Auth. 8,927,205.43 8,927,205.43 8,927,205.43 4.240 4.182 4.240 1 LAIF05 LAIF05 LAIF LIBRARY 5,865,562.99 5,865,562.99 5,865,562.99 4.240 4.182 4.240 1 Subtotal and Average 38,260,678.00 35,277,344.67 35,277,344.67 35,277,344.67 4.182 4.240 1 Federal Agency Non-Amortized
3130B4XH9 USB-28 Federal Home Loan Bank Board 02/07/2025 11,250,000.00 11,252,812.50 11,250,000.00 4.420 4.359 4.420 491 02/04/2027 3130B63Y0 USB-29 Federal Home Loan Bank Board 04/30/2025 10,000,000.00 9,995,600.00 10,000,000.00 4.240 4.186 4.245 300 07/28/2026 Subtotal and Average 21,250,000.00 21,250,000.00 21,248,412.50 21,250,000.00 4.278 4.337 401 Treasury Notes Securities
91282CJE2 USB-20 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 01/31/2024 9,294,000.00 9,299,855.22 9,298,114.67 5.000 4.368 4.429 30 10/31/2025 91282CAT8 USB-24 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 07/31/2024 10,461,900.00 10,428,840.40 10,425,449.58 0.250 4.606 4.670 30 10/31/2025 91282CBH3 USB-25 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 07/31/2024 10,092,000.00 9,971,905.20 9,957,345.09 0.375 4.499 4.562 122 01/31/2026 91282CJV4 USB-26 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 10/31/2024 9,694,000.00 9,700,785.80 9,694,303.27 4.250 4.178 4.236 122 01/31/2026 91282CBW0 USB-27 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 01/31/2025 20,000,000.00 19,647,600.00 19,612,856.83 0.750 4.158 4.216 211 04/30/2026 91282CLB5 USB-30 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 04/30/2025 9,910,000.00 9,957,568.00 9,952,839.82 4.375 3.781 3.833 303 07/31/2026 91282CLS8 USB-31 U. S. TREASURY NOTES 07/31/2025 20,246,400.00 20,333,459.52 20,267,837.04 4.125 3.964 4.019 395 10/31/2026 Subtotal and Average 89,153,381.72 89,698,300.00 89,340,014.14 89,208,746.30 4.186 4.245 203 California Class
CLASS PRIME CLASS California Class 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 4.343 4.284 4.343 1 Subtotal and Average 27,790,345.18 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 4.284 4.343 1 Total and Average 194,402,830.47 174,110,309.93 173,750,436.57 173,620,756.23 4.212 4.271 154
YTM
Par Value Book Value 365
Stated
Market Value Rate
September 30, 2025
Portfolio Details - Cash
Average
Balance Issuer
Portfolio Management
City of Gilroy
Days to
Maturity
YTM
CUSIP Investment # 360
Purchase
Date
Monies Held by Fiscal Agents
WASTEWATER BOND CONSTRUCTION U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 7,269,435.60 7,269,435.60 7,269,435.60 0.000 0.000 1 LEASE REV 2020A INT FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 0.01 0.01 0.01 0.000 0.000 1 LEASE REV 2022A INTE FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 192.22 192.22 192.22 0.000 0.000 1 LEASE REV 2020A PRIN FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 4.59 4.59 4.59 0.000 0.000 1 LEASE REV 2022A PRINC FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 1,117.78 1,117.78 1,117.78 0.000 0.000 1 WASTEWATER BOND PYMT FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 1,423.42 1,423.42 1,423.42 0.000 0.000 1 CFD HWY 152 RESERVE FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 291,562.14 291,562.14 291,562.14 0.000 0.000 1 LEASE REV 2020A REVENUE FUND U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 223.81 223.81 223.81 0.000 0.000 1 CFD HWY 152 SPECIAL TAX U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 6,190.44 6,190.44 6,190.44 0.000 0.000 1 Section 115 Trust Held by PARS
OPEB OPEB Public Agency Retirement Servi 07/01/2025 1,102,406.57 1,102,406.57 1,102,406.57 0.000 0.000 1 PENSION PENSION Public Agency Retirement Servi 07/01/2025 5,169,294.65 5,169,294.65 5,169,294.65 0.000 0.000 1 Wells Fargo Checking
SYSWFB WELLS FARGO WELLS FARGO 646,129.21 646,129.21 646,129.21 0.000 0.000 1 Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash
SYSUNDERCOV UNDERCOV CHASE BANK 07/01/2025 698.30 698.30 698.30 0.000 0.000 1 SYS/MUFG MUFG MUFG / UNION BANK 07/01/2025 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 1 SYSPETTY PETTY PETTY CASH 07/01/2025 2,661.56 2,661.56 2,661.56 0.000 0.000 1 SYS/USBANK USB-CASH U. S. BANK 07/01/2025 268,523.60 268,523.60 268,523.60 0.000 0.000 1 SYSBAIL BAIL WELLS FARGO 07/01/2025 0.00 0.00 0.00 0.000 0.000 1 SYSDISCOVERY DISCOVERY WELLS FARGO 07/01/2025 147,397.08 147,397.08 147,397.08 0.000 0.000 1 SYSICS ICS WELLS FARGO 07/01/2025 181,376.61 181,376.61 181,376.61 0.000 0.000 1 SYSWORKING WORKING WORKING CASH 07/01/2025 1,595.00 1,595.00 1,595.00 0.000 0.000 1
0.00 194,402,830.47 189,200,542.52 4.212 4.271 154
Average Balance 1
Total Cash and Investments 188,840,669.16 188,710,988.82
City of Gilroy
Investments by Issuer
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408)846-0294
Sorted by Type
Active Investments
September 30, 2025
Market
Market Value Date
Redemption
Security Type Date
Current
Rate
Call
CUSIP Investment # Date Collateral
Investment
Class
YTM
365 Book Value
CHASE BANK
SYSUNDERCOV UNDERCOV Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 698.30 698.30 09/30/2025 1 Subtotal and Average 698.30 698.30 1
California Class
CLASS PRIME CLASS California Class Fair 27,884,665.26 4.343 27,884,665.26 09/30/2025 4.343 1 Subtotal and Average 27,884,665.26 27,884,665.26 4.343 1 Federal Home Loan Bank Board
3130B4XH9 USB-28 Federal Agency Non-Amortized Fair 11,250,000.00 4.420 11,252,812.50 09/30/2025 4.420 02/04/2027 491 02/04/2026 3130B63Y0 USB-29 Federal Agency Non-Amortized Fair 10,000,000.00 4.240 9,995,600.00 09/30/2025 4.245 07/28/2026 300 10/28/2025 Subtotal and Average 21,250,000.00 21,248,412.50 4.337 401 LAIF - City of Gilroy
SYSLAIF01 LAIF01 LAIF Fair 20,484,576.25 4.240 20,484,576.25 09/30/2025 4.240 1 Subtotal and Average 20,484,576.25 20,484,576.25 4.240 1 LAIF - Industrial Dev. Auth.
SYSLAIF03 LAIF03 LAIF Fair 8,927,205.43 4.240 8,927,205.43 09/30/2025 4.240 1 Subtotal and Average 8,927,205.43 8,927,205.43 4.240 1
LAIF LIBRARY
LAIF05 LAIF05 LAIF Fair 5,865,562.99 4.240 5,865,562.99 09/30/2025 4.240 1 Subtotal and Average 5,865,562.99 5,865,562.99 4.240 1
MUFG / UNION BANK
SYS/MUFG MUFG Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 0.00 0.00 1 Subtotal and Average 0.00 0.00
Public Agency Retirement Servi
OPEB OPEB Section 115 Trust Held by PARS Fair 1,102,406.57 1,102,406.57 09/30/2025 1 PENSION PENSION Section 115 Trust Held by PARS Fair 5,169,294.65 5,169,294.65 09/30/2025 1
Market
Market Value Date
Redemption
Security Type Date
Current
Rate
Call
Date Collateral
Sorted by Type
Investments by Issuer
City of Gilroy
CUSIP Investment #
Investment
Class
YTM
365 Book Value
Subtotal and Average 6,271,701.22 6,271,701.22 1
PETTY CASH
SYSPETTY PETTY Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 2,661.56 2,661.56 09/30/2025 1 Subtotal and Average 2,661.56 2,661.56 1
U. S. BANK
WASTEWATER BOND CONSTRUCTION Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 7,269,435.60 7,269,435.60 09/30/2025 1 LEASE REV 2020A INT FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 0.01 0.01 09/30/2025 1 LEASE REV 2022A INTE FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 192.22 192.22 09/30/2025 1 LEASE REV 2020A PRIN FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 4.59 4.59 09/30/2025 1 LEASE REV 2022A PRINC FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 1,117.78 1,117.78 09/30/2025 1 WASTEWATER BOND PYMT FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 1,423.42 1,423.42 09/30/2025 1 CFD HWY 152 RESERVE FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 291,562.14 291,562.14 09/30/2025 1 LEASE REV 2020A REVENUE FUND Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 223.81 223.81 09/30/2025 1 CFD HWY 152 SPECIAL TAX Monies Held by Fiscal Agents Fair 6,190.44 6,190.44 09/30/2025 1 SYS/USBANK USB-CASH Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 268,523.60 268,523.60 09/30/2025 1 Subtotal and Average 7,838,673.61 7,838,673.61 1
U. S. TREASURY NOTES
91282CJE2 USB-20 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 9,298,114.67 5.000 9,299,855.22 09/30/2025 4.429 10/31/2025 30 91282CAT8 USB-24 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 10,425,449.58 0.250 10,428,840.40 09/30/2025 4.670 10/31/2025 30 91282CBH3 USB-25 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 9,957,345.09 0.375 9,971,905.20 09/30/2025 4.562 01/31/2026 122 91282CJV4 USB-26 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 9,694,303.27 4.250 9,700,785.80 09/30/2025 4.236 01/31/2026 122 91282CBW0 USB-27 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 19,612,856.83 0.750 19,647,600.00 09/30/2025 4.216 04/30/2026 211 91282CLB5 USB-30 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 9,952,839.82 4.375 9,957,568.00 09/30/2025 3.833 07/31/2026 303 91282CLS8 USB-31 Treasury Notes Securities Fair 20,267,837.04 4.125 20,333,459.52 09/30/2025 4.019 10/31/2026 395 Subtotal and Average 89,208,746.30 89,340,014.14 4.245 203
WELLS FARGO
SYSWFB WELLS FARGO Wells Fargo Checking Fair 646,129.21 646,129.21 09/30/2025 1 SYSBAIL BAIL Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 0.00 0.00 1 SYSDISCOVERY DISCOVERY Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 147,397.08 147,397.08 09/30/2025 1 SYSICS ICS Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 181,376.61 181,376.61 09/30/2025 1 Subtotal and Average 974,902.90 974,902.90 1
WORKING CASH
Market
Market Value Date
Redemption
Security Type Date
Current
Rate
Call
Date Collateral
Sorted by Type
Investments by Issuer
City of Gilroy
CUSIP Investment #
Investment
Class
YTM
365 Book Value
SYSWORKING WORKING Other Banks-Misc.Account-Petty Cash Fair 1,595.00 1,595.00 09/30/2025 1 Subtotal and Average 1,595.00 1,595.00 1
Total and Average 188,710,988.82 188,840,669.16 3.929 141
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408)846-0294
City of Gilroy
Purchases Report
Sorted by Type - Type
July 1, 2025 - September 30, 2025
Original
Par Value
Ending
Book Value
Sec.
Type Type
Maturity
YTM
Accrued Interest
CUSIP Investment # Issuer Payment Periods at Purchase Date Purchase
Date
Principal
Purchased
Rate at
Purchase
CHECKING ACCOUNTS
SYSUNDERCOV UNDERCOV CHECKING PA2 CHASE 698.30 07/01/2025 08/01 - Monthly 698.30 698.30 SYS/MUFG MUFG CHECKING PA2 MUFG 0.00 07/01/2025 01/31 - Monthly 0.00 0.00 OPEB OPEB CHECKING LA3 PARS 1,055,439.23 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 1,055,439.23 1,102,406.57 PENSION PENSION CHECKING LA3 PARS 4,613,782.57 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 4,613,782.57 5,169,294.65 SYSPETTY PETTY CHECKING PA2 PETTY 2,661.56 07/01/2025 08/01 - Monthly 2,661.56 2,661.56 WASTEWATER CONSTRUCTION CHECKING LA2 USBANK 7,544,461.26 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 7,544,461.26 7,269,435.60 LEASE REV 2020A INT FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 0.01 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 0.01 0.01 LEASE REV 2022A INTE FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 190.41 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 190.41 192.22 LEASE REV 2020A PRIN FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 4.54 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 4.54 4.59 LEASE REV 2022A PRINC FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 1,107.25 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 1,107.25 1,117.78 WASTEWATER PYMT FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 880.41 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 880.41 1,423.42 CFD HWY 152 RESERVE FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 294,425.49 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 294,425.49 291,562.14 LEASE REV 2020A REVENUE FUND CHECKING LA2 USBANK 221.61 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 221.61 223.81 CFD HWY 152 SPECIAL TAX CHECKING LA2 USBANK 6,804.15 07/01/2025 07/31 - Monthly 6,804.15 6,190.44 SYS/USBANK USB-CASH CHECKING PA2 USBANK 25,208.99 07/01/2025 07/01 - Monthly 25,208.99 268,523.60 SYSBAIL BAIL CHECKING PA2 WFB 0.00 07/01/2025 08/01 - Monthly 0.00 0.00 SYSDISCOVERY DISCOVERY CHECKING PA2 WFB 131,208.54 07/01/2025 02/01 - Monthly 131,208.54 147,397.08 SYSICS ICS CHECKING PA2 WFB 349,801.51 07/01/2025 10/31 - Monthly 349,801.51 181,376.61 SYSWORKING WORKING CHECKING PA2 WORKIN 1,595.00 07/01/2025 08/01 - Monthly 1,595.00 1,595.00 Subtotal 14,028,490.83 14,028,490.83 0.00 14,444,103.38
NOT CALLABLE
91282CLS8 USB-31 NOT TRC USTN 20,246,400.00 07/31/2025 10/31 - 04/30 20,271,201.84 208,791.00 4.125 10/31/2026 4.019 20,267,837.04 Subtotal 20,246,400.00 20,271,201.84 208,791.00 20,267,837.04 Total Purchases 34,274,890.83 34,299,692.67 208,791.00 34,711,940.42
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020
(408)846-0294
City of Gilroy
Maturity Report
Sorted by Maturity Date
Amounts due during July 1, 2025 - September 30, 2025
Rate
Par Value at Maturity
Sec.
Type Type
Maturity
Date
Maturity
Interest Proceeds Income
Net
CUSIP Investment # Issuer
Purchase
Date
Book Value
at Maturity
91282CAB7 USB-14 NOT TRC USTN 8,915,000.00 07/31/2025 11/07/2023 0.250 8,915,000.00 11,143.75 8,926,143.75 11,143.75 91282CHN4 USB-21 NOT TRC USTN 9,905,300.00 07/31/2025 04/30/2024 4.750 9,905,300.00 235,250.88 10,140,550.88 235,250.88 91282CAB7 USB-23 NOT TRC USTN 868,700.00 07/31/2025 07/31/2024 0.250 868,700.00 1,085.88 869,785.88 1,085.88 Total Maturities 19,689,000.00 19,689,000.00 247,480.51 19,936,480.51 247,480.51
DESCRIPTION Dec Mar Jun Sep % of Total
2024 2025 2025 2025 Sep
LAIF:
CITY OF GILROY 42,446,881 37,894,655 47,832,701 20,484,576 11.80% GILROY INDUSTRIAL DEV AGENCY 8,633,796 8,734,209 8,830,459 8,927,205 5.14% GILROY LIBRARY 2010 BOND 5,672,780 5,738,756 5,801,996 5,865,563 3.38% SUB TOTAL 56,753,457 52,367,619 62,465,156 35,277,345 20.32% CALIFORNIA CLASS 26,991,063 27,285,684 27,583,616 27,884,665 16.06% US GOVERNMENTAL AGENCIES:
FEDERAL AGENCY NON-AMORTIZED - - 21,250,000 21,250,000 12.24% TREASURY NOTES SECURITIES 86,486,293 108,566,845 88,234,366 89,208,746 51.38% TREASURY BILL-AMORTIZING 10,969,743 - - - 0.00%
SUB TOTAL 97,456,037 108,566,845 109,484,366 110,458,746 63.62% GRAND TOTAL (Book Value) 181,200,557 188,220,147 199,533,138 173,620,756 100.00% Quarterly Movement of Investments over the Last 4 Quarters
0 20,000,000
40,000,000
60,000,000
80,000,000
100,000,000
120,000,000
140,000,000
160,000,000
180,000,000
200,000,000
September
2023
December
2023
March
2024
June
2024
September
2024
December
2024
March
2025
June
2025
September
2025
City of Gilroy
Investments From:
September 30, 2023 to September 30, 2025
LAIF CALIFORNIA CLASS US GOVT. AGENCIES
LAIF, $35M, 19%
California Class, $28M, 15%
Federal Agency NonAmortized, $21M, 11%
Treasury Notes Securities,
$89M, 47%
Monies Held with Fiscal
Agents, $8M, 4%
OPEB - Sec 115 Trust,
$1M, 0%
Pension - Sec 115 Trust,
$5M, 3%
Cash or Equivalent, $1M, 1%
Book Value by Investment Type
As of September 30, 2025
Value of Portfolio: $188,710,989
LAIF, CA Class, Bank Checking
Accounts, $64M, 34%
Monies Held with Fiscal Agent,
$8M, 4%
Section 115 Trust Held by
PARS, $6M, 3%
Short Term (less than 1 year),
$79M, 42%
Medium Term (1 to 5 years),
$32M, 17%
Value of Portfolio: $188,710,989
Portfolio By Maturity
As of September 30, 2025
0 1,000,000
2,000,000
3,000,000
4,000,000
5,000,000
6,000,000
7,000,000
8,000,000
9,000,000
15/16 16/17 17/18 18/19 19/20 20/21 21/22 22/23 23/24 24/25 24/26 est* Interest Earnings
Fiscal Years
*Estimate of full year interest earnings for FY25/26
City of Gilroy
Interest Earnings FY2016 - FY2026
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Adoption of an Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy Amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code Relating to Accessory Dwelling Units (Z 25-02)
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Community Development
Submitted by: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director Prepared by: Michael Fossati, Planning Manager
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Promote Safe and Affordable Housing for All
RECOMMENDATION
Adopt the ordinance of the City Council of the City of Gilroy amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code relating to accessory dwelling units and find the ordinance is statutorily exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) pursuant to CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(h) for the adoption of an ordinance regarding second unit in a single-family or multifamily residential zone by a city or county to implement the provisions of Sections 66314 and 66333 of the Government Code as set forth in Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
State legislation bills SB 477, AB 2533, SB 1211 and SB 1077 established new requirements for Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) for 2025. The proposed zoning text amendments are recommended to ensure the city code is consistent with the provisions of those bills and state law.
BACKGROUND
On October 16, 2025, the Planning Commission considered and voted 6-0-1 (one
absent) recommending the adoption of an ordinance amending Chapter 30, Article LIV of the Gilroy City Code relating to accessory dwelling units, which includes zoning text amendments to ensure the city code is compliant with state law.
On November 3, 2025, the City Council approved to introduce the ordinance and find the ordinance statutorily exempt from CEQA per Section 21080.17 of the Public Resources Code and Section 15282(h) of the CEQA Guidelines which statutorily exempts adoption of an ADU ordinance from environmental review per the provisions of Section 65852.1 and 65852.2 of the Government Code, which are now referenced as Government Code Sections 66314 and 66333.
ANALYSIS
The City Council is now being asked to adopt the proposed ADU ordinance previously discussed at the November 3rd, 2025 City Council meeting. Once adopted, the ordinance will take effect thirty (30) days from the date of adoption, or December 17, 2025.
ALTERNATIVES
The Council may choose not to adopt the ordinance. This is not recommended as Council has provided direction to staff. If the Council decides to amend the proposed ordinance, staff will provide a revised version.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
Staff time and resources required to adopt new zoning regulations to implement the state requirements are typically funded under the Department's operational budget and through the City’s General Fund.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
Public noticing is only required for the initial hearings at the Planning Commission and during the City Council’s introduction stages. No additional notice is necessary for the second reading or adoption unless there are substantial changes made. The public hearings on October 16 and November 3, 2025 were property noticed, and no modifications were proposed.
NEXT STEPS
If adopted, the proposed ordinance will become effective in 30 days following adoption and staff will submit the adopted ADU ordinance for review by the State of California
Housing and Community Development Department (HCD) to verify compliance with state law. HCD requires submittal within 60 days.
Attachments:
1. Proposed ADU Ordinance
ORDINANCE 2025-XX
AN ORDINANCE OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF
GILROY AMENDING THE GILROY CITY CODE, CHAPTER
30 (ZONING), ARTICLE LIV REGARDING ACCESSORY
DWELLING UNITS
WHEREAS, the Gilroy City Code Chapter 30 (Zoning), Article LIV currently regulates Accessory Dwelling Units (ADUs) and Junior Accessory Dwelling Units (JADUs) within the city; and
WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 477 was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on March 25, 2024, which, among other things, amended and reorganized various sections of the California Government Code related to ADUs and JADUs, specifically moving and consolidating provisions into the new Chapter 13, commencing with Section 66310 of Division 1 of Title 7 of the Government Code, which became effective March 25, 2024 as an urgency ordinance; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 1211 was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on September 19, 2024, and amended Sections 66313, 66314, and 66323 of the California Government Code, which became effective January 1, 2025; and WHEREAS, Senate Bill No. 1077, was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on September 22, 2024, and amended Section 30500.5 of the Public Resource Code, and became effective January 1, 2025; and WHEREAS, Assembly Bill No. 2533 was signed by the Governor and filed with the Secretary of State on September 28, 2024, and amended Section 66332 of the Government Code, and became effective January 1, 2025; and WHEREAS, the approved bills required text amendments to the Gilroy City Code Chapter 30, Article LIV to remain in compliance with State ADU Law; and WHEREAS, the adoption of the Zoning Ordinance text amendments is statutorily exempt from review under the California Environmental Quality Act (“CEQA”) pursuant to CEQA Public Resources Code Section 21080.17 and CEQA Guidelines Section 15282(h) because it is a project for the adoption of an ordinance by a city to implement the articles of the Government Code commencing with Section 66314 and 66333 of the Government Code (the ADU statutes); and
WHEREAS, on October 16, 2025, the Planning Commission held a duly noticed public meeting, at which time the Planning Commission received and considered the staff report as well as all evidence received including written and oral public testimony related to the proposed Zoning Amendments (Z 25-02); and
WHEREAS, the City Council held a duly noticed public hearing on November 3, and November 17, 2025, at which time the City Council received and considered Zoning Amendment file number Z 25-02, took and considered written and oral public testimony, the staff report, and all other documentation related to application Z 25-02; and
WHEREAS, in accordance with City of Gilroy Chapter 30 (Zoning), Article LII (Amendment to the Zoning Ordinance), the Planning Commission has recommended, and the City Council finds, that the proposed Zoning Ordinance text amendment is necessary to carry out the general purpose of the Zoning Ordinance, and applicable General Plan goals and policies including Gilroy 2040 General Plan Land Use Goal LU 3 to provide a variety of housing types that offer choices for Gilroy residents and create complete, livable neighborhoods; Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element Goal 1 (Housing Production) to encourage the production of a variety of housing types for Gilroy residents; and Gilroy 2023-2031 Housing Element Goal 2 (Removal of Government Constraints) to periodically review City regulations and ordinances to ensure that they do not constrain housing development and are consistent with state law; and WHEREAS, the location and custodian of the documents or other materials which constitute the record of proceedings upon which the project approval is based is the office of the City Clerk.
NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY DOES HEREBY ORDAIN AS FOLLOWS:
SECTION I
The foregoing recitals are true and correct and are incorporated herein by this reference.
SECTION II
The amendments to the Gilroy City Code, Chapter 30 (Zoning), Article LIV, set forth in Exhibit ‘A’ regarding accessory dwelling units, are hereby adopted.
SECTION III
If any section, subsection, subdivision, sentence, clause, or phrase of this Ordinance is for any reason held to be unconstitutional or otherwise void or invalid by any court of competent jurisdiction, the validity of the remaining portion of this Ordinance shall not be affected thereby.
SECTION IV
Pursuant to Section 608 of the Charter of the City of Gilroy, this Ordinance shall be in full force and effect thirty (30) days from and after the date of its adoption.
PASSED AND ADOPTED by the City Council of the City of Gilroy at a regular meeting duly held on the __ day of ___ 2025 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSTAIN: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
_______________________
Kim Mancera, City Clerk
EXHIBIT ‘A’ of ORDINANCE 2025-XX
ARTICLE LIV. ACCESSORY DWELLING UNITS
30.54.10: Purpose and intent.
The intent of this article is to provide for accessory dwelling units and junior accessory dwelling units on lots zoned to allow single-family, duplex and multifamily dwelling residential use and that include a proposed or existing primary residential dwelling consistent with California Government Code Section 66310 et seq. Accessory dwelling units contribute needed housing to the City of Gilroy’s housing stock and enhance housing opportunities. An accessory dwelling unit is considered a residential use that is consistent with the existing general plan and zoning designations for the lot. The accessory dwelling unit is not included in calculation of residential density for the purposes of determining general plan conformance.
30.54.20: General requirements.
Notwithstanding any local ordinance regulating the issuance of variances or special use permits, or regulations adopted herein to the contrary, an application for a building permit to construct an accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit shall be approved or denied ministerially without discretionary review or hearing within sixty (60) days from the date the city receives a completed application if there is an existing single-family or multifamily dwelling on the lot. The following requirements apply to all accessory dwelling units:
(a) An accessory dwelling unit shall not be rented for periods less than thirty (30) days.
Short-term rentals are prohibited.
(b) An accessory dwelling unit shall not be sold separately from the primary residential structure except as permitted by California Government Code Section 66341. (c) Prior to the final building inspection for an accessory dwelling unit and/or a junior accessory dwelling unit, the owner must record a deed restriction stating that any accessory dwelling unit on the property may not be rented for periods less than thirty (30) days and that any accessory dwelling unit may not be transferred or sold separately from the primary residential structure except as permitted by California Government Code Section 66341.
(d) The installation of fire sprinklers shall not be required for an accessory dwelling unit if sprinklers are not otherwise required for the primary residence. (e) Accessory dwelling units are subject to the objective design standards and other zoning requirements of the zoning district in which the existing primary dwelling is located and must be built in accordance with the building code set forth in Chapter 6, except for those design, zoning, and building standards inconsistent with state requirements under California Government Code 66310 et seq. Objective design standards and other zoning requirements will not be imposed if they would preclude the construction of at least an eight hundred (800) square foot attached or detached
dwelling unit with four (4) foot side and rear yard setbacks. (f) An accessory dwelling unit is not subject to residential accessory structure regulations.
(g) An accessory dwelling unit will not be subject to any charges and fees other than building permit fees generally applicable to residential construction in the zone in which the property is located, except as otherwise provided herein. (h) Any connection fees and capacity charges that may be required must be assessed in compliance with the provisions of Government Code Sections 66324 and 66338. (i) The accessory dwelling unit must contain water, sewer and gas and/or electric utility connections that are in working condition upon its occupancy. The accessory dwelling unit may be serviced by the primary residence or may have separate utility meters. The accessory dwelling unit will not be considered a new residential use for the purpose of calculating connection fees or capacity charges for these utilities. (j) Ministerial approval of a permit for creation of an accessory dwelling unit shall not be conditioned on the correction of preexisting nonconforming zoning conditions. (k) A certificate of occupancy for any accessory dwelling unit shall not be issued before the local agency issues a certificate of occupancy for the primary dwelling. (l) If the applicant requests a delay in processing, the sixty (60) daytime period shall be tolled for the period of the delay.
30.54.30: Single-family residential accessory dwelling unit standards.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article or of this chapter to the contrary, residential accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted as a single-family residential use that complies with California Government Code Section 66310 et seq. and the following:
(a) Zoning. An accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed on any residential parcel in any zoning district that permits residential or mixed-use development and which contains an existing or proposed primary single-family residential use. (b) Primary Dwelling Relationship. An accessory dwelling unit may be within, attached to, or detached from the proposed or existing primary dwelling; provided, that a singlefamily residential accessory dwelling unit contained within or attached to an existing primary dwelling unit shall have independent exterior access from the existing residence.
(c) Unit Type Combinations. Ministerial approval for a building permit within a residential or mixed-use zone is permitted to create any of the following:
(1) One (1) accessory dwelling unit and one (1) junior accessory dwelling unit per lot with a proposed or existing single-family dwelling if all of the following apply:
a. The accessory dwelling unit or junior accessory dwelling unit is within the proposed space of a single-family dwelling or existing space of a single-family dwelling or accessory structure and may include an expansion of not more than one hundred fifty (150) square feet beyond the same physical dimensions as the existing accessory structure. An expansion beyond the physical dimensions of the existing accessory structure shall be limited to accommodating ingress and egress. b. The space has exterior access from the proposed or existing single-family dwelling. c. The side and rear setbacks are sufficient for fire and safety. d. The junior accessory dwelling unit complies with the requirements of this article and Government Code Sections 66333 and 66334.
(2) One (1) detached, new construction, accessory dwelling unit that does not exceed four (4) foot side and rear yard setbacks for a lot with a proposed or existing singlefamily dwelling. (d) Size.
(1) A detached accessory dwelling unit shall not exceed a maximum size of one thousand (1,000) square feet in floor area.
(2) An attached accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted but shall not exceed fifty percent (50%) of the existing primary dwelling gross floor area, garage area excluded.
Notwithstanding this requirement, an eight hundred fifty (850) square foot one (1) bedroom or one thousand (1,000) square foot two (2) or more bedroom accessory dwelling unit shall be allowed.
(e) Height.
(1) The maximum height for a detached accessory dwelling unit shall be sixteen (16) feet. Detached accessory dwelling units located within one-half (1/2) mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor are permitted to a maximum height of eighteen (18) feet, and may be up to two (2) feet taller, for a maximum of twenty (20) feet, if necessary to match the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit. (2) The maximum height for a structure composed of a detached garage and an accessory dwelling unit that is proposed to be constructed above a detached garage shall be twenty-four (24) feet.
(3) An accessory dwelling unit attached to the primary dwelling is limited to the height allowed in the underlying zoning district.
(f) Setbacks. An accessory dwelling unit is subject to the design criteria and zoning requirements of the district in which the existing single-family dwelling is located and as follows:
(1) An accessory dwelling unit must not encroach upon the required front yard area unless it would preclude the construction of at least an eight hundred (800) square foot accessory dwelling unit with four (4) foot side and rear yard setbacks. (2) A setback of four (4) feet from the side and rear lot lines shall be required for a newly constructed accessory dwelling unit that is not constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as an existing structure.
(3) No additional zoning setback is required for conversion of an existing permitted accessory structure, living area, or garage space, or conversion of a structure that is constructed in the same location and to the same dimensions as the existing structure. (g) Parking. One (1) additional parking space shall be required for a newly constructed accessory dwelling unit, which may be located within the front setback, in tandem and in an existing driveway. Parking in setback areas or tandem parking may be denied if found to be infeasible due to specific site or life safety conditions. Notwithstanding the above, a parking stall will not be required for an accessory dwelling unit that meets any of the following criteria:
(1) The accessory dwelling unit is created as a result of the conversion of existing area of the single-family residence or existing permitted single-family residential accessory structure.
(2) An existing single-family residential garage, carport, covered parking structure, or uncovered parking space is converted or demolished to accommodate an accessory dwelling unit in the same location.
(3) The accessory dwelling unit is within one-half (1/2) mile walking distance of a public transit station, such as a bus stop or train station.
(4) The property is within an architecturally and historically significant historic district. (5) On-street parking permits are required in the area but not offered to the occupant of the residential accessory dwelling unit.
(6) A car share vehicle is located within one (1) block of the accessory dwelling unit. (h) Design Standards. Architectural review of an attached or detached accessory dwelling unit will be limited to the following:
(1) The design of the single-family residential accessory dwelling unit must be compatible with the existing primary dwelling. This may be achieved through use of the same architectural details, including window styles, roof slopes, exterior materials, and colors. Architectural review shall not unreasonably restrict construction of the accessory dwelling unit.
(2) An accessory dwelling unit located within a historic site or neighborhood combining district will be subject to ministerial review for compliance with the design review criteria set forth in section 30.27.40 and must be consistent with the Secretary of the Interior’s Standards for the Treatment of Historic Properties.
(3) An accessory dwelling unit must be built in accordance with the building code set forth in Chapter 6, except that any design, zoning, and building standards inconsistent with state requirements under California Government Code Sections 66314, 66321, 66322, and 66323 shall not apply.
30.54.40: Junior accessory dwelling unit standards.
Notwithstanding any other provisions in this article or of this chapter to the contrary, a junior accessory dwelling unit shall be permitted within a single-family residential unit in compliance with the following standards:
(a) One (1) junior accessory dwelling unit may be permitted per residential lot zoned for a single-family residential use; provided, that the lot has not more than one (1) existing or proposed single-family residence, and not more than one (1) attached or detached residential accessory dwelling unit if constructed in compliance with all applicable limitations of section 30.54.30.
(b) The unit must be constructed within the existing walls of an existing or proposed single-family dwelling.
(c) The square footage of the unit shall be at least the minimum size required for an efficiency unit, up to a maximum size of five hundred (500) square feet in floor area. (d) A separate entrance from the unit to the exterior of the residence shall be provided.
Internal connection may also be permitted.
(e) An efficiency kitchen must be provided in the unit which shall include all of the following:
(1) A cooking facility with appliances, which may be countertop appliances. (2) A food preparation counter and storage cabinets that are of reasonable size in relation to the size of the junior accessory dwelling unit. (f) The unit may include separate bathroom facilities or may share bathroom facilities contained within the primary residence. If a bathroom facility is shared with a primary residence, a separate interior entry to the main living area is required. (g) No separate utility connection, connection fee or capacity charge, or parking space shall be required for a junior accessory dwelling unit.
30.54.50: Multifamily and duplex residential accessory dwelling unit standards.
Notwithstanding any other provisions of this article or of this chapter to the contrary, accessory dwelling units within duplex or multifamily zoned and developed properties shall be permitted and comply with the following:
(a) Portions of the existing duplex or multifamily dwelling structure(s) that are not used as livable space (including, but not limited to, storage rooms, boiler rooms, passageways, attics, basements, or garages) may be converted for use as accessory
dwelling units; provided, that the total number of units must not exceed twenty-five percent (25%) of the existing multifamily dwelling units or one (1) unit, whichever is greater.
(b) An owner may also construct up to a maximum of eight (8) detached accessory dwelling units on a lot that has an existing permitted or proposed duplex or multifamily dwelling, subject to a height limit of eighteen (18) feet and four (4) foot rear yard and side setbacks, provided that the number of accessory dwelling units does not exceed the number of existing dwelling units on the lot.
(c) Height. Accessory dwelling units are limited to a maximum height of sixteen (16) feet, except as established below:
(1) A detached accessory dwelling unit located within one-half (1/2) mile of a major transit stop or high-quality transit corridor is limited to a maximum height of eighteen (18) feet, and may be up to two (2) feet taller, for a maximum of twenty (20) feet, if necessary to match the roof pitch of the primary dwelling unit. (2) A detached accessory dwelling unit located on a parcel with a multistory, multifamily dwelling structure is limited to a maximum height of eighteen (18) feet.
30.54.60: Definitions.
As used in this article, the following terms shall be defined as follows:
“Accessory dwelling unit” means an attached or a detached residential dwelling unit that provides complete independent living facilities for one (1) or more persons and is located on a lot with a proposed or existing primary residence. It shall include permanent provisions for living, sleeping, eating, cooking and a food preparation area (which may include countertop appliances), and sanitation on the same parcel as the single-family or multifamily dwelling is or will be situated. “Accessory dwelling unit” also includes the following:
(a) An efficiency unit, as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 17958.1. (b) A manufactured home, as defined in California Health and Safety Code Section 18007.
“Attached accessory dwelling unit” means a residential dwelling unit that is created as a result of internal conversion, addition, or combination thereof made to the primary residential dwelling unit.
“High-quality transit corridor” means a corridor with fixed bus route service with service intervals no longer than fifteen (15) minutes during peak commute hours as defined in Section 21155 of the Public Resources Code.
“Junior accessory dwelling unit” means a unit that is no more than five hundred (500) square feet in size and contained entirely within a single-family residence. A junior accessory dwelling unit may include separate sanitation facilities, or may share sanitation facilities with the existing structure.
“Livable space” means a space in a dwelling intended for human habitation, including living, sleeping, eating, cooking, or sanitation.
“Living area” means the interior habitable area of a dwelling unit, including basements and attics, but does not include a garage or any accessory structure. “Major transit stop” means an existing rail or bus rapid transit station, a ferry terminal served by either a bus or rail transit service, or the intersection of two (2) or more major bus routes with a frequency of service interval of twenty (20) minutes or less during the morning and afternoon peak commute periods as defined in Section 21064.3 of the Public Resources Code.
“Nonconforming zoning condition” means a physical improvement on a property that does not conform with current zoning standards.
“Objective standards” means standards that involve no personal or subjective judgment by a public official and are uniformly verifiable by reference to an external and uniform benchmark or criterion available and knowable by both the development applicant or proponent and the public official prior to submittal.
“Public transit” means a location, including, but not limited to, a bus stop or train station, where the public may access buses, trains, subways, and other forms of transportation that charge set fares, run on fixed routes, and are available to the public. “Tandem parking” means that two (2) or more automobiles are parked on a driveway or in any other location on a lot, lined up behind one another.
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Claim of Curtis Crackel (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of the claim)
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Administrative Services
Submitted by: LeeAnn McPhillips, Assistant City Administrator/HR Director Prepared by: LeeAnn McPhillips, Assistant City Administrator/HR Director STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, this claim is recommended for rejection.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the November 17, 2025 meeting:
• Claim of Curtis Crackel
BACKGROUND
n/a
ANALYSIS
n/a
ALTERNATIVES
n/a
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
n/a
PUBLIC OUTREACH
n/a
NEXT STEPS
n/a
Attachments:
1. Claim of Curtis Crackel
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Claims of Yolanda Alanis and Tony Jose Alanis (The City Administrator recommends a "yes" vote under the Consent Calendar shall constitute denial of the claims)
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Administrative Services
Submitted by: LeeAnn McPhillips, Assistant City Administrator/HR Director Prepared by: LeeAnn McPhillips, Assistant City Administrator/HR Director STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, these claims are recommended for rejection.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
Based on the recommendation from Municipal Pooling Authority (MPA) and/or legal counsel, the following claim is submitted to the City Council for rejection at the November 17, 2025 meeting:
• Claim of Yolanda Alanis
• Claim of Tony Jose Alanis
BACKGROUND
n/a
ANALYSIS
n/a
ALTERNATIVES
n/a
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
n/a
PUBLIC OUTREACH
n/a
NEXT STEPS
n/a
Attachments:
1. Claim of Yolanda Alanis
2. Claim of Tony Jose Alanis
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Consider the Approval of Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency to Proceed with a Habitat Plan Amendment
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Community Development
Submitted by: Sharon Goei, Community Development Director Prepared by: Valerie Negrete, Senior Planner
STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
1. Receive information on a proposed amendment to the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan; and
2. Authorize the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency to proceed with the Habitat Plan amendment.
EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
The Habitat Plan managed by the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency (Agency) provides a long-term coordinated vision for habitat conservation, while improving and streamlining the environmental permitting process for projects and activities impacting threatened and endangered species in Santa Clara County. The City of Gilroy is one of six co-permittee agencies to the Habitat Plan.
After 10 years of successful implementation, the Agency and its co-permittee agencies are preparing a Habitat Plan amendment, which is summarized in the attached report.
Pursuant to the 2012 Memorandum of Understanding (MOU) with the co-permittee agencies (of which the city is a co-permittee), the Habitat Agency is requesting approval from the City of Gilroy to proceed with the proposed amendment. No changes to the
existing 2012 MOU are required for this action.
BACKGROUND
Since 2013, the Habitat Agency has been managing and implementing the Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) with support from the following co-permittees; County of Santa Clara, Cities of San Jose, Gilroy and Morgan Hill, Valley Water (SCVWD) and the Valley Transportation Authority. Prior to HCP, applicants and developers would apply directly to the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS), and/or the California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) for any potential impacts on protected species under the federal Endangered Species Act (ESA) if their project would result in a “take” of a listed threatened or endangered species. “Take” is defined separately by state and federal wildlife agencies but generally refers to a negative effect on a species of plant or wildlife that is listed on the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). Permitting from state and federal agencies often took months if not years to achieve depending on the project and associated impacts.
In 2013, the Habitat Plan was approved in order to provide mitigation when take occurs.
Since Plan adoption, through careful oversight of covered projects, efficient use of fees and grants to advance the Conservation Strategy, and detailed annual reporting, the Habitat Agency has been successful in meeting the early goals and objectives of the Habitat Plan. However, continued success of the Habitat Plan means that some components must be adjusted or revised periodically to align assumptions with the reality of development and need for coverage in Santa Clara Valley. For example, land cover impact limits in the Habitat Plan are approaching their take limits for one covered species (burrowing owl) and a few habitat types. These limits can only be adjusted through a formal amendment to the Habitat Plan.
Also, the Habitat Plan does not cover all special status species in the area and some species, like Swainson’s hawk, are expanding their range into the plan area, while other resident species, such as mountain lion, Crotch’s bumblebee, and western monarch butterfly are now candidates for listing under the Federal or California Endangered Species Acts. For the Habitat Plan to remain useful and effective in streamlining project permitting, it must adapt, and new species must be added for coverage. Otherwise, project proponents will have to revert to the regulatory process prior to the Habitat Plan, whereby some species and habitats are covered and some are not. Individual project consultation with regulatory agencies and additional and uncertain mitigation would become necessary if new listed species are not extended coverage under the Habitat Plan.
The first ten years of Habitat Plan implementation have required modifications, clarifications, and interpretations to clear the administrative record and strengthen policy. A rewrite of some Habitat Plan sections would make it easier to understand for new staff members of the co-permittee agencies who help administer the Habitat Plan.
Also, the early success of the Habitat Plan has led to discussions about whether more
of the land within Santa Clara County should be covered for impacts and/or considered for enrollment in the growing Reserve System of land. County Parks, County Roads and Airports, VTA and Valley Water have all requested this extended coverage, which they see as beneficial in carrying out new development as well as continued operations and maintenance of existing facilities.
ANALYSIS
A staff report prepared by the Habitat Agency is provided as Attachment 1. This staff report details the history and early implementation of the Habitat Plan, as well as the rationale for the proposed amendment. It also includes a direct link the full administrative draft chapters of the amended Habitat Plan and an explanation of each of the changes, shown as edited versions of the text. Attachment 2 is a copy of the Memorandum of Understanding that was executed between the Habitat Agency and the co-permittees.
Consistent with Section 8(d) of the MOU, any decision to amend the Habitat Plan must be approved by the governing bodies of each co-permittee agency. The VTA Board of Directors, the Valley Water Board of Directors, and the Morgan Hill City Council have all approved the Habitat Agency proceeding with the proposed amendment. The Habitat Agency is therefore requesting that the Gilroy City Council also approve them proceeding with the proposed amendment.
The amendment is anticipated to go through the environmental review process in early 2026 and be complete by the end of 2026. Coordination between the Habitat Agency and the co-permittees will be ongoing during this time.
ALTERNATIVES
If the City of Gilroy does not approve this request, then the Plan amendment won’t proceed and benefits outlined in the staff report will be lost. Developers will face uncertainty regarding mitigation requirements for covered species, leading to delays and increased costs from the United States Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) and California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) permit requirements. This may hinder their ability to plan and move forward with development and construction.
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
There is no direct fiscal impact. Funding for the plan amendment has been fully secured by the Habitat Agency through USFWS/CDFW grants and also funds provided by SCVWD to pay for benefits they specifically receive through the amendment that does not benefit the other co-permittees.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
N/A
NEXT STEPS
The Habitat Agency requests that the City of Gilroy City Council approve pursuit of the Plan amendment as presented. If approved, the Habitat Agency Implementation and Governing Boards may approve a final Plan amendment upon its completion of environmental review.
Attachments:
1. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency Technical Summary Staff Report
2. Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Memorandum of Understanding
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
1 TO: Gilroy City Council
FROM: Gerry Haas, Principal Planner
SUBJECT: Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Amendment – Administrative Draft Review RECOMMENDED ACTION: Approve the Habitat Agency proceeding with a proposed amendment to the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.
INTRODUCTION:
For the past ten years, the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency (Habitat Agency) has led an ambitious conservation effort, quietly protecting valuable natural habitat throughout the County to benefit special status plant and wildlife species, several of which exist only in this valley. The permanent protection of over 16,000 acres of conservation land to date is a local success story implemented by the Habitat Agency, but impossible without the support and partnership of the six co-permittee agencies including the County of Santa Clara, the Cities of San Jose, Morgan Hill and Gilroy, Valley Water and the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority. The conservation success is at a landscape-scale, focused on purchasing large ranches from willing sellers .
These ranchlands are managed to enhance natural communities and the 18 Habitat Plan covered species. Wetlands and other aquatic resources, which have been negatively impacted by past human activities, are restored to improve water quality, water storage and habitat benefits for species which are dependent on them. To date, the Habitat Agency has restored nearly four miles of streams, 10 acres of sycamore alluvial woodland, six acres of riparian habitat, and 8.9 acres of perennial and seasonal wetlands and ponds. Moreover, the Habitat Agency is contributing to a better understanding of our natural environment through research and monitoring. Staff uses this knowledge to better manage the landscapes in the hope what they learn will benefits future generations.
The purpose of this report is to explain how and why this conservation is taking place; to define the Habitat Agency in the context of its formation, function, and future; to acknowledge the achievements of its goals and objectives; and finally, to present the purpose and need for an update to its governing document, the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan.
BACKGROUND:
A Habitat Conservation Plan/Natural Communities Conservation Plan (HCP/NCCP) may be required when a project will result in direct take of a listed threatened or endangered species. The intent of the
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
2 HCP/NCCP is to provide mitigation for the take when it occurs. “Take” is defined separately by state and federal wildlife agencies but generally refers to a negative effect on a species of plant or wildlife that is listed on the Federal Endangered Species Act (FESA) or the California Endangered Species Act (CESA). An HCP/NCCP was required in July 2001 as part of State and Federal approval of several local transportation projects (U.S. 101 widening from San Jose to Morgan Hill, the U.S. 101/Bailey Avenue Interchange, Highway 85/U.S. 101 Interchange, and the Coyote Valley Research Park Plan). Since several projects were being required to complete an HPC/NCCP at the same time, and since there were many more projects in the foreseeable future which would face the same requirement, it was decided that the best approach would be to prepare a single large-scale plan to accommodate broad development in Santa Clara County.
Four local agencies (Valley Transportation Authority [VTA], County of Santa Clara, City of San Jose, and Valley Water) were subject to the initial requirement and jointly committed to the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) and the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) to develop the HCP/NCCP. Initial work included development of a work plan and approval in 2004 of a Memorandum of Understanding among the four original co-permittee agencies (Co-Permittees). The four original copermittees were joined in 2005 by the cities of Gilroy and Morgan Hill. The six co-permittees then signed a Planning Agreement with CDFW and USFWS in October 2005. Intense technical work on the Santa Clara Valley HCP/NCCP, now known as the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan (Plan), started in 2005.
In 2013, the Plan was approved, along with the formation of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency (Habitat Agency) as a Joint Powers Authority (JPA) to oversee and implement the Plan. The JPA is managed by a Governing Board, consisting of eight members: two representatives of each of the four participating jurisdictions (the cities and the County). The Governing Board has two primary roles:
adoption of Plan fees and approval of the annual budget. The Habitat Agency has a second board, the Implementation Board, which is responsible for making financial recommendations to the Governing Board, contracting approvals, land acquisition and grant funding review, approval of annual reports and additional tasks prior to submittal to the USFWS and CDFW (together, the wildlife agencies). The Implementation Board is composed of 11 members, consisting of two representatives from each of the participating jurisdictions, two representatives for Valley Water, and a single representative for VTA.
The Plan’s HCP component is consistent with the FESA, which allows local agencies to approve projects in endangered species’ habitats in exchange for identifying mitigation strategies based on a coordinated landscape scale plan for conserving endangered species and related natural habitat.
The Plan’s NCCP component is the State counterpart to the Federal HCP and provides a means of complying with the CESA. The NCCP goes farther than the HCP in that it addresses not only mitigation of development impacts but also includes actions necessary to promote the long-term restoration and enhancement of species habitat areas, known as natural communities.
The purpose of an HCP/NCCP is to offer a more efficient process for protecting the environment and processing state and federal applications for local projects that may affect endangered species and
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
3 natural habitat. Prior to the Plan, public entities and private developers evaluated projects individually.
Endangered species regulations may require consultation with a variety of federal and state regulators to mitigate impacts to species and habitat loss. This can be a lengthy process for project proponents, involving considerable time and money and with uncertain outcomes.
Furthermore, mitigation in the absence of an HCP/NCCP does less to protect the environment because of its piecemeal approach, resulting in fragmented habitats that are less ecologically viable and more difficult to manage. As endangered species protections continue to expand in response to increasing development impacts, movement of non-native invasive species and climate change, there is a mounting need to provide an assured and balanced structure for development and resource conservation at a regional scale that can be sustained indefinitely. An HCP/NCCP meets this need by providing clear project costs, avoiding project delays due to consultation or permitting for impacts to protected plants or wildlife and creates a local mitigation solution that results in a comprehensive landscape scale conservation program which benefits all the co-permittees.
Since 2013, the Plan has provided instant and automatic take authorization for all covered projects within the Plan area with the completion and submittal of a Private Development Application Form or a Public Reporting form, and the payment of land cover and specialty impact fees.
PLAN IMPLEMENTATION:
The Habitat Plan programmatic take permits are shared by all co-permittees and are issued with the understanding that generally marginal habitat is being impacted, while better habitat is being protected, away from the threat of development. The Plan’s Conservation Strategy makes this expectation clear as it strives for recovery of protected species locally and the presence of protected species within the Reserve System of land (all land protected by the Habitat Agency). The loss of some species in areas that are more impacted is offset by protecting, then improving the quality of habitat in the Reserve System. In this sense, the Plan is managed like a bank account. For every acre of land impacted by permanent development, one or more acres must be permanently protected from future development through the purchase of land or a conservation easement by the Habitat Agency. The ratio of acres protected to acres impacted varies by land cover type. Additional acreage is required to be protected and restored when especially sensitive resources are impacted. In each fiscal year (July 1 through June 30), the Habitat Agency documents total covered project impacts which have accrued within the Plan area (debits) and acres of land acquired or protected for conservation as well as restoration or enhancement actions completed (credits). Demonstrating compliance with the Plan through an annual report ensures that the Habitat Agency is keeping up with the Plan’s conservation strategy and that the take authorization can continue throughout the permit term (50 years from inception). All annual reports are accessible on the Habitat Agency website: https://scvhabitatagency.org/328/Annual-Reports.
Impacts and Take Authorization
Since Plan adoption, the Habitat Agency and Co-Permittees have developed workflows and processes to improve efficiency of reporting impacts and documenting compliance with the Plan’s requirements.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
4 Primarily documented in annual reports, the impacts accrued are compared with the conservation and restoration achieved with the funding provided through the assessment of land cover fees for those same impacts. Since 2013, a total of 470 individual projects have received automatic take coverage under the Habitat Plan. Cumulative permanent land cover impacts for all projects covered by the Plan in the first ten years of implementation total 2,230 acres. In that same period, 3,027 linear feet of streams (0.57-mile) were permanently impacted. The Plan assumes total land cover impacts for the entire 50-year permit term to be 17,975 acres. As the Plan is ten years old, the assumption is that 3,595 acres of land would have been permanently impacted by this time. The actual impact figure is 883 acres fewer than assumed, and this may represent changes in development patterns such as avoidance of open space in favor of infill development or it may be reflective of other trends such as cost of living and the resulting outmigration In any case, the amount of impact is well below anticipated levels.
Of the 470 projects covered by the Plan as of the date of this report, 262 were private development activities, 184 were public projects, and 24 were projects conducted by Participating Special Entities (PSE’s) – outside agencies who voluntarily sought coverage under the Plan to streamline their projects.
All of these projects and activities received automatic take coverage for impacts to Plan covered species, meaning there was no delay for project review or permitting by USFWS or CDFW. The Plan also ensured certainty for these projects in terms of cost and conditioning. Development and construction plans could be drafted and completed with the knowledge that abiding by the Plan was all that was necessary to avoid consultation with the wildlife agencies.
Conservation
The Habitat Plan’s Conservation Strategy describes how covered activity impacts are mitigated primarily through the conservation (protection) of land. Land which is acquired through the purchase of fee title or through a recorded conservation easement becomes part of the Reserve System of Land (Reserve System). The Reserve System includes land protected in four of the five major watersheds in the Plan area. The Habitat Agency’s early focus on acquiring land of high conservation value has resulted in a mosaic of protected land occupied by one or more of the Plan’s covered species. This conservation land exists in various locations across the Plan area extending from San Jose in the north, down to the Pajaro River south of Gilroy and in both mountain ranges that flank the valley. The Habitat Agency is active in managing these newly protected lands. General land management actions are necessary, such as installation and maintenance of fences, roads, culverts, and irrigation infrastructure; vegetation management; removal of debris, aging infrastructure and other nuisances; and property access management. Beyond those responsibilities applicable to all land management entities, the Habitat Agency has additional requirements to enhance the habitat within the Reserve System to make it more suitable for covered species. Enhancement includes installing and supporting native plant species, removal and control of invasive and exotic species and activities focused on improving ecosystem health.
In a demonstration of the Habitat Agency’s commitment to the Conservation Strategy, land has been protected at an impressive rate, averaging over 1,400 acres per year for the first ten years of implementation. Many acres of the highest value conservation lands in the most critical locations have
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
5 already been secured. Continuing at this rate will give all protected plant and wildlife species the greatest chance at recovery. A current map of the Reserve System is available on the Habitat Agency website at this link: https://scv-habitatagency.org/213/Reserve-System With the Reserve System now standing at 16,160 acres of land conserved, the Plan is a full 40% ahead of its conservation target. By this time in Plan implementation, it was anticipated that only 9,000 acres would have been protected. This land acquisition success is due the Habitat Agency successfully secured local, state and federal grants, which allows Plan mitigation fees to fund the Habitat Agency operations and land management. But as mentioned above, with a reduction in total acres of land being impacted than was anticipated, there is a corresponding reduction in fees being collected. This challenge, and a recommended solution to it, is discussed in the Plan Amendment Funding and Future Costs section below.
Restoration and Enhancement
The habitat restoration requirements of the Plan are intended to offset impacts to aquatic resources resulting from development in the Plan area, and to aid in the recovery of the species which rely on those resources. Since 2013, the Habitat Agency has completed seven habitat restoration projects in ponds, wetlands and stream corridors. These restoration sites are located on the east side of Santa Clara Valley (Diablo Range – Coyote watershed), on the west side of the Valley, (Santa Cruz Mountain foothills – Alamitos watershed), and also on valley floor lands in the Pacheco Creek and Pajaro watersheds. Cumulatively, restoration projects have restored 9 acres of riparian woodlands, 9 acres of sycamore alluvial woodlands, 8.9 acres of perennial and seasonal wetlands and ponds, and 3.4 miles of streams. Restoration projects have improved habitat for 8 of 18 covered species— western burrowing owl, California red-legged frog, California tiger salamander, western pond turtle, least Bell’s vireo, tricolored blackbird, Mount Hamilton thistle, and Coyote ceanothus. One project improved a regional wildlife connection between the Diablo Range and Santa Cruz Mountains, and another one enhanced wildlife movement under SR-152 In addition to providing benefits to covered plant and wildlife species, the habitat improvements realized through effective restoration benefits all plant and wildlife species occurring in the vicinity of these projects.
In addition to restoration projects, general habitat conditions have been improved throughout the Reserve System of land through focused and careful land management practices. Managing grasslands to benefit our covered plant species and Bay checkerspot butterfly is an ongoing task occurring on thousands of acres of protected land. Clearing trash and debris from the landscape, as well as targeting invasive plant and wildlife species for removal ensures the best chances of all covered species to survive and thrive in the Reserve System.
Monitoring and Research
In addition to funding significant land conservation, restoration and enhancement, the Habitat Agency has used available funding to conduct research on covered species, wildlife connectivity and monitoring of resources. Several studies, ranging from species surveys and occurrence tracking for covered plants (smooth lessingia, jewelflowers and Tiburon paintbrush) and herptofauna (California red-legged frog
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
6 and California tiger salamander) to wildlife movement (mountain lion, tule elk) to adaptive management based on tracking impacts following wildfire (Coyote Ridge) are playing an important role in the Habitat Agency’s understanding of the current and changing conditions of the landscape within the Plan area. Links to early research and monitoring projects can be found on the Habitat Agency’s website, which is updated regularly.
Plan Implementation Success
As described in the Annual Reports, the Habitat Agency is meeting most of its early success criteria. It exceeds the Plan’s proportional requirements for land protection and habitat restoration, which are the key and foundational metrics for gauging such success. Land acquisition and restoration are, in fact, the primary means of determining that mitigation has truly been provided for impacts which have occurred in the past ten years. Not only has the Habitat Agency protected 40% more acreage than required at this point in implementation, but it has also protected more than 100% of the minimum required acres of all specified natural communities on which our covered species rely. By nearly every measure, the Habitat Agency is outperforming its expectations to the collective benefit of the copermittees.
HABITAT PLAN AMENDMENT: On January 20, 2022, the Implementation Board authorized the Executive Officer to enter into a consultant service agreement with ICF to prepare a major amendment to the Santa Clara Velley Habitat Plan (Plan). The proposed changes to the Plan were described in the January 2022 staff report to the Implementation Board and are summarized below in the section titled:
Primary Changes Proposed in the Amendment. Two approved US Fish and Wildlife Service (USFWS) Section 6 planning assistance grants, administered through the California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW) are funding this effort, which is needed to capitalize on early Plan successes by expanding the coverage and benefits of the Plan, both to special status species and to the copermittees, and to address issues that have arisen since the Plan was adopted in 2013. A consultant service agreement with ICF was finalized in April 2022, and work on the Plan amendment began immediately.
For the past three years, the Habitat Agency and ICF have worked closely with each of the co-permittee agencies, the wildlife agencies, land management entities, local professional biologists and other stakeholdersto review and discuss changes proposed in the Plan through the amendment process. The second half of 2022 and the first few months of 2023 were spent determining the full scope of changes to be considered. The result of this effort was a technical report, which was shared with the Habitat Agency’s Public Advisory Committee (PAC) and itsImplementation and Governing Boards in early 2023.
The report became an informal roadmap for drafting the revised language in each of the chapters. The remainder of 2023 was spent negotiating sections of new language and revisions to existing language within each of the chapters of the Plan with the partners.
In 2024, the first versions of the administrative draft chapters of the Plan were shared with the Habitat Agency’s Technical Advisory Committee (TAC) for input and discussion. The TAC consists of representation from each of the co-permittee agencies, the Habitat Agency and both wildlife agencies.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
7 Chapter 1 (Introduction) required very little discussion, and consensus was reached in a short time. But most other chapters required extensive discourse to ensure the final draft language was acceptable for all parties. Although there had been general agreement on the scope of the proposed additions to the Plan, the exact language to incorporate those additions was challenging to fully develop. For example, there is general agreement that adding monarch butterfly to our covered species list was necessary now that they are candidate for federal listing on the Endangered Species Act. Yet, agreeing on their primary and secondary habitat types within the Plan area, overwintering use, and an effective conservation approach took time. This played out for all seven species and even for a few other species that were evaluated but dropped from consideration. Other initial proposals were also dropped after lengthy analysis and discussions, such as the removal of the Private Development Areas Map, the addition of other agencies as co-permittees and removal of coverage for two species that have not been documented in the Plan area. Most Plan amendment work in 2024 was focused on writing and rewriting text to ensure all parties could agree with the final approach.
Progress improved in early 2025 and by early summer, the consensus administrative draft version of the first three chapters was completed. By summer’s end, the final administrative draft version of the entire Plan was completed. The administrative draft version is summarized below and can be accessed at the following link (due to volume) for review and discussion with this staff report, following a brief explanation of the Habitat Plan structure and an overview of the changes within each chapter.
Administrative Draft Amended Habitat Plan overview and chapters:
https://scv-habitatagency.org/354/Habitat-Plan-Amendment STRUCTURE OF THE HABITAT PLAN:
The structure of the Habitat Plan is somewhat linear, wherein early chapters define the setting and scope for ensuing chapter analyses. The Plan and state and federal permits are introduced, as are the existing physical conditions, regulatory framework and biological resources. Then, covered activities are described and potential build-out of the various general plans, master plans and other organizational documents are accounted for in an effects analysis. The effects analysis is layered over the biological setting to provide a sense of the potential scale of impacts expected over the life of the permit term (50 years). Most importantly, the effects analysis drives a conservation strategy to appropriately mitigate for all potential impacts, and the final chapters discuss how the conservation strategy is to be implemented, including a funding chapter to ensure the Plan can pay for itself. Below is a brief outline of the chapters, including a description of their general content and how they relate to other chapters.
Chapter 1 – Introduction
This chapter describes the Habitat Plan as both a Natural Communities Conservation Plan (NCCP) under the California Department of Fish and Wildlife, and a Habitat Conservation Plan (HCP) under US Fish and Wildlife Service. It describes the Plan boundary, the structure and jurisdiction of the co-permittee agencies and list of species covered by the Habitat Plan.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
8 Chapter 2 – Land Use and Covered Activities
This chapter defines the activities and projects to be covered by the Habitat Plan, broken down by covered activity type and including co-permittee programs, master plans and proposed build out. It summarizes the areas where take (in the form of development or ongoing maintenance) is likely to occur.
Chapter 3 – Physical and Biological Resources
This chapter describes the existing baseline condition of physical and biological resources throughout the Plan area at the time of Plan adoption. It describes the natural communities, the land cover types (which are a subset of those communities), aquatic resources and topographical features in the Plan area. It also includes habitat modeling for each of the existing 18 covered species of plants and wildlife.
Chapter 4 – Impact Assessment and Level of Take
This chapter describes the scale of covered activities and establishes the impact caps on the various land cover types and modeled habitats. By quantifying the presumed rate of development within the Plan area and layering the covered activities onto the baseline maps of the biological setting, an assumption of total take of acres (and miles of stream length) is specified for the entire 50-year permit term.
Chapter 5 – Conservation Strategy
Based on the impact assumptions, a conservation strategy is developed, which will sufficiently mitigate for all the identified impacts throughout the permit term. The conservation strategy is a combination of land protection, land management, restoration, enhancement actions, research, monitoring and reporting.
Chapter 6 – Conditions on Covered Activities
These are conditions of coverage and are required, as applicable, for all covered activities. They identify avoidance and minimization measures, survey requirements for select species and certain standard practices for development
Chapter 7 – Monitoring and Adaptive Management
This chapter outlines the expected land management actions and monitoring of species and habitat health within the Reserve System of land. It also provides allowances and expectations for adaptive management as new data is generated, and research is developed.
Chapter 8 – Plan Implementation
This chapter describes how the Plan is to be implemented. Though much of this chapter is focused on documenting, tracking and reporting out on covered activities, there also is significant discussion about Habitat Agency structure, roles of the co-permittees and wildlife agencies.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
9 Chapter 9 – Cost and Funding
Funding for the Habitat Plan comes from land cover impact fees (approximately 55% of revenue) and grants/donations (45% of revenue). This chapter describes the collection of revenues and how they are to be spent proportionally on various cost centers, including: land acquisitions, land management, restoration, enhancement, monitoring, research, staffing, and administration. It describes the endowment, as well as the anticipated change in the fee schedule from year to year and over time, including adjustments made pursuant to the requisite five-year fee reviews.
Chapter 10 – Assurances
These are assurances requested by the co-permittees to ensure that the state and federal take permits issued to the Habitat Plan will not be modified and that the agreements and commitments within the Plan will not change as a result of new regulation or policies, except as agreed to by all parties. It includes references to the federal No Surprises Regulation stipulating that no additional money, commitments or restrictions will be required by the co-permittees due to unforeseen circumstances.
Chapter 11 – Alternatives to Take
This chapter is limited to a disclosure that alternatives to take for the covered species were considered, and if take is included, an explanation why it could not be avoided. Some of the Plan covered species are still no-take, meaning no direct loss of individuals is covered, but impacts to their habitat can occur.
PRIMARY CHANGES PROPOSED IN THE PLAN AMENDMENT:
The schedule of regular TAC meetings, sharing Plan amendment updates with Habitat Agency boards and committees, as well as separate meetings and consultations with individual co-permittees as needed, has helped to refine the approach to the amendment and has distilled four primary changes deemed most important to address at this time. These changes are considered by the TAC to be the most pressing in terms of ensuring continued success of the Habitat Plan, increased benefits of including more species for coverage and extending the existing coverage benefitsto a larger geographic area. Many other secondary and administrative changes can be seen in draft versions of each amended chapter. Because most of them have no material effect on coverage, cost, or conservation, they are not described here. The four primary changes that have the potential to affect coverage, cost or conservation are as follows:
1) Add seven new special status wildlife species to the Habitat Plan for coverage, protection and conservation.
2) Expand the Plan area boundary to the northwest for public and select project coverage and to the northeast for conservation only.
3) Include Valley Water’s Stream Maintenance Program and the California Vegetation Treatment Program as covered activities, including some provisions for acknowledging the beneficial actions of each of these programs.
4) Adjust cumulative impact assumptions and take limits for certain land cover types, habitats or specific species.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
10 ADMINISTRATIVE DRAFT AMENDED CHAPTERS:
There are four universal changes to Plan text where replacement language has been selected to update and provide clarity to existing text within the document. These changes include the following:
• Name change from Santa Clara Valley Water District to Valley Water • Name change from California Department of Fish and Game (CDFG) to California Department of Fish and Wildlife (CDFW)
• Removal of references to the Three Creeks HCP, which is no longer in development • Change ‘Study area’ (existing Plan boundary) to ‘Permit area’ (existing Plan boundary, plus expanded coverage areas described below)
The following is a description of the primary additions, omissions and revisions to each chapter of the Habitat Plan. These revisions can all be found within the linked revised chapters in a track-change format for ease of discovery.
The primary changes to Chapter 1 include:
• Update to reflect the first amendment to the Habitat Plan and presumed date of approval • Updated Table 1-2 to include the seven new species proposed to be added for coverage • Definition of the expanded Plan boundary
• Updated Mission Statement approved by the PAC and Governing Board in 2024 • Notations that certain supporting or background documents were updated within the Habitat Plan, but only if their updates necessitated analysis for impact assumptions.
Amending the Plan to address early challenges in implementation offers the opportunity to reevaluate the covered species list and propose new species for coverage. Periodic re-evaluation is important and necessary when considering the many environmental threats facing an expanding list of local plants and wildlife. In the past ten years, several new species have been proposed for listing under CESA and ESA. If any of these species become listed, but are not covered by the Plan, then projects and activities affecting these species may require additional consultation and mitigation from project proponents. If that should occur, it would undermine the assurances baked into the Plan for expeditious project review, covered projects could experience costly delays, and the certainty created by the Plan through the transparency of both the avoidance measures and impact fees, would be eroded.
Species considered in the evaluation process for the Plan amendment consisted of special-status species:
• That were not previously evaluated in the original Plan; • With a change (or proposed change) in regulatory listing status; • With range expansion into the study area;
• With the potential to be impacted by covered activities; and/or • That were of interest for take coverage by the Habitat Agency or members of the TAC.
Special-status species which were evaluated and excluded in the original plan because they did not meet any of the five criteria above were not reevaluated. Once selected for evaluation, each new
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
11 species was assessed based on a set of criteria described in the Plan (Section 1.2.4, Covered Species, subheading Covered Species Criteria). These criteria are as follows:
1. Range – the species is known to occur in the Plan area based on credible evidence, or is expected to occur in the Plan area sometime during the permit term (e.g., range expansion or reintroduction)
2. Status – the species is: listed or proposed for listing under the ESA; listed or candidate for listing under the CESA; listed as rare under the Native Plant Protection Act; or is expected to be listed under one of these acts within the permit term.
3. Impact – the species or its habitat would adversely be affected by covered activities
4. Data – sufficient data on the species’ life history, habitat requirements and occurrence in the Plan area are available to adequately evaluate the impacts on the species and develop conservation measures to mitigate those impacts.
For species that met all the above criteria, a final screening criterion was whether coverage for the species is deemed necessary by the Habitat Agency and its co-permittees. For example, if there is interest in adding a species with a low potential to meet some of the above criteria but the species generally fit within the existing conservation strategy, will benefit from inclusion in the Plan, and will not significantly increase the cost to implement the Plan, then it could be included as a covered species.
Based on the above criteria, the following list of seven species is currently being proposed for coverage under the Plan amendment.
• Monarch butterfly (Danaus Plexippus)
• Large marble butterfly (Euchloe ausonides ausonides)
• Crotch’s bumblebee (Bombus crotchii)
• Swainson’s hawk (Buteo swainsoni)
• Loggerhead shrike (Lanius ludovicianus)
• American badger (Taxidea taxus)
• California mountain lion (Felis concolor) (Central Coast Distinct Population Segment) The proposed expansion of the Plan boundary includes two separate components, but each one has a similar geographic purpose and extent. The current Plan boundary does not include the northwest or northeast portions of Santa Clara County between the existing Plan boundary and the county line. In the northwest, mostly covered by cities which are not co-permittees to the Plan, coverage was deemed unnecessary because private development secures approval authority through those cities and there is no nexus to the Plan. In the northwest, very little development or management of the land occurs, which would require coverage, so it was left out.
Through the Plan amendment process, the County of Santa Clara, Valley Water, and Valley Transportation Authority all requested coverage in the northwest portion of the County for ongoing operations and maintenance as well as future capital projects. The Plan can be extended to this area, even though it is within other city jurisdictions, because the requested coverage will be limited to land
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
12 owned or controlled by one of the co-permittee agencies. Examples of the select projects would be maintenance of streams, dams, canals, roadways, bridges and other infrastructure, as well as capital projects to repair or create new infrastructure. Private development would not be covered in this expanded area.
In the northeast, the Habitat Agency is proposing expansion of the existing Plan boundary out to the northeast County line to allow for potential expansion of the Reserve System by acquiring suitable habitat in that area. It is uncertain if land will eventually be enrolled for protection in this area, but having the potential for acquisition provides land protection options if the Habitat Agency encounters difficulty in securing the minimum acreages of specific land cover types within the existing Plan boundary. For both current and new proposed species, suitable and possibly occupied habitat may be available to address future conservation needs.
Certain development plans, policies and other documents that informed the existing Habitat Plan were updated between initial adoption and this amendment process. They were evaluated to determine whether the updates would have a significant effect on the impact assumptions. For example, Gilroy’s General Plan update in November 2020 slightly constricted the urban growth boundary, which will reduce overall urban growth. However, it would not reduce all potential development of agricultural land and certain land cover impacts are still likely to occur. Additionally, this restriction builds on an existing growth boundary that has been in place for decades and the anticipated decrease in impact assumptions for the Gilroy is very small in the context of the entire Plan area. Therefore, this update is referenced, but because it did not result in a significant change in development patterns and the decrease in development potential was so small, no reduction in the overall impact assumption resulted from the update. By acknowledging the Gilroy Plan update, the Habitat Agency wanted to be transparent that potentially significant policy changes in the past twelve years had been given consideration. Many other updates or new plans, which were determined to not have an effect on the impact assumptions, were not addressed in the amendment as their inclusion would have slowed down review and approval of the Plan amendment.
The primary changes to Chapter 2 include:
• Inclusion of Valley Water’s Stream Maintenance Program (SMP) and other VW activities • Inclusion of the California Vegetation Treatment Program (CalVTP) • Update of references to local plans, policies and ordinances where they relate to future growth restrictions
• Updated population figures and economic statistics for the local jurisdictions • Description of beneficial actions to be considered as covered, but exempt from fee payment when consistent with the Conservation Strategy
• Acknowledging tribal access to Reserve System land if their uses are described in the Reserve Unit Master Plan for each property
• The series of bullets at the end of Section 2.4 (Projects and Activities not Covered by this Plan) are not new, but were approved as an errata to the original Habitat Plan upon its adoption in 2014, and are now simply incorporated into the text
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
13 This chapter was revised to expand coverage for certain activities, both within the existing Plan boundary and the new proposed expanded areas of coverage. Although Valley Water’s Stream Maintenance Program was specifically excluded from the Habitat Plan, the list of activities included in that program are covered for all other co-permittees currently. The reason it was exempted from the Plan had to do with timing of the original SMP and the fact that the program had mitigation needs for the US Army Corps of Engineers and the Regional Water Quality Control Board, that could not be addressed by the Habitat Plan conservation strategy. However, since the Habitat Agency received approval of the In-Lieu Fee program for shared mitigation, and the newest reissuance of the SMP is under review at the time, it made sense for Valley Water to request inclusion through the Plan amendment. Within the expanded Plan area, Valley Water’s Dam Maintenance and Pipeline Maintenance Programs will also be covered.
Another Chapter 2 update was focused on ensuring coverage for increasing land management activities to control vegetation and preventing wildfires. Activities outlined in the CalVTP, which was approved in 2019, are largely viewed as beneficial across the landscape because they control the spread of invasive weeds and reduce fire fuel loads. In the absence of fire or other vegetation management, landscapes become overgrown and wildfires in these areas are known as catastrophic. Managing fuel loads with a focus on ecosystem health ensures that future fires burn more slowly and destroy fewer native shrubs and trees. Although these vegetation management activities are already covered by the Plan, the co-permittees requested that CalVTP be specifically identified and covered for future reference. It is important to note that components of CalVTP, Valley Water’s SMP, tribal management of landscapes, and ongoing public agency and private property owner vegetation management may be considered beneficial actions if they adhere to the same list of best management practices and specific avoidance and minimization measures for vegetation management outlined specifically in the revised Chapter 2 language.
The primary changes to Chapter 3 include:
• New land cover and natural community assessment within the expanded Plan area • Identifies existing and new habitats for the seven newly proposed covered species • Updated topography, slope and watershed mapping for the expanded Plan area • Updated existing species occurrence data within the expanded Plan area and noted occurrences of the seven proposed covered species in both the current and proposed expanded Plan area The revisions in Chapter 3 are focused on updating descriptions of the biological setting of the Plan area to include habitat assessments for all 7 of the new covered species, as well as a new assessment of the biological setting in the expanded Plan area for all 25 species (18 existing and 7 new). Appendix B – Species Accounts, was also updated to provide new account records for all the new proposed species. This included consultation with the wildlife agencies, biologist consultants and Habitat Agency biological staff to ensure the proper habitat designations were applied to the new species.
The primary changes to Chapter 4 include:
• Adjust the impact assessment to account for expanded Plan boundary
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
14 • Adjust impact assessment to account for impacts to the seven new species proposed for coverage • Change methodology of tracking land cover impacts at the natural community level • Increase temporary take levels
• Increase impact assumptions for burrowing owl occupied habitat • Expand occupied habitat buffer from 0.5-mile to one mile in the vicinity of the Burrowing Owl Conservation Easement at the San Jose/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Treatment Facility • Reduce permanent impact assumptions for certain pond and wetland land covers With the updates and expansion of covered activities described in Chapter 2, and a new biological setting established in Chapter 3, the Habitat Agency updated the impact assessment. As documented in the Habitat Agency’s annual report (May 2025), by the end of Fiscal Year 2025 the Habitat Agency had provided take coverage for permanent impacts to 2,030 acres of land in its first 11 years of operation. This amount is 1,930 acres short of land conversion expectations that drive the Habitat Plan’s minimum conservation and restoration requirements. Because the Plan has over-assumed permanent impacts to land cover, the amended Chapter 4 concludes that all future land cover impacts, including new covered activities and impacts within the expanded Plan area, remain below the maximum level set in the original Plan. Thus, there is no increase in any permanent impact assumption for any land cover type resulting from the proposed amendment. There are some increases to the temporary impact assumptions, but temporary impacts do not require conservation action and do not result in any additional costs.
As shown in Table 1 below, Chapter 4, impact assumptions to ponds, freshwater marsh, and mixed riparian habitats are proposed to be lowered. This is because impacts to those specific aquatic land cover types have been far below anticipated impact assumptions, but more importantly, impacts to aquatic resources require expensive restoration efforts regardless of the level of impact. By reducing the take assumptions, the Habitat Agency can reduce the minimum restoration commitment and overall cost of the Plan.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
15 The Plan does not allow for direct take of burrowing owls but authorizes conversion of up to 198 acres of occupied BUOW habitat. Occupied nesting habitat impacts may be approved for development within
0.5-mile of a nest. Mitigation fees for these impacts fund the burrowing owl conservation strategy, including the captive rearing, captive breeding, and reintroduction programs. As of the date of this staff report, the Habitat Agency has authorized take of 162 acres of occupied BUOW habitat, and only 36 acres of take remain. The species is now a candidate for listing on the California ESA, so continued coverage of the owl by the Plan is critical.
Following consultation with the wildlife agencies, the burrowing owl conservation strategy has been amended to allow for 20 more acres of permanent take coverage immediately. An additional 40 acres of take may be authorized by the wildlife agencies if the Habitat Agency can come into compliance with the stay-ahead provision for protection of occupied burrowing owl habitat that keeps pace with, or exceeds the requirement based on accrued impacts. A third installment of take (another 40 acres) could be approved following demonstration of continued compliance with the stay-ahead provision and a sustained, positive growth trend for the species.
Since all of the current occupied nesting habitat occurs around the San Jose/Santa Clara Regional Wastewater Facility (RWF), take coverage for impacts to occupied nesting habitat is most critical for projects within the City of San Jose. This allowance for up to 100 additional acres of take authorization would ensure that the City of San Jose continues to benefit from the streamlined permitting for take afforded by the Habitat Plan for future public and private projects in the vicinity of the RWF.
The primary changes to Chapter 5 include:
• Adding conservation actions for new covered species
• Update adaptive management approaches to conservation requirements • Increase take limit for burrowing owl occupied habitat (from 198 acres to 298 acres) • Develop a strategy for the incremental release of take acreage for burrowing owl occupied habitat contingent upon new success criteria
• Reducing minimum restoration commitments commensurate with the proposed reduction in maximum allowable take of aquatic resources
• Added public education and outreach goals for bird-safe actions, noise reduction, light shielding and pollinator-friendly practices to be implemented by the Habitat Agency This chapter was revised to include a conservation strategy for each of the new covered species. As shown in draft Chapter 5, many of the existing conservation approaches for the currently covered species will also benefit the new suite of species. For example, protection of 13,300 acres of annual grassland as currently required by the Plan to mitigate for impacts to kit fox, burrowing owl and other covered species would also provide protection benefits to mountain lion, loggerhead shrike, monarch butterfly and other new proposed species. Similarly, management of oak woodlands, as currently required, can provide the same benefit to other species not currently covered.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
16 Where the existing conservation strategy was not considered adequate for the new species, and in consultation with the wildlife agencies and other species experts, additional measures, known as Biological Goals and Objectives (BGO’s), are identified in the draft chapter. Therefore, the text of this chapter has been updated, but also Tables 5-1 and 5-2, which list the BGO’s.
Consistent with the proposed increase to the burrowing owl take limits, Chapter 5 and Appendix M (Burrowing Owl Conservation Strategy) were both updated with new conservation commitments, primarily focused on close coordination and continued consultation with the wildlife agencies to ensure additional take is commensurate with success criteria in the new draft language.
The primary changes to Chapter 6 include:
• Add new survey requirements and avoidance measures for Swainson’s hawk (new Condition 21) and loggerhead shrike (new Condition 22)
• Add new voluntary Condition 23 to avoid payment of temporary impacts fees associated with mowing and other vegetation management when conducted to minimize impacts to covered pollinator species • Added new language to streamline reporting requirements for temporary land management actions, such as mowing and vegetation management
• Revised language in Condition 11 to clarify that the Habitat Agency itself does not have the authority to stop any development – such authority only exists with the local jurisdiction • Revised Table 6-2 to eliminate aquatic resource avoidance and minimization references associated with Regional Water Quality Control Board or US Army Corps of Engineers and National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permitting compliance in favor of incorporating such measures by reference This chapter was revised to add two new required conditions for coverage of loggerhead shrike and Swainson’s hawk. A third new condition, which is voluntary, will allow co-permittees to avoid temporary or permanent impact fees for impacts to pollinator species if they abide by avoidance and minimization measures included in the condition. This condition is meant to address impacts to the new pollinator species.
A minor adjustment to Condition 11 now clarifies that the Habitat Agency cannot prohibit a reduction in stream setbacks for a project but can only provide a recommendation to the authorizing jurisdiction.
Also related to aquatic resources, the amended Chapter 6 includes an update to consolidate Table 6-2 (Aquatic Avoidance and Minimization Measures) because state law now permits incorporation by reference, so there is not a need to list every possible measure by every regulatory agency. The list is consolidated, renumbered and now only includes those measures which could impact or directly benefit covered species.
The primary changes to Chapter 7 include:
• Removal of the Independent Conservation Assessment Team • Adjustments to existing covered species monitoring requirements based on feedback and lessons learned during the first 10 years of implementation.
• Adding a monitoring framework for all seven new covered species
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
17 • None of the original tables or figures required edited This chapter was revised to add monitoring and management requirements for the new species, as well as provide some additional flexibility in surveying and monitoring requirements for existing species by allowing for more time between survey efforts, when they can be determined to not have an effect on the performance of the monitoring program.
Removal of the independent conservation assessment team is proposed due to the fact that local species experts work regularly with the Habitat Agency in a number of capacities and have the best understanding of the local species population needs. Additionally, the Habitat Agency is now staffed with four biologists who are becoming local authorities on our covered species. The periodic convening of an independent team to assess performance of the Plan is considered to be an unnecessary expense and use of staff time because our successful compliance with the Biological Goals and Objectives of the Plan is transparent in publicly shared annual reports.
The primary changes to Chapter 8 include:
• Expanded definition of a conservation easement to allow for other land protection instruments consistent with California Civil Code Section 815 (providing flexibility and reducing costs to the Habitat Agency in acquiring and protecting land)
• Minor updates
The Plan requirement for reserve properties to be protected with a conservation easement has proven costly and time consuming, and in some cases, unachievable. Smaller properties (less than 100 acres, for example), which are important acquisitions by the Habitat Agency due to their natural resources or geographic locations important for wildlife connectivity, are rarely of interest to open space agencies and an unwelcome burden for private property owners. Additionally, California Civil Code Section 815 defines a conservation easement as any one of a number of protective instruments which can be recorded on a property. The Habitat Agency asserts that, provided land is owned by the Agency, alternative perpetual protection documents may be relied on in the future to secure enrollment of new properties without the lengthy and costly conservation easement template included in the Plan.
The primary changes to Chapter 9 include:
• Adjust the cost analysis to account for increase in conservation actions to mitigate impacts for the new covered species
• Reduce costs associated with the minimum restoration commitments for willow riparian, freshwater marsh and pond impacts as a result of reduced impact assumptions in Chapter 4 • Account for additional take limit for burrowing owl occupied habitat impacts, both for increased fee revenue and commensurate increase in conservation commitments for this species • Prepare a new Appendix P to provide analysis and summary of all cost model changes associated with the Plan amendment
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
18 The final revised Chapter 9 is updated to reflect new costs and cost savings that would result from the amended Plan. It is important to note that these cost assumptions are not reflected as a direct change in the cost model of the existing Plan. This is because the original cost model (from 2012) and associated fee schedule have been updated with a comprehensive analysis resulting from the Plan’s requisite FiveYear Fee Review. The most recent Five-Year Fee Review was completed in 2019, so the new cost analysis for the Plan amendment is based on the resulting adjusted cost model of that review.
In addition to the relatively minor Chapter 9 text changes, a new Appendix P was prepared and proposed for approval. Appendix P provides an in-depth explanation of the analysis of the cost model changes that would result if the Plan amendment were approved. The chart below, excerpted from the new Appendix P, provides an overview and explanation of any potential cost adjustments that could result from the Plan amendment.
Plan Amendment Change Effect on Costs Effect on Fees & Revenues Add seven new covered species. Small increase in land
management and monitoring
costs.
Small changes in land cover,
serpentine, and nitrogen
deposition fee levels and
revenues.
Expand Plan boundary. No increase in reserve
acquisition costs
No effect.
Expand covered activities. No effect because no change in required conservation
activities.
Negligible effect on
development fee revenue from
expanded coverage for specified
public projects.
Adjust cumulative impacts and
take limits: reduce allowable
wetland impacts and
conservation actions.
16% decrease in wetland
restoration/creation costs.
Small increase in wetland fee
levels and 11% decrease in fee
revenue.1
Adjust cumulative impacts and
take limits: increase western
burrowing owl impacts and
conservation actions.
Small increase in burrowing
owl conservation strategy
costs.
(See Chapter 2.)
17% decrease in burrowing owl
fee level and small increase in
fee revenue.2
(See Chapter 3.)
Overall effect on funding
strategy.
Small decrease in total Plan
costs.
Small decrease in total Plan
funding and small increase in
ending fund balance.1
1 This Appendix P analysis does not incorporate a small potential reduction in non-fee funding associated with reduced wetland restoration/creation for contribution to recovery (versus mitigation, see Table
2.1). See Chapter 4 for further discussion.
2 Burrowing owl fee decreases because allowable impacts increase more in proportion to mitigation costs. See Chapter 3 for more explanation.
Also excepted from Appendix P is a table (below) itemizing the cost adjustments in terms of dollars and percentages of change from the existing cost model. When all is considered, the Plan amendment would result in a 3.2% reduction in total plan costs over the permit term. This amounts to a potential $23 Million savings to the Habitat Agency in future implementation, while achieving conservation for an expanded number of species.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
19 2019
Five-Year
Review
2026
Plan
Amendment
Amendment vs.
Five-Year Review
Amount Percent
Wetland Restoration/
Creation $132,410,000 $110,670,000 ($21,740,000) (16.4%) Reserve Management
and Maintenance $156,640,000 $156,590,000 ($50,000) (0.0%) Monitoring, Research, and
Scientific Review $40,420,000 $40,550,000 $130,000 0.3% Western Burrowing Owl
Conservation Strategy $11,790,000 $11,930,000 $140,000 1.2% Land Acquisition &
Enrollment $243,400,000 $243,400,000 $0 0.0%
Program Administration $30,440,000 $30,440,000 $0 0.0%
Technical and Permitting
Support $22,700,000 $22,700,000 $0 0.0%
Contingency Fund $16,700,000 $16,340,000 ($360,000) (2.2%) Subtotal $654,500,000 $632,620,000 ($21,880,000) (3.3%) Endowment Fund
Contribution $71,520,000 $70,150,000 ($1,370,000) (1.9%) Plan Preparation Cost
Recovery $5,040,000 $5,040,000 $0 0.0%
Total $731,060,000 $707,810,000 ($23,250,000) (3.2%)
Note: All dollar amounts in FY 2017-18 dollars.
Sources: Urban Economics, Five-Year Review of the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Costs, Funding & Development Fees, June 2020, Table 2.1, p. 10; Appendix P2, Table 9-1.
The primary changes to Chapter 10 include:
• Updates to climate change and temperature data
• No other significant revisions
The primary changes to Chapter 11 include:
• Updates to include alternatives to take for new covered species • No other significant revisions
HABITAT PLAN AMENDMENT COMPLETION SCHEDULE:
As mentioned above, the Plan amendment is funded by two USFWS Section 6 grants, administered by CDFW. The final grant deliverable for this Plan amendment is a completed draft of the Amended Habitat Plan, including environmental clearances and approval by the Habitat Agency Implementation Board. The grant deadline for funding is January 27, 2026. This means the full Amended Habitat Plan must be approved by the Implementation Board at the January 2026 meeting.
Gilroy City Council
Agenda: November 17, 2025
20 The schedule below shows the remaining milestones to finalize the Plan amendment process. Once approved by the Implementation Board, the final draft Amended Habitat Plan must be sent to the wildlife agencies for their review of all changes. Their legal counsel must review and accept the document, and findings for the new species and changes to Plan scope must be made. This period of their review may take many months to complete and may require subsequent changes. 2025 2026
TASK Jul Aug Sep Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar
Complete Administrative
Draft of Plan
Share Admin Draft Plan with
SCVHA Board
CEQA and NEPA Process
Public Draft Amended Plan
to PAC
Public Draft Amended Plan
to SCVHA Board for
Approval
Submit USFWS 10(a)1(b)
Permit
USFWS and CDFW Review
of Amended Permit
ACTION:
The Habitat Agency requests that the Gilroy City Council approve pursuit of the Plan amendment as presented and authorize the Habitat Agency Implementation and Governing Boards to approve a final Plan Amendment upon completion of environmental review.
Following approval of the Plan amendment in January, the grant funding will expire, and minor administrative processing of the revised Plan being approved by the wildlife agencies and returning to the Joint Board for final adoption would be borne by the Habitat Agency. This cost is not expected to exceed $40,000 and would consist primarily of staff time to process.
SANTA CLARA VALLEY HABITAT PLAN
MEMORANDUM OF UNDERSTANDING
This Memorandum of Understanding ("MOD") is entered into by and among the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency ("Agency"), the County of Santa Clara (the "County"), the City of San Jose ("San Jose"), the Santa Clara Valley Water District ("SCVWD"), the Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority ("VTA"), the City of Gilroy ("Gilroy"), the City of Morgan Hill ("Morgan Hill"), and the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority ("OSA"). The parties may be referred to collectively as the "Parties" and individually as a "Party" in this MOD. The County, San Jose, SCVWD, VTA, Gilroy and Morgan Hill are collectively referred to as "Local Partners."
RECITALS
The Local Partners have been engaged in a lengthy process to develop a joint habitat conservation plan and natural communities conservation plan entitled the "Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan" ("Habitat Plan").
1"^ The purposes of the Habitat Plan include the long-term protection of ecosystems and biodiversity within the geographic area covered by the Habitat Plan, and the provision of incidental take authorization pursuant to the Federal Endangered Species Act and the California Natural Community Conservation Planning Act for local land use and public agency infrastructure activities.
The Habitat Plan and the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan Implementing Agreement ("Implementing Agreement") identify certain duties and obligations that must be fulfilled, in whole or in part, by an "Implementing Entity."
D. The Local Partners determined that it was appropriate to establish a joint powers agency to serve as the Implementing Entity for the Habitat Plan. The Joint Powers Act, Gov. Code § 6500 et seq., requires that all parties to a joint powers agreement have common powers.
One of the primary functions of the joint powers agency is to adopt mitigation fees for development projects pursuant to the Mitigation Fee Act, Government Code § 66000 et seq., to help finance Habitat Plan implementation activities. Because only certain of the Local Partners (the County, San Jose, Morgan Hill and Gilroy) have clear authority to adopt mitigation fees, the Local Partners determined that the parties to the joint exercise of powers agreement ("Agency Agreement") creating the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency would be limited to the County, San Jose, Morgan Hill and Gilroy. Nonetheless, because the Implementing Agreement and the Permits associated with the Habitat Plan provide that all Local Partners are responsible for ensuring that the Habitat Plan is fully implemented, all of the Local Partners will play a role in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Agency.
The OSA will also play a critical role in Habitat Plan implementation, including potential contributions of land to the Habitat Plan Reserve System and/or potentially undertake management and monitoring, and/or provide other services related to implementation of the Habitat Plan.
NOW, THEREFORE, the Parties, for and in consideration of the mutual promises and agreements herein contained, agree as follows:
PURPOSES
The purposes of this MOD are to:
Further define the roles, rights and responsibilities of the Parties with respect to Habitat Plan implementation activities;
Explain the relationships between the Parties;
Establish processes for resolving disputes and addressing other issues that may arise with respect to the Habitat Plan;
EFFECTIVE DATE
The following conditions must occur before this MOU will go into effect: 1) the Implementing Agreement must be fully executed; and 2) all parties must execute this MOU. The effective date of this MOU will occur at the date when both of the above mentioned conditions have been fulfilled.
3 • DEFINITIONS
Unless the context otherwise requires, the terms used in this MOU shall have the same definitions as provided in the Implementing Agreement.
LOCAL PARTNER AND AGENCY ROLES
All of the Local Partners are Permittees and parties to the Implementing Agreement.
Therefore, all of the Local Partners must ensure that they comply with the Habitat Plan and Permits. However, although each Local Partner must ensure that its own actions comply with the Plan and Permits, the primary responsibilities for implementing the Habitat Plan rests with the Agency. Among other things, the Agency is responsible for ensuring that there is sufficient funding to perform all implementation activities, including activities during the permit term and in perpetuity. Except for paying SCVHP Fees associated with their own projects and, where applicable, collecting SCVHP Fees from private project applicants and transmitting SCVHP Fees to the Agency, the Local Partners are not required to fund implementation activities. These roles and responsibilities are more fully described in Chapter 8 of the Habitat Plan.
(a)
(b) Although VTA and SCVWD are not parties to the Agency Agreement, all of the Local Partners will play an active role in the Agency through, among other things, their representatives on the Implementation Board of the Agency. The fact that VTA and SCVWD are not parties to the Agency Agreement should not be viewed in any way as diminishing their rights and responsibilities established in the Habitat Plan or Permits.
5. OSA ROLE
(a) Although OSA is not a Permittee, the Parties anticipate that OSA may contribute land and potentially other resources that will assist with fulfilling Habitat Plan implementation responsibilities. Exhibit , which is attached hereto and incorporated by reference herein, are the "Principles of Participation in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan" that were adopted by the OSA Board on September 9, 2010.
(b) While the OSA is not a Permittee under the Habitat Plan, the OSA has the option to apply for take authorization under the Plan as a Participating Special Entity. To receive this take authorization, the OSA would follow the procedures outlined in the Habitat Plan, including approval by the Implementing Entity and the Wildlife Agencies. To anticipate this, the estimated impacts of OSA activities on the covered species will be included in the Plan. Any Habitat Plan fees due would be offset by an equivalent value of OSA land being concurrently incorporated into the Habitat Plan Reserve System.
6. COMPENSATION FOR LOCAL PARTNER CONTRIBUTIONS TO IMPLEMENTATION
REQUIREMENTS
The Local Partners may contribute land, provide services, or undertake other activities (e.g., habitat creation, restoration, monitoring) that fulfill Habitat Plan implementation requirements. The process by which the Agency will evaluate the value of these contributions and give credit to the Local Partners for these "in lieu" activities is set forth in Section 9.4.1 of the Habitat Plan.
IMPLEMENTATION FUNDING SHORTFALLS
(a) Although the Local Partners believe that the cost and funding assumptions in the Habitat Plan are sound, there is always the possibility that there will be funding shortfalls and/or that the costs of implementing the Habitat Plan exceed expectations. As set forth in the Habitat Plan and Implementing Agreement, the Agency is responsible for implementation and any funding shortfalls, and for ensuring that SCVHP fees keep pace with Habitat Plan implementation costs.
Except for SCVHP fees associated with their own Covered Activities, the Local Partners are not required to contribute any of their funds toward Habitat Plan implementation.
(b) If there is a funding shortfall, the Agency will take all feasible steps to address the funding shortfall, including but not limited to seeking loans from all possible sources. (c) If, despite all reasonable efforts, the Agency is unable to address a funding shortfall, the Local Partners will meet and confer regarding how to proceed. Options that may be considered include, but are not limited to, loans from one or more Local Partners to the Agency, grants from Local Partners, government agencies or nongovernmental entities, relinquishing the permits, and/or amending the Habitat Plan and Permits.
(d) No Local Partner shall be required to provide funding to the Agency. If a Local Partner, in the sole discretion of its governing body, agrees to provide funding to the Agency, it may do so on the condition that the Agency either provide the Local Partner with credit toward future SCVHP Fees or repay the loan at a future date.
8. HABITAT PLAN/PERMIT AMENDMENTS
(a) There are a variety of reasons why the Local Partners may want or need to amend the Habitat Plan and Permits over the 50-year term, including but not limited to the following;
to add or remove Covered Species;
to expand or retract the Permit Area boundaries;
to add a Permittee;
to address a significant funding shortfall that cannot be addressed through any feasible means;
to reflect significant changes in Habitat Plan assumptions (e.g., the amount or timing of "Take"); or
to provide for additional Covered Activities.
(b) If the Agency or one or more of the Local Partners desires to amend the Habitat Plan and/or Permits, then that Local Partner shall notify the Agency and all of the other Local Partners of this desire and provide an explanation of the proposed amendment and reasons for the amendment.
(c) Upon being notified by the Agency or a Local Partner of a request to amend the Habitat Plan and Permits, the Agency and all Local Partners will meet and confer regarding whether to proceed with the proposed amendment. (d) The costs associated with any amendment to the Habitat Plan and Permits (including but not limited to preparation, analysis and approval of the amendment documents and implementation responsibilities resulting from the amendment) shall be borne by the Local Partners in a manner that reflects the relative benefit of the amendment to each Local Partner. A cost allocation shall be mutually agreed upon by the Local Partners before any costs are incurred in relation to the amendment.
Any Local Partner that commences work on an amendment prior to this proceeds at its own risk.
(e) Any decision to seek an amendment to the Habitat Plan and Permits, and the cost allocation associated with the amendment, shall be approved by the governing bodies of all of the Local Partners before any work is begun or any costs are incurred in relation to the amendment. Any Local Partner that commences work on an amendment prior to this proceeds at its own risk.
WITHDRAWAL
(a) If a Local Partner decides to withdraw from the Implementing Agreement and relinquish its Permits, it shall first provide 180 days written notice to the Agency, the other Local Partners and the OSA. Notwithstanding such withdrawal, the withdrawing Local Partner shall remain obligated, to the same extent, if any, that the remaining Parties are obligated, to contribute amounts necessary to pay any debts, liabilities and obligations of the Agency arising from or related to actions taken by the Agency while the withdrawing Party was a party to the Implementing Agreement.
Upon withdrawal, the withdrawing Party shall no longer be a Party to this MOU or a Local Partner, and the term "Parties" and "Local Partners" as used in this MOU shall thereafter mean the remaining Parties and Local Partners to this MOU.
(b) The OSA may withdraw from the MOD upon ninety (90) days written notice to the Agency and the Local Partners. Upon withdrawal, the OSA shall no longer be a Party to this MOU, and the term "Parties" as used in this MOU shall thereafter mean the remaining Parties and Local Partners to this MOU.
(c) Within 30 days after receiving a notice of withdrawal, the Parties who will remain will meet to discuss whether any amendments to the Habitat Plan, Permits or Implementing Agreement are necessary or appropriate in light of the withdrawal, and to prepare any appropriate amendments for consideration by the governing bodies of the remaining Parties. The requirements of this provision are intended to be in addition to any notice or other requirements set forth in the Implementing Agreement or Permits pertaining to withdrawal from or termination of the Habitat Plan or Permits.
10. TERMINATION BY ALL LOCAL PARTNERS
If the governing bodies of all or some of the Local Partners agree to relinquish the Permits and terminate the Implementing Agreement, then the Agency and Local Partners will undertake a process to discuss and resolve the following issues:
Calculating and funding the amounts necessary to pay any debts, liabilities and obligations of the Agency arising from or related to actions taken by the Agency while the Permits and Implementing Agreement were in effect, including but not limited to funding any endowment necessary for ongoing obligations related to Reserve System lands; and
Identifying one or more successor(s) to fulfill the continuing obligations of the Agency.
The dispute resolution process in Section 15 of this MOU may be used for this purpose.
11. REMEDIES FOR HABITAT PLAN/PERMIT/IMPLEMENTATION AGREEMENT
VIOLATIONS
(a) Although the Wildlife Agencies will issue separate permits to the Agency and Local Partners, the obligations imposed by the Habitat Plan, Implementation Agreement and Permits operate collectively. Therefore, if the Agency or a Local Partner violates the Habitat Plan, Implementation Agreement or Permits in a way that puts the overall Habitat Plan or Permits at risk or subjects the Agency and/or Local Partners to an enforcement action, then the other Parties may take any and all commensurate and reasonable action against the violating Party to remedy the noncompliance, including but not limited to filing a lawsuit seeking injunctive relief or specific performance.
(b) The Parties shall engage in the dispute resolution process set forth in Section 15 of this MOU prior to filing a lawsuit for an alleged violation. The dispute resolution process is not required, however, if there is a threat of imminent harm to any Party or if the Wildlife Agencies have notified the Parties of their intent to suspend the Permits or undertake other enforcement action.
12. INDEMNIFICATION AND INSURANCE
(a) Except as provided in Section 14(c) of this MOU, the Agency shall indemnify, defend and hold harmless all of the Local Partners and the OSA and their officers,
agents, and employees from any claim, liability, loss, injury or damage arising out of, or in connection with, the adoption, execution, performance or implementation of the Habitat Plan, the EIR/EIS, the Permits, the Implementing Agreement, the Agency Agreement or this MOU provided, however, that this obligation by the Agency shall not apply to; (1) reckless, intentional, or willful conduct leading to personal injury, or (2) any claims, demands, damages, costs, expenses or suits by one party to this MOU against one or more other parties relating to an alleged breach of either agreement. The Agency shall reimburse the Local Partner(s) and the OSA for all reasonable costs, attorneys' fees, expenses and liabilities incurred with respect to any litigation or action in which the Agency is obligated to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Local Partner(s) and the OSA under this MOU. Any indemnified party may elect to provide its own defense at that party's own expense. (b) It is the intent of the Parties that the provisions of this Section 12 provide the broadest possible coverage for the Local Partners. The Agency shall obtain and maintain insurance to provide sufficient coverage to fulfill its obligations under this Section.
(c) Each Local Partner shall require that any consultant hired to implement this MOU obtain and maintain insurance policies to provide sufficient coverage to fulfill its obligations under this Section.
(d) If any claim, liability, loss, injury or damage for which the Agency is obligated to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Local Partner(s) and the OSA pursuant to this Section 12 is filed or incurred before the Agency is formed, has sufficient revenues or obtains sufficient insurance to fulfill its obligations under this Section 12, then the Local Partner(s) may bear their own their reasonable costs, attorneys' fees, expenses and liabilities incurred with respect to any litigation or action in which the Agency is obligated to indemnify, defend and hold harmless the Local Partner(s) and the OSA under this Section 12 and recover them from the Agency at a future date, and the Agency shall not raise any defenses related to the timeliness of such a claim for recovery (e.g., statute of limitations, laches) against the Local Partner(s) or the OSA.
13. AGENCY FAILURE/INABILITY TO PERFORM
(a) If, for any reason, the Agency is unable or unwilling to perform its implementation duties, then the Local Partners will meet and confer regarding how to proceed.
Options that may be considered include, but are not limited to, recommending that the parties to the Implementing Agreement dissolve the Agency and that the Local Partners establish a new implementing entity or reallocate Habitat Plan implementation obligations.
(b) If a particular Local Partner or its representatives to the Governing Board or Implementation Board are preventing the Agency from fulfilling its duties, then the other Local Partners shall notify the governing body of the Local Partner that is preventing the Agency from fulfilling its duties and request that the governing body promptly address the situation. If the situation is not resolved within 60 days, the other Local Partners may seek judicial relief, including but not limited to requesting that the court reform the Implementing Agreement without the consent of the Local Partner that is preventing the Agency from fulfilling its duties.
14. COMPENSATION FOR SERVICES/ACTIVITIES PROVIDED TO AGENCY (a) Due to the necessity and desire to keep Habitat Plan implementation costs as low as possible, the Agency may contract for many goods and services. In procuring goods and services, the Agency will utilize a selection process that is fair, objective and impartial, and is intended to result in the selection of a provider that provides the best value and meets the needs of the Agency. The Parties acknowledge that they are not entitled to any rights or preferences in the Agency's selection process.
If a Party believes that it has been treated unfairly during any Agency selection process, it may invoke the dispute resolution process set forth in Section 15 of this MOU.
(b) If a Party provides services to the Agency, it may negotiate with the Agency to be compensated with cash or credits toward SCVHP Fees. The form of compensation may be a factor that the Agency considers during its selection process. (c) If a Party contracts with the Agency to provide land, services or perform other activities on behalf of the Agency, then any indemnity and defense responsibilities related to that arrangement shall be addressed in the agreement for the particular goods and services, and the indemnification and defense provisions in Section 12 of this MOU shall not apply.
15. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCESS
In addition to the other provisions of this MOU that require the Parties to engage in the dispute resolution process in this Section, any Party may request that the Parties voluntarily engage in the dispute resolution process set forth in this Section at any time and for any reason related to the Habitat Plan, Permits, Implementing Agreement or any matters related thereto. The intent of this provision is to provide an informal dispute resolution measure which is alternative to a court action.
(a) Informal Negotiations Before Mediation. Any negotiations the Parties may undertake to resolve disputes before Mediation is initiated are for settlement purposes only and are not binding. Any Party may notify any other Party of a disagreement or dispute regarding provisions of the Habitat Plan, Permits, Implementing Agreement or any matters related thereto. That notifying Party shall first request discussion among all the Parties. The dispute may be informally resolved by consensus of the Parties.
Only after proceeding through such an informal dispute resolution process described in this Section may a Party seek mediation as described in Section 15 (b). (b) Mediation.
(i) Non-Binding Nature of Mediation. If any dispute or issue related is not resolved through informal negotiations, the Parties agree to attempt to resolve the matter through mediation. Any mediation is voluntary, nonbinding, and intended to provide an opportunity for the Parties to arrive at a mutually agreeable solution.
(ii) Initiation of Mediation. Any Party may initiate mediation for any dispute or issue related to this MOU by submitting a written request for mediation to the other Parties involved in the dispute. The request for mediation shall contain a brief statement of the nature of the dispute or claim, and the names, addresses, and telephone numbers of those who will represent the Party submitting the request for mediation.
(iii) Selection of Mediator. Within 14 days of receiving a request for mediation, the involved Parties shall meet and confer to select a mediator agreeable to the Parties. Any mediator selected shall have expertise in the area of the dispute and be knowledgeable about the mediation process. No person shall serve as a mediator in any dispute in which that person has any financial or personal interest in the result of the mediation.
Before accepting an appointment as mediator, the prospective mediator shall be required to disclose all circumstances likely to create a perception of bias or prevent a prompt meeting with the Parties. Upon receipt of such information, the Parties will meet and confer and decide whether to select another mediator.
(iv) Representation During Mediation. The Parties may be represented by persons of their choice, who shall have full authority to negotiate on behalf of the Party they represent. The names, addresses, and telephone numbers of such representatives shall be communicated in writing to all Parties and the mediator.
(v) Time and Place of Mediation. The Mediator shall set the time of each mediation session. The mediation shall be held at any convenient location within Santa Clara County that is agreeable to the mediator and the involved Parties. All reasonable efforts will be made by the Parties and the mediator to schedule the first session within thirty (30) days after selection of the mediator.
(vi) Identification of Matters in Dispute. At least 10 days before the first scheduled mediation session, each involved Party shall provide the mediator with a brief memorandum not longer than 10 pages setting forth its position with regard to the issues that need to be resolved. At the mediator's discretion, the memoranda may be mutually exchanged by the Parties. (vii) Authoritv of Mediator. The mediator shall not have authority to impose a settlement on the Parties, but will attempt to assist the Parties in reaching a satisfactory resolution of their dispute. The mediator is authorized to conduct joint and separate meetings with the Parties and to make oral and written recommendations for settlement. Whenever necessary, the mediator may also obtain expert advice concerning technical aspects of the dispute, provided the involved Parties agree and assume the expenses of obtaining such advice. Arrangements for obtaining such advice shall be made by the mediator or the Parties, as determined by the mediator. (viii) Privacv. Mediation sessions are private. The Parties and their representatives may attend mediation sessions. Other persons may attend only with the permission of the Parties and consent of the mediator. (ix) Confidentiality. Confidential information disclosed to a mediator by the Parties or by witnesses in the course of mediation shall not be divulged by the mediator or the Parties. All records, reports, and other documents and information produced during mediation shall be confidential. The mediator shall not be compelled to divulge such records or to testify in regard to the mediation in any adversary proceeding or a judicial forum. The Parties shall maintain the confidentiality of the mediation and shall not rely on, or
introduce as evidence in any arbitration, judicial or other proceedings any of the following: (a) views expressed or suggestions made by the other Party with respect to a possible settlement of the dispute; (b) statements made by the other party in the course of the mediation proceedings; (c) proposals made or views expressed by the mediator; or (d) whether the other Party had or had not indicated willingness to accept a proposal for settlement made by the mediator.
(x) No Record of Proceedings. There shall be no stenographic or other record of the mediation proceedings.
(xi) Termination of Mediation. The mediation may be terminated in any of the following ways; (a) by the execution of a settlement agreement by the Parties; (b) by a written declaration of the mediator to the effect that further efforts at mediation are no longer worthwhile; or (c) by a written declaration of any Party to the mediation that it is terminating the mediation proceedings. (xii) Interpretation and Application of These Mediation Provisions. The mediator shall interpret and apply these mediation provisions insofar as they relate to the mediator's duties and responsibilities.
(xiii) Expenses. The expenses of witnesses for each Party shall be borne by the Party producing the witnesses. All other expenses of the mediation, including required travel and other expenses of the mediator, the expenses of any witness called by the mediator, and the cost of any proofs or expert advice produced at the direct request of the mediator, shall be the sole responsibility of the Agency.
16. TERMOFMOU
This MOU shall remain in effect until it is terminated by mutual agreement of the Parties.
17. AMENDMENT OF MOU
This MOU may be amended only by written agreement executed by all of the Parties.
18. POST-PERMIT ISSUES
The Parties anticipate that the Agency will be dissolved at the end of the 50-year Permit term and that one or more successor entities will need to be identified to fulfill the implementation responsibilities that will continue in perpetuity. In light of this, the Parties agree as follows:
By no later than the beginning of year 45 of the Permit term, the Parties will begin the process of identifying all implementation responsibilities that will continue beyond the 50-year Permit term and related funding requirements (e.g., endowment for continuing obligations related to Reserve System lands); By no later than the end of year 48, the Parties will have identified one or more successor entities to fulfill the implementation responsibilities beyond the 50-year Permit term and a transition plan will have been completed; and
By no later than the end of year 49, agreements with the successor entity(ies) will be in place and implementation of the transition plan will have begun.
19. REMEDIES FOR BREACH
If a Party shall default on any obligation contained in this MOD, such default shall not excuse any Local Partner from fulfilling its respective obligations under this MOD. Any Party shall be entitled to pursue any and all legal and equitable remedies against any other Party in response to any alleged default under this MOU. Any and all of the remedies provided to the Parties hereunder or by any law now or hereafter enacted are cumulative and the exercise of one right or remedy shall not impair the right of the Parties to any or all other remedies.
20. SEVERABILITY
If any court determines that a part, term, or provision of this MOU is illegal or in conflict with any law of the State of California, or otherwise be rendered unenforceable or ineffectual, the validity of the remaining parts, terms or provisions hereof shall not be affected by that determination.
21. SUCCESSORS; ASSIGNMENT
This MOU shall be binding upon and shall inure to the benefit of the successors of the Parties. No Party may assign any right or obligation hereunder without the consent of the other Parties.
22. NOTICES
Notices to the Parties shall be sufficient if delivered as follows; County of Santa Clara
County Executive
70 W. Hedding Street, 11lh Floor, E. Wing
San Jose, OA 95110
City of San Jose
City Manager
200 East Santa Clara St.
San Jose, CA 95113
City of Gilrov
City Administrator
7351 Rosanna St.
Gilroy, CA 95020
City of Morgan Hill
City Manager
17575 Peak Avenue
Morgan Hill. CA 95037
Santa Clara Valley Water District
Chief Executive Officer
5700 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
Santa Clara Valley Transportation Authority
General Manager
3331 North First St.
Building B. Second Floor
San Jose, CA 95134
Santa Clara County Open Space Authority
General Manager
6980 Santa Teresa Boulevard, Suite 100
San Jose, CA 95119
With a copy to:
County Counsel
County of Santa Clara
70 W. Hedding St., 9th Floor, E. Wing
San Jose, CA 95110
San Jose City Attorney
City of San Jose
200 East Santa Clara St.
San Jose, CA 95113
Gilroy City Attorney
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna St.
Gilroy, CA 95020
Morgan Hill City Attorney
City of Morgan Hill
17575 Peak Avenue
Morgan Hill, CA 95037
District Counsel
Santa Clara Valley Water District
5700 Almaden Expressway
San Jose, CA 95118
General Counsel
Santa Clara Valley Valley Transportation Authority
3331 North First St.
San Jose, CA 95134
Open Space Authority Legal Counsel
Wittwer & Parkin, LLP
147 S. River St.. Suite 221
Santa Cruz, CA 95060
23. SECTION HEADINGS
All Section headings contained herein are for reference only and are not intended to define or limit the scope of any provision of this MOD.
24. COUNTERPARTS
This MOU may be executed in counterparts and so executed shall constitute one MOD which shall be binding upon all Parties. A photocopy of the fully executed MOU shall have the same force and effect as the original.
25. SIGNATURES
By affixing his/her signature below, each of the persons signing this MOD warrants and represents that he/she has read and understands the MOD, that he/she is authorized to sign this MOU, and that the Party on behalf of whom he/she signs agrees to be bound by its terms.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
By; Date: ifXjil
Jeffrey V. S
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
County Counsel
Orr/ P . |^-o rlo y A ,
By:
Lizanne^R
ounty Executive
1 Date; (3
eynolds ounty Counsel
t)e|7u.^y
CITY OF SAN JOSE
By; Date;
Debra Figone, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
Richard Doyle, City Attorney
By; Date;
Vera Todorov, Senior Deputy City Attorney
CITY OF GILROY
By; Date;
Thomas J. Haglund, City Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
By: Date:
Linda Callon, City Attorney
CITY OF MORGAN HILL
By; Date;
J. Edward Tewes, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
By; Date;
Danny Wan, City Attorney
25. SIGNATURES
By affixing his/her signature below, each of the persons signing this MOU warrants and represents that he/she has read and understands the MOU, that he/she is authorized to sign this MOU, and that the Party on behalf of whom he/she signs agrees to be bound by its terms.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
By; Date:
Jeffrey V. Smith, County Executive
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lori E. Pegg, Acting County Counsel
By: Date:
Lizanne Reynolds, Acting County Counsel
CITY ;AN JOSE
V/
Date: ////?
£•* -1
Debra Figone, Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Do- Attorn'
Date: ^ llfU By: i)^
Vera Todorov, Senior Deputy City Attorney
CITY OF GILROY
By: Date:
Thomas J. Haglund, City Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Linda Callon, City Attorney
CITY OF MORGAN HILL
By: Date:
J. Edward Tewes, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Danny Wan, City Attorney
25. SIGNATURES
By affixing his/her signature below, each of the persons signing this MOU warrants and represents that he/she has read and understands the MOU, that he/she is authorized to sign this MOU, and that the Party on behalf of whom he/she signs agrees to be bound by its terms.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
By: Date;
Jeffrey V. Smith, County Executive
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Lori E. Pegg, Acting County Counsel
By: Date:
Lizanne Reynolds, Acting County Counsel
CITY OF SAN JOSE
By: Date:
Debra Figone, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Richard Doyle, City Attorney
By: Date:
Vera Todorov, Senior Deputy City Attorney
c £ OY
By: Date:
Thomas J. Haglund, City Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Linda Callon, City Attorney
CITY OF MORGAN HILL
By: Date:
J. Edward Tewes, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Danny Wan, City Attorney
Item IX.A.
25. SIGNATURES
By affixing his/her signature below, each of the persons signing this MOD warrants and represents that he/she has read and understands the MOD, that he/she is authorized to sign this MOD, and that the Party on behalf of whom he/she signs agrees to be bound by its terms.
COUNTY OF SANTA CLARA
By: Date;
Jeffrey V. Smith, County Executive
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
Lori E. Pegg, Acting County Counsel
By; Date;
Lizanne Reynolds, Acting County Counsel
CITY OF SAN JOSE
By; Date;
Debra Figone, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
Richard Doyle, City Attorney
By; Date;
Vera Todorov, Senior Deputy City Attorney
CITY OF GILROY
By; Date;
Thomas J. Haglund, City Administrator
APPROVED AS TO FORM;
By; Date;
Linda Callon, City Attorney
CITY OF HILL
By; Date; 'jVL
Steve Kymer, City Manager
APPR S TO FORM;
By; Date;
Renee Gurza, City Attorney
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By: Date:
BeauGoTdi ief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stanly Yamamoto. District Qouosi
* V
By: Date: zy/j
/
, ^-^dwarcTErYates. Senior Assistant District Counse
"x
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
By: Date:
Michael T. Burns, General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Robert Fabeia, General Counsel
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY
By: Date:
Andrea Mackenzie, General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
William P. Parkin, Legal Counsel
SANTA CI^ARA VALLEY HABITAT AGENCY
By: ) UL-CKA Date: "S
APPROVED AS FORM:
\
By: Date: SMI>/3
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By: Date;
Beau Goldie, Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Stanly Yamamoto, District Counsel
SANTA CLARA, VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
By: Date: //
Michael T. Burns, Qeneral Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
a, General Counsel
C jS' By: Date: ^ 11 13
Robfert Fa
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY
By: Date:
Andrea Mackenzie, General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
William P. Parkin, Legal Counsel
SANTA CLARA VALLEY HABITAT AGENCY
By: Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
SANTA CLARA VALLEY WATER DISTRICT
By; Date:
Beau Goidie, Chief Executive Officer
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Stanly Yamamoto, District Counsel
By: Date:
Edward E. Yates, Senior Assistant District Counsel
SANTA CLARA VALLEY TRANSPORTATION AUTHORITY
By: Date:
Michael T. Burns, General Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Robert Fabela, General Counsel
SANTA CLARA COUNTY OPEN SPACE AUTHORITY
Andrea Mackenzie, General MaQ^ger
By: Date: jV/T/ZS
'
APPRO/VElJlAS TO FORM:
By: Date: Hh/iz
iHjam P. Parkin, Legal Counsel
SANTA CLARA VALLEY HABITAT AGENCY
By: Date:
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
By: Date:
Santa Clara County Open Space Authority
Principles of Participation
in the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan
These principles are to be used later for a side agreement between the Santa Clara County Open Space Authority (OSA) and the Santa Clara Valley Habitat Plan (Habitat Plan, or Plan) Implementing Entity, once the Entity is established:
1) The OSA states its willingness to cooperate and partner with the Habitat Plan Implementing Entity to help implement the Plan successfully. The OSA recognizes that acquisition of habitat is consistent with its mission as an open space agency. 2) The OSA is not a permittee under the Habitat Plan. However, the OSA has the option to apply for take authorization under the Plan as a Participating Special Entity. To receive this take authorization, the OSA would follow the procedures outlined in the Habitat Plan, including approval by the Implementing Entity and the Wildlife Agencies. To anticipate this, the estimated impacts of OSA activities on the covered species will be included in the Plan. Any Habitat Plan fees due would be offset by the value of land acquired by the OSA to date and incorporated into the Habitat Plan Reserve System. 3) The OSA has no specific funding commitment towards the Habitat Plan. However, the OSA commits to working with the Habitat Plan Implementing Entity for the duration of the permit to pursue joint land acquisition that is mutually beneficial to each agency on a caseby-case basis and help the Implementing Entity meet its local land acquisition commitments in cooperation with other local agencies, non-profit organizations, and foundations. The OSA intends to leverage its funds to acquire an estimated 5,000 acres for inclusion in the Reserve System, and will make efforts to acquire an additional 2,500 acres for the Reserve System, if feasible. Roles for the OSA in land acquisition may include cooperating on land management issues, brokering a land purchase but not owning it, contributing lands to a Habitat Plan acquisition and owning the land, or owning and managing land acquired by the Implementing Entity in exchange for management funding. The OSA's acquisitions and funding that is ultimately committed to the Habitat Plan are not to be used for mitigation, but are to be allocated instead to species recovery and conservation on an ecosystem-wide basis under the Natural Community Conservation Plan (NCCP) portion of the Habitat Plan. 4) Any lands that the OSA acquires in partnership with the Implementing Entity would meet the requirements of the Habitat Plan including a conservation easement and incorporation into a reserve unit management plan. The conservation easement would require management in perpetuity by the Implementing Entity consistent with the Habitat Plan and allow for compatible public access such as unpaved multi-use trails. The OSA does not expect to be directly reimbursed for the cost of land acquisition or conservation easement dedication for land that it continues to own; the OSA's evaluation of projects on a case-bycase basis allows the OSA to consider the financial benefits the OSA will receive through grant funding under the Plan and funding for management before granting a conservation easement.
Principals of Participation | Approved by the Board: September 9, 2010 | Amendment Approved: September 8, 2011
City of Gilroy
STAFF REPORT
Agenda Item Title: Award Two Opioid Remediation Grants, not-to-exceed $118,675 to Carry the Vision and $118,676 to Youth Alliance, for Opioid Remediation Services; Adopt a Resolution
Amending the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget in the Opioid
Settlement Fund by $237,352; and Authorize the City
Administrator to Negotiate and Execute Final Grant
Agreements
Meeting Date: November 17, 2025
From: Brad Kilger, Interim City Administrator
Department: Administration
Submitted by: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator Prepared by: Bryce Atkins, Assistant to the City Administrator STRATEGIC PLAN GOALS: Not Applicable
RECOMMENDATION
Council:
1. Award two opioid remediation grants, reimbursement-based and not to exceed $118,675 to Carry the Vision and $118,676 to Youth Alliance, for opioid remediation services;
2. Adopt a resolution amending the Fiscal Year 2026 Budget in the Opioid Settlement Fund by $237,352; and
3. Authorize the City Administrator to negotiate and execute final grant agreements.
BACKGROUND
In response to the national lawsuits and bankruptcies surrounding the production and distribution of opioids, such as Fentanyl, for example, nationwide settlement and bankruptcy agreements were created as part of those processes, and cities and counties throughout the nation were able to sign on to the agreements to receive some
of those funds. The City of Gilroy signed onto those agreements and now accepts payments from the administrators overseeing those settlements.
The individual payments are small, ranging from just a few thousand dollars to approximately $42,000, the most significant amount, although these large amounts are rare. In the budget process, staff do not project payments from these agreements, as the amounts are not known in advance and can vary significantly regarding the amount and timing of the payments.
The use of settlement funds is required to meet conditions in the settlement agreements and is regulated by the State of California and the appointed Trust Administrator. There are several categories of uses, but many of the services described in them are not commonly present in Gilroy. Opioid remediation and prevention is not a program offered by the City, and the City is neither equipped to create such a program nor knows if it would be viable.
The only expenditure against these funds was a purchase of naloxone (also known as Narcan) for distribution to Police and Public Works staff in case they encounter someone in the public experiencing an overdose condition. Aside from that purchase, there has not been any additional use of these funds. The fund currently has a fund balance of $237,352.12.
Staff had received an inquiry and an unsolicited proposal from a local organization seeking to use the funds. However, the City's purchasing policy requires competitive procurement. Without specific programming and knowledge of the available vendors and programs in the area, staff requested, and the Council approved, the issuance of an exploratory request for proposals (RFP). The exploratory RFP was an open solicitation process for vendors who believe their services align with the intent of the funding being made available, without limiting proposals to a specific program or service.
ANALYSIS
As presented to the Council at the September 8, 2025, regular meeting, the evaluation of proposals was first vetted by City staff to ensure they meet the funding requirements and to offer a recommendation for grant awards. Those proposals that meet the requirements would then be presented to the Council, which would determine which awards are made.
The City received six proposals, which are attached to this staff report and discussed briefly below, and all meet the intent of the funds.
Proposals Received
The City received the following proposals, listed in order from highest to lowest average screening score. Although staff are presenting the amounts for each proposal, the basis of the staff's recommendation was on the services being provided, matched to the funding requirements, and suitable to the community, rather than the lowest cost.
Organization Evaluation
Average Score
Proposal
Amount
Carry the Vision 81 $118,675
Youth Alliance 81 $118,676
End Overdose 79 $72,238
Catholic Charities 77 $129,330
Sunday Friends Foundation 63 $73,889
Bay Area Community
Health 56 $125,000
Each of these proposals accomplishes a different assortment of services. Below is a rough identification of services being proposed by each organization. The breakdown is rough due to differences in descriptions of the various programs in each proposal:
Firm
Naloxone
Distribution/
Overdose
Prevention
Education/
Prevention
MedicationAssisted
Treatment
WarmHandoff/
Recovery
Services
Syringe
Services
OUD
Treatment/
Support
those in
treatment
Diversion
Program
Programs
Offered
Bay Area
Community
Health
X X X X X 5
Youth Alliance X X X X X 5
Carry the
Vision X X X X 4
Sunday
Friends
Foundation
X X 2
Catholic
Charities X 1
End Overdose X 1
Special Considerations
There are a few considerations that played in the screening scores as well as staff's recommendation:
• Bay Area Community Health. While matching Youth Alliance for the largest number of programs offered, including medication-assisted treatment for opioid abuse, the proposal identified that participants are selected based on their existing status as patients or those receiving referrals from other medical professionals and specific sources. A general resident could not participate in their programs. This limits the utility of their programs in addressing the community-wide needs of residents who require support.
• End Overdose. End Overdose had a quality proposal, but the service delivery is dependent upon finding partners to deliver the program. The organization is based in Southern California, and there is a risk that insufficient partnerships will be
created to deliver their train-the-trainer model of service delivery. • Sunday Friends Foundation. The proposal requires city staff participation, namely, community service officers for certain components, and recreation staff for referrals.
Given that the RFP was intended to have the potential firms provide the services and operate independently, this proposal is not feasible as the City's staff in these positions already carry a significant task load and are not available to support the functions. Additionally, it places the firm in a position where, if insufficient participants are found, it could claim that the City did not perform the referral functions adequately.
• Carry the Vision and Youth Alliance. These two organizations submitted separate proposals, but are coordinated to provide similar programs, one for adults and the other for youth. The Youth Alliance proposal includes an additional service of providing a diversion program, which is not offered by any other proposal. These two organizations previously submitted an unsolicited proposal and sought information about the Opioid Settlement funding, which encouraged the activation of these funds.
Staff Recommendation
Staff recommends that the Council award contracts to Carry the Vision and Youth Alliance.
Their proposals have some of the largest program type offerings based on their descriptions; have already been providing services in the community; have outreach mechanisms that reach population groups that — statistically speaking — are more likely to be impacted and underserved as documented in the settlement agreements and use of funding descriptions; have coordinated services to reach families, including a youth component that would meet the area of high impact requirement for opioid funding; and proposals that, including these qualities but others, scored the highest in the proposal screening.
With the RFP process being exploratory and the high level of requirements for documentation, reimbursement, and oversight of the opioid settlement funds, the specific contract scopes of work, milestone schedules, and payment schedules must be negotiated with each organization awarded funds; only then can the contracts be executed. Staff is seeking Council approval to authorize the City Administrator to complete negotiations on the proposed agreements selected by the Council for grant awards, and to execute the contracts.
Finally, as mentioned in the background, no funds from the Opioid Settlement Fund have been appropriated in the budget. Staff has included, as part of the recommended action, a resolution for the Council to approve a budget amendment to appropriate the full balance of funds available for the FY26 budget. The unused funds, since the contracts will be based on the calendar year, will roll forward with the contract terms into FY27.
ALTERNATIVES
Council may award, modify, or reject the proposal(s).
FISCAL IMPACT/FUNDING SOURCE
$237,352.12 from the Opioid Settlement Fund (Fund 293). The funds will be expended as reimbursements for qualifying expenditures under the final contract, consistent with the requirements as imposed by the settlement agreements, the funding source for these grant funds.
PUBLIC OUTREACH
This item was first discussed at the September 8, 2025, regular City Council Meeting and was included on the publicly posted agenda for tonight. Any decision on this item will be shared through the City's e-newsletter.
NEXT STEPS
Following the Council's selection of proposals to receive grant funds, staff will complete contract negotiations and execute agreements with the awarded organizations to implement the proposed programs.
Attachments:
1. Budget Amendment Resolution - FY26 Opioid Settlement Fund
2. Proposal - Bay Area Community Health
3. Proposal - Bay Area Community Health Budget
4. Proposal - Carry the Vision
5. Proposal - Catholic Charities
6. Proposal - End Overdose
7. Proposal - Sunday Friends Foundation
8. Proposal - Youth Alliance
9. RFP for Opioid Remediation Services
RESOLUTION NO. 2025-XX
A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF GILROY AMENDING THE BUDGET FOR THE CITY OF GILROY FOR FISCAL YEAR 2026 IN THE
OPIOID SETTLEMENT FUNDS AND APPROPRIATING PROPOSED
AMENDMENTS
WHEREAS, the City Administrator prepared and submitted to the City Council a budget for the City of Gilroy for Fiscal Years 2026 and 2027, and the City Council carefully examined, considered, and adopted the same on June 2, 2025; and WHEREAS, City Staff has prepared and submitted to the City Council a proposed amendment to said budget for Fiscal Year 2026 for the City of Gilroy in the staff report dated November 17, 2025, for the awarding of opioid settlement funds for opioid remediation services; and
WHEREAS, the City Council has carefully examined and considered the same and is satisfied with said budget amendments.
NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED that appropriations to the expenditure accounts in the Opioid Settlement Funds (Fund 293), are hereby increased by $237,352 for Fiscal Year 2026.
PASSED AND ADOPTED this 17th day of November 2025 by the following roll call vote:
AYES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
NOES: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
ABSENT: COUNCIL MEMBERS:
APPROVED:
______________________________
Greg Bozzo, Mayor
ATTEST:
Kim Mancera, City Clerk
Resolution No. 2025-XX
Budget Amendment: Opioid Settlement Funds
City Council Regular Meeting | November 17, 2025
CERTIFICATE OF THE CLERK
I, KIM MANCERA, 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, November 17, 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.
____________________________________
Kim Mancera
City Clerk of the City of Gilroy
(Seal)
Carina Baksa
City Of Gilroy
Administration Department
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020-6197
Dear Selection Committee,
On behalf of Bay Area Community Health (BACH), I am pleased to submit this proposal in response to the City of Gilroy’s Request for Proposals (RFP) for opioid remediation services.
BACH is fully committed to partnering with the City to deliver high-quality, equitable, communitycentered health services in alignment with the goals and requirements of the RFP.
Required organizational and contact information is as follows:
Legal name of applicant organization: Bay Area Community Health (BACH) Address of headquarters: 40910 Fremont Boulevard, Fremont, CA 94538 Website address: https://bach.health
Contact information for the applicant organization:
Name: Dr. Zettie D. Page III
Title: Chief Executive Officer
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (510) 252‑5882
As part of our proposal submission, BACH hereby states that it has reviewed the standard agreement template attached to this RFP as Attachment B and (if selected) agrees to be bound by its terms, conditions, and obligations.
BACH is strongly suited to perform the requested services in light of the organization’s decades of experience in providing substance use, behavioral, medical, and social support services across Santa Clara County, fortified by our commitment to serving underserved communities.
Thank you for your consideration.
Zettie D. Page, III, M.D., Ph.D., MBA, MSW, MS
Chief Executive Officer (CEO)
Bay Area Community Health
Doc ID: 419ffa437baf7c94d8703609c662d88e62cd31e2 Page 130 of 417 CEO Signature Needed: City of Gilroy - Opioid Remediation... file
419ffa437baf7c94d8703609c662d88e62cd31e2
MM / DD / YYYY
Signed
This document was requested from app.contractsafe.com
10 / 14 / 2025
21:29:34 UTC
Sent for signature to Dr. Zettie D. Page III
([email protected]) from [email protected]
IP: 174.221.119.129
10 / 14 / 2025
21:36:50 UTC
Viewed by Dr. Zettie D. Page III ([email protected])
IP: 12.200.253.194
10 / 14 / 2025
21:37:31 UTC
Signed by Dr. Zettie D. Page III ([email protected])
IP: 12.200.253.194
10 / 14 / 2025 The document has been completed.
21:37:31 UTC
1 Project Narrative
Organization Overview and History: Bay Area Community Health (BACH)’s mission is to deliver exceptional health and social services that improve the quality of life for the individuals, families, and communities it serves. A nonprofit, Federally Qualified Health Center (FQHC), BACH provides high quality comprehensive health services in California’s southern Alameda County (AC) and Santa Clara County (SCC). The organization provides primary medical, dental, vision, and behavioral health services for the entire family through 34 clinic sites from Union City to Gilroy, including a dental site, a vision clinic, 12 mobile units, and six school-based clinics.
Originally split into two organizations, Tri-City Health Center (TCHC) and Foothill Community Health Center (FCHC), BACH was formed in spring 2020. TCHC was founded in 1970 as a family planning clinic for low-income, minority women living in Newark and FCHC was founded in 1996 in San Jose. BACH as it exists today was born at the height of the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, a time when the Bay Area’s most vulnerable communities urgently needed accessible, affordable, and culturally responsive healthcare. BACH has been able to meet those needs by ensuring effective inclusive healthcare solutions for underserved populations.
As part of its diverse suite of services, BACH has extensive experience providing effective treatment protocols for patients facing substance use disorder (SUD), and opioid use disorder (OUD). For example, the organization’s Generations initiative has provided a full spectrum of harm reduction services since 2000. The program currently operates at the East Bay Recovery Project in Hayward and at three homeless encampments in Fremont. By the end of 2023, Generations had served 580 unhoused individuals in Fremont, offering rapid Hepatitis C Virus (HCV) testing, HIV screenings, street outreach, syringe exchange, one-on-one risk and harm reduction counseling, OUD/SUD education, fentanyl detection kits, wound and abscess care, overdose prevention education, and referrals to SUD and OUD treatment and social service agencies.
Furthermore, BACH has extensive experience delivering harm reduction services that effectively reduce clients’ risky behaviors and improve overall health outcomes. To support patients who choose medications for recovery, BACH launched its Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) program in 2016, drawing on the expertise of addiction and behavioral health specialists to support clients in recovery. Clients receiving MAT services have achieved stability on Suboxone, a prescription medication containing buprenorphine and naloxone used to treat opioid addiction.
The program incorporates a variety of therapeutic and peer-led groups, including a Harm Reduction Support Group, Art and Meditation Group, Relapse Prevention Groups in English and Spanish, and a Walking Group. BACH has also partnered with the SCC Harm Reduction Program and Needle Exchange (NEX) since 2021 to expand access to services and outreach.
This experience, combined with support from the City of San José, positions BACH to serve a growing number of unhoused individuals at risk of OUD. In 2022, BACH served 140 individuals through its Harm Reduction program, including 44 MAT clients across Santa Clara and Alameda counties.
Through years of OUD care, BACH has also effectively treated co-occurring conditions, including HIV, in vulnerable populations, especially people experiencing homelessness. The organization implemented one of the first HIV programs in Alameda County in 1993 and has maintained a strong presence in outreach and prevention ever since. BACH’s street outreach team has been successful in building trust and providing services within high-risk social
2 networks, reaching individuals who are often the most difficult to engage across both Alameda and Santa Clara counties. In 2002, BACH created TransVision to meet the HIV service needs of transgender individuals, establishing the only comprehensive transgender health program in southern, central, and eastern Alameda County. These services are scheduled to expand into Santa Clara County by the end of 2025.
BACH’s leadership team combines decades of experience in healthcare operations, clinical services, and community health innovation. The team consists of the following:
● Dr. Zettie D. Page, CEO, has over 20 years of FQHC leadership as an executive, clinician, and researcher.
● Dr. Harsha Ramchandani, CMO, a Board-Certified Internist, oversees clinical care and champions MAT and SUD initiatives.
● Dr. Stan Augustine, CFO, has led financial strategy for Kaiser Permanente and Providence St. Joseph Health.
● Wilfredo Lacro, Chief of Strategic Development, offers 18 years in nonprofit management and fund development.
● Carl Walters II, COO, contributes 30 years of FQHC leadership and service as a U.S.
Naval Officer.
● Gaurav Tyagi, Chief of Information Systems, brings 17 years of healthcare technology expertise that supports innovation and efficiency.
Through its integrated, equity-driven approach, BACH has demonstrated the organizational capacity, community trust, and clinical expertise necessary to advance opioid prevention, treatment, recovery, and harm reduction efforts across Alameda and Santa Clara Counties.
Project Narrative
A. Provide in the narrative for the overall project answers to the following:
Plan to Address Abatement Strategies: BACH intends to reduce OUD-related overdoses, reduce stigma for patients in recovery, and increase linkage to care and services for patients in Gilroy. The project will expand harm reduction services throughout the City of Gilroy, increase treatment sites, build the patient roster, and collaborate with more mission-aligned organizations. Pop-up SSP services will be based at BACH’s Gilroy Clinic in the parking lot at 9460 No Name Uno in the city of Gilroy. The clinic provides medical care, behavioral health care, and social services that support harm reduction. BACH’s project will leverage the following abatement strategies:
Naloxone or other FDA-approved overdose reversal medications: BACH provides nonjudgmental access to naloxone distribution, education on safer substance use, and referrals to needle exchange programs. This meets patients where they are and reduces barriers to entry for treatment, especially for those not yet ready to fully engage in recovery. In order to facilitate maximum impact within its target population, BACH will increase distribution efforts of overdose reversal medications among individuals who are uninsured or whose insurance does not cover these services. The organization provides health services for all regardless of income or insurance status. In fact, 87.3% of BACH’s overall patients in 2024 lived at or below 200% of the Federal Poverty Level and 85.4% were uninsured or qualified for Medicaid. BACH will continue this practice for the proposed project by distributing FDA-approved overdose reversal medications at low or no cost to patients based on health insurance, ensuring accessibility for low-income, uninsured, and/or unhoused individuals.
3 Medication-Assisted Treatment distribution and other treatment: Patients linked to treatment can receive counseling, support groups, and MAT. Since 2016 BACH has expanded its MAT services from three to 16 waivered physicians authorized to prescribe buprenorphine for OUD. The project leverages addiction behavioral health specialists and therapy groups, including a Support Group which provides art, meditation, life skills, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy approaches, and physical activity. BACH partners with the SCC Public Health Department to reach target populations through a low-barrier MAT program. The team includes SUD and MAT counselors, case managers, Primary Care Providers (PCPs), and MAT providers who meet patients where they are in their process of change and recovery. Referrals come from individuals, doctors, hospitals, the legal system, and other substance abuse programs. Once referred, patients receive an assessment appointment within 24 to 48 hours. If a patient misses a provider appointment, a face to face visit with SUD or MAT staff is required prior to a refill.
Walk-in patients outside their regular appointment receive a refill only through their next scheduled visit. Extenuating circumstances can be evaluated by the MAT team.
Expansion of warm hand-off programs and recovery services: The proposed project will help the target population address and overcome barriers to improve access to and retention in OUD care. To meet this goal, the project will offer evidence-based, comprehensive, wraparound services and referrals. These include mental health support, OUD treatment, Narcan distribution, medical case management, basic primary care, and linkages to medical, BH, and other social supports.
Upon intake, patients receive comprehensive SUD screenings so providers can make appropriate internal referrals to the most suitable services. Linked patients can receive counseling, support groups, MAT, Cognitive Behavioral Therapy, and recovery support from staff. Patients are eligible for 30-day prescriptions and monthly group meetings or shared medical appointments for continued SUD and MAT prescriptions.
Other referrals include dental, vision, preventative screenings, reproductive services, STD screening and treatment, specialized care, and primary care. BACH also screens all patients for negative social determinants of health during intake and provides referrals to local communitybased organizations when necessary, including social services and family and cultural resources.
Staff will support clients throughout the continuum of care, referring them to enroll in benefits (Medicaid, SNAP, SSDI), securing transportation, if needed, and linking them to other social services. To fully support individuals experiencing or at risk of OUD and overdose, BACH will leverage and expand partnerships with City of San Jose (and SCC) nonprofit organizations, shelters, faith‑based groups, and public housing agencies and providers. BACH already partners with the SCC Departments of Public Health and BH.
Expanding Syringe Services Programs: The project is designed to reduce fatal and nonfatal overdoses, prevent infections related to injection drug use, deliver low-barrier and communityinformed services, and strengthen sustainable access to care through expanded Syringe Services Programs (SSPs). Building on existing programs, services, and relationships, BACH will expand its overdose prevention efforts to better serve individuals at high risk of drug-related harm and disease transmission. The initiative will center the voices and experiences of people who use drugs, ensuring they are treated as partners in the design and delivery of care.
4 Project Staff will distribute health education materials in English and Spanish to reflect and accommodate Gilroy’s cultural diversity. These multi-modal outreach strategies are designed to meet people where they are and build trust through consistency, visibility, and respect.
Treat Opioid Use Disorder: BACH’s staff for the proposed project will conduct an array of health services to ensure a holistic system of care for patients suffering from OUD. These methods include syringe exchange, individual risk and harm reduction counseling, distribution of fentanyl detection kits and Narcan, hygiene kit distribution, overdose prevention and education, and referrals to drug treatment and social services. Narcan use and overdose reversal education will be routinely offered.
The team will use harm‑reduction and trauma‑ informed approaches to reduce stigma and build trust with clients and support them throughout the continuum of care by assisting in benefits enrollment, securing transportation as necessary, and linking them to other social services. For patients with co-occurring OUD and BH issues, BACH offers intensive outpatient services using evidence‑based approaches such as motivational interviewing , cognitive behavioral therapy, and FDA‑approved medications for OUD. BACH will also facilitate telemedicine appointments, when possible, to help clients overcome logistical barriers to engage with BACH providers. By offering these services, BACH staff will foster trust and build rapport with patients, reducing stigma that creates a bridge between clients and the healthcare system.
As a further part of its overdose prevention strategy, the project’s staff will provide OUD education by introducing patients to BACH’s harm reduction services and encourage participation in 15-minute risk reduction sessions delivered directly at outreach sites. These sessions will cover safer drug use practices, overdose prevention, and strategies to prevent injection-related infections such as HIV or HCV. Staff will track outreach contacts and sessions delivered to monitor impact and adjust strategies as needed.
Support people in treatment and recovery: The proposed project will help the target population overcome barriers to accessing and remaining in OUD care. To achieve this, the project will provide evidence-based, comprehensive wraparound services and referrals that include mental health support, OUD treatment, support groups, medical case management, primary care, and linkages to behavioral health and other social supports with the overall goal of helping clients sustain their recovery journey.
As mentioned, project staff will guide clients through the entire continuum of care by referring to benefit enrollment, and helping secure transportation when needed. Staff will also refer clients to essential social services.
Additional referrals will include dental, vision, preventive screenings, reproductive health services, STD screening and treatment, specialized care, and primary care. BACH screens all patients for negative social determinants of health during SUD intake and provides referrals to community-based organizations for social services and family or cultural resources as needed.
For this initiative, BACH will serve 150 patients annually through the following timeline:
● 3 months - During the project’s initial ramp-up period, BACH will train existing staff on project goals, while staff conduct standardized SUD intakes and referrals to address local residents’ needs. At the same time, a Community Health Worker (CHW) will be recruited and hired to support the project. Peers will volunteer and assist the CHW at the
5 SSP pop-up site with naloxone education and safe distribution. ● 3-6 months - During the first three months of implementation, project staff will operate in the previously identified service areas to initiate SSPs, distribute naloxone, and provide fentanyl test strips to clients. Staff will also refer clients, as needed, to BACH services such as MAT, HCV treatment, and tobacco cessation support.
As these activities progress, BACH will collect and analyze data to assess whether the project is on track to meet its goals and objectives. Staff will evaluate the project’s effectiveness based on these findings and adjust workflows as necessary. To ensure all grant deliverables are met, project managers will conduct regular check-ins, review progress toward grant goals, and implement changes as needed. ● 6-9 months - BACH will continue to collect data while maintaining SSPs, distributing naloxone, providing fentanyl test strips to clients, and referring clients to additional services as needed. Staff will use the collected data to adjust workflows, evaluate project effectiveness, verify that grant deliverables are being met, and conduct routine check-ins to ensure progress toward all goals.
● 9 -12 months - In the project’s final quarter, BACH will begin preparing for end-of-year reporting and comprehensive data collection. During this period, the organization will continue to operate its SSPs, distribute naloxone, provide fentanyl test strips, and refer clients to additional BACH services as needed.
Description of the Target Audience: The project’s target audience are people diagnosed with OUD, people who use drugs, individuals in treatment, and recurring BACH clients. The target patient population faces a diverse array of other barriers and challenges in accessing services.
Many have been historically underserved or marginalized and have been denied treatment.
Many have also not felt welcome or felt services have not fully understood their circumstances or situations. They may have felt isolated or alienated due to their race or language, have faced social stigma in accessing brick-and-mortar health services, or lack health insurance and therefore feel they are not eligible to receive care. Adding to all of this is the stigma they may feel related to the substance use, which might be compounded by co-occurring mental illness (including severe mental illness), and other BH issues they may be experiencing.
BACH staff recognize and understand that social determinants of health (SDOH) and other complicating factors intersect with health and social challenges that target population experience. The project will help the target population address and overcome barriers to improve access to and retention in OUD care. To do this, the project will offer evidence-based, comprehensive, wraparound services and referrals, which include mental health support, OUD treatment, Narcan distribution, medical case management, basic primary care, and linkages to medical, BH, and other social supports.
Furthermore, BACH has extensive experience with harm reduction services that have been effective in mitigating clients' risky behaviors and thus ensuring an overall improvement in health. In 2022, BACH served 140 in its Harm Reduction program, including 44 MAT clients in both SCC and AC. Those who received MAT services have become stable on Suboxone (a prescription medicine of buprenorphine and naloxone, active ingredients that treat opioid addiction). BACH has partnered on an innovative partnership with the SCC Harm Reduction Program, NEX since 2021. This experience, coupled with support from the City of San Jose will place BACH in a strategic position to serve an increased number of individuals at risk of OUD.
6 BACH will continue to leverage its best practices in this proposed project. BACH will act as a regional hub for OUD treatment, providing ongoing integrated care for individuals identified through outreach and referred by partners. Patients will have access to BACH’s network of PCPs who lead evidence‑based treatment regimens. For patients with co -occurring OUD and BH issues, BACH offers intensive outpatient services using evidence‑based approache s such as motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy, and FDA‑approved medications for OUD. Also, to address common challenges they face, BACH will offer telemedicine appointments, when possible, to help them overcome logistical barriers to engage with BACH providers.
Description of Community Needs: BACH’s identification of the community needs addressed by this project comes from observations and patient feedback gathered by BACH’s Harm Reduction team. The prevalence of OUD has been steadily rising throughout SCC. The county’s opioid overdose rate dramatically increased from 61 in 2018 to 195 in 2022 with nearly 87 percent of overdose related deaths coming from opioids, methamphetamine, or a combination of both (County of Santa Clara, 2023). This crisis creates an undue burden on the county’s underserved and marginalized populations including those in recovery from OUD, people living in poverty, patients with co-occurring disorders, and residents experiencing homelessness.
According to Santa Clara County’s 2023 Point-in-Time Count and Survey, 7,427 individuals were identified as unhoused and unsheltered, representing 75 percent of the total 9,903 unhoused residents. Of these, 26 percent reported experiencing drug or alcohol dependence (County of Santa Clara, 2023). The City of Gilroy faces a particularly acute homelessness challenge. Although smaller than many other Bay Area cities, Gilroy has more than 17 unhoused residents per 1,000 people, the highest per capita rate in the region (Mercury News, 2025). Interviews conducted with Gilroy’s unhoused population also revealed that substance use is widespread (Mercury News, 2025).
Although prescriptions for buprenorphine and access to naloxone have increased in line with evidence-based practices, staff at BACH’s Generations program have noted the persistence of substantial barriers to treatment. These barriers include stigma, limited transportation, lack of insurance, restrictive care policies, homelessness, mental health issues, and other unmet basic needs. Complicating these barriers are co-occurring issues, including psychiatric or emotional conditions; chronic health problems; physical disability; or living with HIV/AIDS. These barriers cause a higher mortality and morbidity rate in comparison to the general population and significant barriers to primary, behavioral, and specialty healthcare.
Individuals at risk of OUD face a range of logistical, social, health access, and legal obstacles to consistent care: their unstable housing, lack of reliable transportation, laws that require them to move from place to place, and limited communication resources can prevent them from accessing OUD prevention and intervention services, or, if they are already accessing service, these barriers may lead them to drop out of OUD care.
This proposed project will enable BACH to reduce the barriers experienced by community members by positioning Gilroy as a centralized hub for OUD treatment, supporting residents of both the city and the broader SCC. To further support participants, BACH has prioritized culturally and linguistically appropriate care to reflect the diverse demographics of Gilroy’s population, ensuring that all educational materials and services are accessible and respectful of cultural norms.
7 The organization’s commitment to offering culturally appropriate healthcare to each patient is demonstrated through the hiring of bilingual providers and support staff, who speak many languages. This approach acknowledges the barriers patients may face, such as language differences, and works to create a welcoming and supportive environment. Additionally, many of BACH’s Generations staff have lived experience with SUD and behavioral health challenges, as well as firsthand understanding of the barriers faced by historically disadvantaged communities.
This shared experience fosters trust with the target population, reflects the community served, and ultimately enhances the project's effectiveness.
In addition, by addressing SDOH that disproportionately affects people at risk of or suffering OUD in the city of Gilroy. Project staff will mitigate barriers such as limited transportation. BACH will support socially and geographically isolated patients by connecting them with transportation services or vouchers as needed. To ensure a seamless care experience, BACH staff will provide transportation to patients through UBER Health, ensuring patient accessibility to receive services.
Project Staffing: To coordinate and complete the activities of the proposed project, funding from the City of Gilroy will be used to compensate the following personnel:
● In-Kind MAT Provider: Jason England
● In-Kind SUD Counselor: Esther Veronika Rodriguez
● In-Kind Behavioral Health Specialist: Marjorie Huang
● In-Kind Harm Reduction Supervisor - Jorge “Koki” Vieto ● 1.0 FTE Community Health Worker - To Be Hired
● Subcontractors/ Partners- N/A
Project Sustainability: BACH is committed to sustaining the success of its opioid remediation project even after the conclusion of the funding period. The organization engages in a diversified revenue strategy that includes federal, state, county, and municipal grants and contracts; foundation and corporate support; individual donations; and special events. As the project proceeds beyond the funding period, BACH will also be able to bill Medi-Cal and other insurance providers along with managed healthcare plans to increase revenue that will enable project sustainability. Confirmed revenue streams include insurance reimbursements from participant insurance and medical provider payments, an ongoing revenue source for covered services.
B. For each activity or program within the broader project, the narrative must include a work plan. The work plans at a minimum shall consist of the following:
Project Activities
Activity 1: Naloxone Distribution and Overdose Prevention ● Category: Prevention
● Subcategory: Prevent overdose deaths and other harms (Harm Reduction) ● Strategy: Providing access to naloxone distribution, education on safer substance use, and referrals to needle exchange programs
● Activity Description: BACH will procure naloxone (Narcan) units and distribute them through the Gilroy Clinic, mobile outreach teams, and community events. Staff will provide education on safer substance use, recognizing overdose signs, and administering naloxone.
● Objective: By 12/31/2026, distribute at least 150 naloxone kits in Gilroy, increasing community access to overdose reversal medication by 80%.
8 ● Action Steps:
1. Identify local shelters and outreach sites for distribution (by March 31, 2026).
2. Train 3 staff and peers in naloxone education and safe distribution (by March 31, 2026).
3. Host 1 outreach event per quarter to educate and distribute naloxone (starting every three months in March, June, September, and December).
● Responsible Staff: Harm Reduction Supervisor: Jorge “Koki” Vieto and a Community Health Worker: To Be Hired.
● Performance Metrics: # of naloxone kits distributed; # of people trained in overdose response
● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026 Activity 2: Medication-Assisted Treatment (MAT) and Behavioral Health Integration ● Category: Treatment
● Subcategory: Treat OUD and support people in treatment and recovery ● Strategy: Expand access to FDA-approved medications for OUD and integrated behavioral health care
● Activity Description: BACH will expand its MAT program in Gilroy by linking patients to counseling and medical management using buprenorphine and other evidence-based medications.
● Objective: By 12/31/2026, enroll 45 new patients in MAT and ensure 75% remain in treatment for at least 2 months.
● Action Steps:
1. Conduct intake and SUD screenings for all new Gilroy patients (ongoing).
2. Train 3 new providers or counselors to deliver or refer to MAT by December 31, 2026.
3. Offer 2 recovery support groups per month (starting January 1, 2026).
4. Track medication and prescriptions via Electronic Health Records (EHR) (quarterly). ● Responsible Staff: In-Kind MAT Provider: Jason England; In-Kind SUD Counselor:
Esther Veronika Rodriguez; and In-Kind Behavioral Health Specialist: Marjorie Huang. ● Performance Metrics: # of patients enrolled in MAT, # of active MAT prescribers, % of patients retained in treatment for at least two months. ● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026 Activity 3: Warm Hand-offs and Recovery Services
● Category: Treatment and Recovery Support
● Subcategory: Expansion of warm hand-offs and recovery services ● Strategy: Facilitate immediate linkage from outreach or intake to appropriate OUD treatment and wrap-around care
● Activity Description: BACH will strengthen its intake process and warm hand-off system to refer patients to counseling, MAT, case management, and recovery services within 24–48 hours.
● Objective: By 12/31/2026, ensure 100% of patients identified through screening are successfully linked to treatment or recovery services within 48 hours. ● Action Steps:
1. Staff will implement standardized SUD intake and referral workflows that address SDOH assessment needs within 30 days of a patient encounter.
2. Train clinical staff on warm hand-off protocols and internal referral processes to behavioral health and MAT by March 31, 2026.
3. Link eligible patients to counseling, support groups, MAT, CBT, and peer-led recovery support (ongoing).
9 4. Provide referrals for dental, vision, reproductive, STD, and primary care services, as well as to community-based resources addressing social services and family or cultural resources (ongoing).
5. Track referral outcomes and service utilization through EHR and monthly team meetings.
6. Evaluate process effectiveness and adjust referral flow as needed (quarterly). ● Responsible Staff: Program Manager: Jorge “Koki” Vieto and Community Health Worker:
[Name / To Be Hired].
● Performance Metrics: % of referrals linked to care within 48 hours, # of clients receiving warm hand-offs
● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026 Activity 4: Syringe Services Program (SSP) Expansion
● Category: Prevention
● Subcategory: Reduce overdose deaths and prevent infections related to injection drug use, deliver low-barrier, community-informed services, and strengthen sustainable access to care
● Strategy: Conduct SSPs
● Activity Description: BACH will conduct its SSP by deploying a Community Health Worker to conduct daily distribution of harm reduction supplies (naloxone, fentanyl test strips, sterile syringes), provide 15-minute risk-reduction sessions, and link people who use drugs in Gilroy to comprehensive health, treatment, and social services. ● Objective: By 12/31/2026, distribute 200 sterile syringes and safely collect/dispose of 100 used syringes, reaching at least 100 clients in Gilroy. ● Action Steps:
1. Launch SSP pop-up services in the shared parking lot of BACH’s Gilroy Clinic and St. Louise Regional Hospital by March 31, 2026.
2. Conduct syringe exchange 4 times per month.
3. Provide education and referrals for HIV, HCV, and MAT services at all SSP encounters.
4. Track syringe distribution and disposal data in compliance with county reporting requirements.
● Responsible Staff: Harm Reduction Supervisor: Jorge “Koki” Vieto ● Performance Metrics: # of sterile syringes distributed, # of used syringes safely collected/disposed, # of participants receiving 15-minute risk-reduction sessions, # of participants referred or linked to care.
● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026.
Activity 5: Treat OUD:
● Category: Treatment
● Subcategory: Treat OUD and support people in treatment and recovery ● Strategy: Provide holistic treatment protocols for patients with OUD ● Activity Description: The team will use harm-reduction and trauma-informed approaches to reduce stigma, build trust, and support clients across the continuum of care by referring to benefits enrollment (Medicaid, SNAP, SSDI), arranging transportation, and referring them to social services. For clients with co-occurring OUD and behavioral health issues, BACH provides intensive outpatient care using evidence-based methods such as motivational interviewing, cognitive behavioral therapy, and FDA-approved medications for OUD. BACH also facilitates telemedicine visits to overcome logistical barriers.
● Objective: By 12/31/2026, enroll at least 45 Gilroy residents to holistic care continuum.
10 ● Action Steps:
1. Conduct intake and SUD screenings for all new Gilroy patients (ongoing).
2. Train 3 new providers to deliver or refer to MAT services by December 31, 2026.
3. Link 45 patients to BH and other SUD treatment as needed by December 31, 2026.
4. Facilitate 45 telemedicine appointments as needed by December 31, 2026.
5. Track patient retention and medication adherence via EHR (quarterly). ● Responsible Staff: In-Kind MAT Provider: Jason England; In-Kind SUD Counselor:
Esther Veronika Rodriguez; In-Kind Behavioral Health Specialist: Marjorie Huang. ● Performance Metrics: # of patients enrolled in OUD treatment, % of patients retained in treatment ≥ 12 months
● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026 Activity 6: Support people in treatment and recovery
● Category: Treatment
● Subcategory: Treat OUD and support people in treatment and recovery ● Strategy: Provide project clients with services and support necessary for them to sustain their recovery journey
● Activity Description: Project staff will guide clients through the entire continuum of care by referring to benefit enrollment (such as Medicaid, SNAP, and SSDI), and helping secure transportation when needed. Staff will also refer clients to essential social services.
● Action Steps:
1. Conduct intake and SUD screenings for all new Gilroy patients (ongoing).
2. Link 45 clients to supplementary services or treatment as necessary by December 31, 2026.
3. Track patient retention and medication adherence via EHR (quarterly). ● Responsible Staff: In-Kind MAT Provider: Jason England; In-Kind SUD Counselor:
Esther Veronika Rodriguez; In-Kind Behavioral Health Specialist: Marjorie Huang. ● Performance Metrics: # of patients referred to additional care and services, % of patients retained in treatment ≥ 12 months.
● Timeline: Start Date: January 1, 2026 - End Date: December 31, 2026.
Budget Plan
Salaries and Benefits: In-Kind MAT Provider, Jason England will connect to patients via videoconference. He will prescribe buprenorphine, where applicable, and establish, strengthen, and maintain links to care through Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) and other OUD services. In-Kind SUD Counselor, Esther Veronika Rodriguez, will be working with newly diagnosed OUD patients to establish, strengthen, and maintain links to care through MAT services. She will provide SUD counseling via videoconference. In-Kind Behavioral Health Specialist, Marjorie Huang, will be providing referred patients with behavioral health services via videoconference. In-Kind Harm Reduction Supervisor, Jorge "Koki" Vieto, will be overseeing the project progress on this grant and checking in with the CHW via videoconference. $56,000 will go towards a To be hired 1.0 FTE CHW II with 36% fringe benefits. The CHW will be running the grant program.
Contractual Services: No contractual services will take place for the grant.
Travel: $3,000 will be provided for client transportation via UBER Health. $2,000 will cover staff mileage throughout the grant period.
11 Operating Supplies: $10,000 will cover harm reduction supplies including points, bubblers, fentanyl test strips, wound care supplies, hygiene kits, food packs, and Narcan. $2,000 will cover office supplies. $3,000 will cover minor equipment including 1 laptop, 1 monitor, and 1 tablet. $15,000 will cover incentives for peer support at $625 per quarter per peer x 6 peers x 4 quarters. Peers who are volunteering to assist the CHW II at the SSP pop-up site with naloxone education and safe distribution will receive incentives. $2,4736.36 will cover the cost of outreach supplies.
Other: Indirect costs are at 10% for this grant.
Bay Area Community Health
City of Gilroy: Opioid Remediation Services
TBD
Cost Items SALARY FTE Budget
A.Personnel
Harm Reduction Supervisor - Jorge Vieto - IN KIND 0% $ - MAT Provider - Jason England - IN KIND 0% $ -
SUD Counselor - Esther V. Rodriguez - IN KIND 0% $ -
BH Specialist - Marjorie Huang - IN KIND 0% $ -
Community Health Worker II - TBH 56,000.00 100% $ 56,000.00 Subtotal Personnel 56,000.00
Retirement 54100 3.00% 1,680.00
Worker's Comp 54300 3.94% 2,206.40
Med/Dental, etc 54400 20.41% 11,429.60
Social Security 54600 6.20% 3,472.00
Medicare 54700 1.45% 812.00
EDD 54800 1.00% 560.00
B. Fringe FringeBenefits Benefits at 31% 36.00% 20,160.00 Total Payroll Costs 76,160.00
C. OperatingExpense Expenses 37,476.36
Minor Equipment (1 laptop, 1 monitor, 1 tablet) $ 3,000.00 Office Supplies $ 2,000.00
Client Transportation $ 3,000.00
Harm Reduction Supplies $ 10,000.00
Peer Support $ 15,000.00
Staff Mileage $ 2,000.00
Outreach Supplies $ 2,476.36
Total Operating Costs 37,476.36
D. IndirectCosts Cost 10% 10% 11,363.64
E. Total Budget $ 125,000.00
Bay Area Community Health
City of Gilroy: Opioid Remediation Services
Budget Narrative
A. PERSONNEL: $ 56,000.00
Harm Reduction Supervisor - Jorge Vieto - IN KIND -
( $ - X 0% )
He will be overseeing the project progress on this grant and checking in with the CHW via videoconference.
MAT Provider - Jason England - IN KIND
( $ - X 0% )
He will connect to patients via videoconference. He will prescribe buprenorphine, where applicable, and establish, strengthen, and maintain links to care through Medication Assisted Treatment (MAT) and other OUD services.
SUD Counselor - Esther V. Rodriguez - IN KIND
( $ - X 0% )
She will be working with newly diagnosed OUD patients to establish, strengthen, and maintain links to care through MAT services. She will provide SUD counseling via videoconference.
BH Specialist - Marjorie Huang - IN KIND
( $ - X 0% )
She will be providing referred patients with behavioral health services via videoconference.
Community Health Worker II - TBH 56,000.00
( $ 56,000.00 X 100% )
The Community Health Worker II will be running the grant program.
B. FRINGE BENEFITS 36% 20,160.00
Bay Area Community Health Center’s fringe benefit rate is 36% and consists of 3% Retirement, 3.94 Wokers' Comp, 20.41% Medical/Dental, 7.65 Social Security & Medicare, 1% Long-term Disability.
C. Operating Expenses 37,476.36
Minor Equipment (1 laptop, 1 monitor, 1 tablet) 3,000.00 $3,000.00 will be provided for minor equipment including 1 laptop, 1 monitor, and 1 tablet.
Office Supplies 2,000.00
$2,000.00 will be provided for office supplies.
Client Transportation 3,000.00
$3,000.00 will be provided for client transportation via UBER Health.
Harm Reduction Supplies 10,000.00
$10,000.00 will cover harm reduction supplies including points, bubblers, fentanyl test strips, wound care supplies, hygiene kits, food packs, and Narcan. $2,000 will cover office supplies Peer Support 15,000.00
$15,000 will cover incentives for peer support at $625 per quarter per peer x 6 peers x 4 quarters. Peers who are volunteering to assist the CHW II at the SSP pop-up site with naloxone education and safe distribution will receive incentives.
Staff Mileage 2,000.00
$2,000.00 will cover staff mileage throughout the grant period.
Outreach Supplies 2,476.36
$2,476.36 will cover the cost of outreach supplies.
D. Indirect Cost 10% 11,363.64
Indirect costs are expenses that cannot be directly attributed, but are necessary for the general operation and administration of an organization. Expenses include but are not limited to administrative salaries, facility costs, office supplies, communications, and other general operating expenses.
Total Budget $ 125,000.00
Bay Area Community Health
City of Gilroy: Opioid Remediation Services
Budget Narrative
Cover Letter
Legal Name: Carry the Vision (CTV)
Address: 7365 Monterey Road, Suite 203, Gilroy, CA 95020 Website: www.carrythevision.org
Primary Contact: Shelley Swan, Executive Director
Email: [email protected]
Phone: (408) 275-6133
Statement of Agreement:
Carry the Vision has reviewed and agrees to the terms of the standard agreement template attached to this RFP as Attachment B.
Organizational Overview
Carry the Vision (CTV) is a community based nonprofit organization based in Gilroy. Our mission is to foster healing, recovery, and connection among South County residents who have been most impacted by trauma, substance use, incarceration, homelessness, and systemic inequity.
CTV is one of the few organizations in South Santa Clara County that hires, trains, and is led by people with lived experience. Our staff and peer mentors are individuals who have walked through addiction, incarceration, and recovery themselves and now dedicate their lives to helping others heal. This foundation of authenticity, compassion, and trust allows CTV to reach and support residents who are often disconnected from formal systems of care.
Our core programs include:
• In Custody Leadership and Life Skills – Courses at Elmwood Correctional Facility, Main Jail, and through reentry programs that help incarcerated individuals develop tools for healing, reflection, and successful reentry.
• Resource Navigation and Peer Support – Peer-led assistance for formerly incarcerated adults and families navigating recovery, employment, and housing stabilization. • Employment Social Enterprise (Rooted) – Paid work and wraparound support for individuals facing barriers to employment, offering second chance jobs through dignified work.
• Healing Circles, Mindfulness, and Life Skills – Healing Circles and mindfulness practices that strengthen emotional wellness, connection, and belonging throughout South County. • Advocacy and Leadership Development: Seats on boards and commissions, coalition building, and leadership training to influence policy.
1
• Fiscal Partner Development – Backbone and capacity support for grassroots coalitions and emerging community groups advancing healing-centered, resident-led solutions.
CTV’s peer-led approach directly aligns with the principles of opioid remediation. Our Healing Circles provide trauma-informed spaces for those affected by addiction and loss to process grief, rebuild relationships, and connect with recovery resources. CTV also provides Narcan distribution and referrals to treatment and recovery services.
Our organization has longstanding collaborations with Santa Clara County Reentry Services, Santa Clara County Public Health, behavioral health networks, and community coalitions that address substance use. These partnerships ensure coordination across systems of care and increase access to prevention and recovery resources for those most impacted.
For this initiative, Healing Together: Rooted in Recovery, CTV will partner closely with Youth Alliance (YA), a trusted South County organization with extensive experience supporting youth and families through prevention, intervention, and wellness programs. This collaboration creates a whole family approach to healing and recovery that strengthens the continuum of care across generations. CTV and YA will coordinate referrals between youth and family programs to ensure seamless access to support for all household members. This partnership ensures that families in Gilroy receive compassionate, culturally relevant, and coordinated support that meets them where they are on the path to healing.
Carry the Vision is honored to submit this proposal in partnership with the City of Gilroy and in collaboration with local agencies, schools, law enforcement, and nonprofit partners who share a commitment to building a healthier, more connected community. Healing Together: Rooted in Recovery will strengthen the local response to the opioid crisis by expanding trusted, culturally grounded spaces for healing, education, and recovery. Together, we will create a network of support that bridges families, service providers, and first responders ensuring that every person in Gilroy has access to compassionate care, prevention resources, and a community that believes in their capacity to heal and recover.
2
Project Narrative
Describe how you plan to address the abatement strategy(ies). Share the project, including the timeline, a high-level overview of implementation and evaluation steps, and the intended outcomes. Describe how the project addresses opioid use disorder (OUD)-related stigma.
Healing Together: Rooted in Recovery is a peer-led, trauma-informed initiative designed and implemented by people with lived experience of addiction, recovery, incarceration, and family loss related to substance use. The program aligns with the opioid remediation abatement strategies outlined in Schedule A and Schedule B–J, specifically:
- Strategy 1: Prevent overdose deaths and other harms
- Strategy 3: Support recovery services and connections - Strategy 5: Reduce stigma and promote recovery through education and storytelling - Schedule B–J (J-3): Leadership, planning, and coordination through training and capacity building The project builds on CTV’s established Healing Circle model, which has long provided safe and inclusive spaces for reflection, emotional healing, and connection across Gilroy neighborhoods.
Healing Together expands these circles with a recovery-focused framework that strengthens prevention, education, and leadership within the recovery community.
The program recognizes that connection is a cornerstone of recovery and that healing occurs within community, where individuals are seen, heard, and valued. It cultivates belonging one person at a time, transforming isolation into trust, shame into compassion, and stigma into understanding.
Program Activities:
- Weekly Healing Circles: Peer-led circles provide trauma-informed spaces for individuals and families affected by opioid use to process trauma, build coping skills, and foster belonging. - Educational Workshops: Bilingual workshops offer harm reduction education, Narcan distribution, and trauma awareness for families and residents. - Trauma-Informed and Opioid Safety Training: Training sessions equip staff, peers, and volunteers with skills in trauma-informed care, overdose prevention, and culturally responsive engagement.
- Storytelling Events: Community gatherings highlight real stories of recovery and resilience, helping reframe addiction through a human-centered lens and reduce stigma. - Outreach and Referrals: Peer outreach teams provide Narcan kits, harm reduction education, and warm handoffs to recovery and community resources.
- Narcan Distribution: Narcan will be provided at all circles, workshops, and outreach events, with bilingual demonstrations to ensure community readiness to prevent overdose deaths. 3
Timeline:
- January 2026: Planning, coordination, and recruitment of peer facilitators. - February 2026: Training in trauma-informed care, harm reduction, safety, and outreach. - March–December 2026: Implementation of Healing Circles, educational workshops, storytelling, and outreach. Evaluation will include attendance tracking, Narcan distribution, and participant feedback on stigma reduction and connection to recovery supports.
Intended Outcomes:
- 80 Healing Circles
-100 Residents Connected to Recovery Supports
- 200 Narcan kits distributed
- 5 Educational Workshops
- 6 Storytelling Opportunities
- 20 peer mentors and volunteers trained
- 80% of participants report reduced stigma and increased sense of belonging - 60% connect to ongoing recovery supports
Healing Together redefines recovery as a collective process of community healing, where each circle and story transforms shame into compassion and isolation into belonging, rebuilding the human connections essential for lasting recovery.
Describe the target audience impacted by your proposal. How are these targeted audiences most at risk or impacted by OUD considered in this project? How does your project address potential barriers to accessing your programming?
The target audience includes individuals and families most affected by the opioid crisis in Gilroy particularly Latino residents, justice-impacted adults, youth, unhoused residents, and low-income households. Gilroy neighbors face significant barriers such as language access, stigma, isolation, and fear, all of which limit their ability to engage in prevention and recovery services.
The project addresses these barriers through trusted peer leadership. Every facilitator, trainer, and outreach worker brings lived experience in having personally navigated recovery or supported loved ones through addiction. This peer-to-peer connection builds trust and credibility, making participants more likely to engage.
To ensure equitable access and inclusion, all Healing Together circles, workshops, and community events will be bilingual in English and Spanish, held in trusted and familiar community spaces such as neighborhood centers, faith-based sites, and public parks. Activities will be co-facilitated by trained peers and community leaders who reflect the cultures and lived experiences of participants.
Outreach efforts will extend beyond traditional service settings to include encampments and other 4
overlooked areas, meeting people where they are and ensuring that no resident is left disconnected from information, support, or recovery resources.
By grounding this work in lived experience, cultural fluency, and peer leadership, Healing Together ensures that those most impacted by opioid use disorder can access compassionate, judgment-free support in the spaces where they already live and gather. All peer leaders were born and raised in Gilroy, bringing deep community wisdom and firsthand understanding of the local realities that shape both harm and healing. This authentic connection removes institutional barriers and builds the trust, belonging, and resilience essential for lasting recovery.
Describe how the proposed project will meet community needs. How were those needs identified? How does your project support those most disproportionately impacted by the opioid epidemic? How will you ensure this program is culturally, linguistically, and developmentally appropriate for the proposed community(ies)? The Healing Together initiative was created in response to the growing number of opioid related overdoses in Gilroy and South Santa Clara County, where fentanyl has devastated families and deeply affected neighborhoods already facing social and economic hardship. The need for this work has been identified through years of lived experience and community engagement. Peer mentors, local service providers, and families in recovery have consistently expressed that residents need a safe place to gather, learn, and heal together outside of clinical or institutional settings.
Healing Together meets these needs by expanding CTV’s trusted Healing Circle model into a recovery focused space designed by and for people who have lived through addiction, incarceration, or loss. The program offers a bridge between the street and the system, a place where healing begins with connection.
What makes this program unique is who leads it. Every peer mentor once struggled with addiction or contributed to harm in the community. Through their own transformation, they now lead others toward healing. They embody what recovery looks like in real life and model what is possible for those who are still struggling. Their presence alone breaks stigma and builds trust, reminding participants that change is possible and that recovery belongs to everyone.
The program prioritizes those most impacted by the opioid crisis including Latino residents, justice involved individuals, unhoused neighbors, and low income families. Many face language barriers, fear of judgment, or limited access to care. To meet these needs, all circles, workshops, and educational sessions will be bilingual in English and Spanish and will use clear and inclusive communication that is easy to understand and relate to. Sessions will be interactive and flexible, meeting participants where they are.
By grounding the program in local leadership and lived experience, Healing Together ensures that recovery is not something done to people but something created with them. It restores dignity, agency, and belonging while strengthening community trust and resilience. Through shared stories, 5
mutual support, and practical tools for harm reduction and healing, this initiative transforms cycles of harm into cycles of hope and connection.
What is the level of staffing for the project? Ensure accountability for carrying out work plan activities and maintaining overall support and coordination of the work. If planning to use subcontractors, please describe their responsibilities in carrying out grant activities.
The Healing Together project will be led by CTV’s Program Director, who will oversee all activities, documentation, reporting, and collaboration with the City of Gilroy and community partners. The Program Director will be responsible for ensuring that all deliverables outlined in the work plan are met on time and that data collection, evaluation, and communication with city staff are coordinated effectively.
The project will be implemented by CTV’s Healing Circle facilitators and peer mentors, all of whom bring lived experience with substance use, recovery, incarceration, or family loss related to addiction. These individuals were born and raised in Gilroy and have deep roots in the community.
Their credibility, compassion, and firsthand understanding of addiction and recovery make them uniquely equipped to reach those most in need. They helped design this program based on what has already proven effective in CTV’s existing Healing Circles, which consistently draw strong community participation and trust.
Peer mentors will facilitate weekly circles, provide outreach in the community, and co-lead workshops and storytelling events. They will also support participants through referrals to services and ensure that Narcan and harm reduction materials are distributed safely and responsibly. All staff and volunteers will complete trauma informed and opioid safety training at the beginning of the project to ensure best practices in care, confidentiality, and cultural responsiveness A subcontracted consultant will provide professional training and oversight in trauma informed care, safety protocols, and healing circle facilitation with a recovery focus. All subcontracted services will directly build capacity and strengthen the peer-led model.
All activities will be implemented by CTV’s trained team under the supervision of the Executive Director, ensuring strong leadership, accountability, and alignment with the goals of the opioid remediation program.
How will this project be sustainable beyond the proposed funding period? The Healing Together initiative is intentionally designed to build lasting community infrastructure rather than create a short term program. Sustainability is embedded in every part of the model through leadership development, local capacity building, and deep partnerships with trusted systems of care. By training peer mentors and equipping them with facilitation, trauma informed care, and harm reduction skills, the project creates a self sustaining network of recovery leaders 6
rooted in Gilroy. These peers are community members who have walked the path of addiction and recovery themselves. Through this program they will gain the tools, confidence, and experience to continue leading circles, mentoring others, and expanding access to support long after the grant period ends.
CTV will continue operating Healing Circles through its established programming and partnerships with Santa Clara County Reentry Services, Youth Alliance, and regional coalitions that support recovery, behavioral health, reentry, and housing stability. These collaborations provide natural continuity for participants who need ongoing recovery and navigation support. The program also strengthens relationships with local institutions including the City of Gilroy, public safety, and county agencies, aligning with existing community health and prevention goals.
Sustainability will also grow through the human connections formed in the circles themselves. Each participant becomes part of a larger network of belonging that continues beyond structured sessions. As trust and community ownership increase, local leaders will emerge who can host circles, share lived experience, and continue the cycle of healing.
Ultimately, Healing Together builds the foundation for a community led recovery ecosystem in South County. It ensures that healing, education, and connection continue to thrive as part of Gilroy’s long term response to the opioid crisis.
7
Workplan – Healing Together: Rooted in Recovery (January – December 2026) Activity Name Category /
Subcategory /
Strategy
Activity Description Objectives &
Measurable
Outcomes (with
target dates)
Timeline (Jan–Dec
2026)
Healing Circles & PeerLed SupportCategory: Treatment & Recovery Support
Subcategory: Recovery
Services and
Connection-Based Care
Strategy: Establish
peer-led recovery
programs offering
ongoing emotional and
social support.
Connection to services.
Facilitate weekly
bilingual Healing
Circles led by trained
peer mentors with
lived experience.
Circles provide traumainformed, stigma-free
spaces for reflection,
emotional regulation,
and support.
Participants receive
referrals to treatment
support services and
resources.
Objective: By
12/31/26, conduct 80
circles serving at least
150 residents from
high-need Gilroy
neighborhoods. 100
residents connected to
recovery services and
supports.
Action Steps: Train 8
peer facilitators (by
Feb 2026), launch
weekly circles (Mar–
Dec 2026), collect
feedback after sessions.
Outcome: 75% of
participants report
improved well-being,
connection, and
awareness of recovery,
and resources.
Planning and training
Jan-Feb;
Implementation Mar–
Dec 2026
Trauma-Informed &
Opioid Safety Training
Category: Leadership,
Planning, and
Coordination
Subcategory: Training
and Professional
Development
Deliver bilingual
trauma-informed and
opioid safety training
to staff, peer mentors,
volunteers to
strengthen capacity for
Objective: By 9/30/26,
train 20 peer recovery
staff and volunteers in
trauma-informed
recovery and fentanyl
safety practices.
Planning Jan–Feb;
Training Feb–Dec 2026
8
Strategy: Provide
trauma-informed care
and opioid safety
training to staff, peer
mentors, and
volunteers.
culturally responsive
recovery support.
Training will cover
trauma awareness,
harm reduction, selfcare, and fentanyl
overdose response and
safety protocols.
Action Steps: Contract
bilingual traumainformed consultant
(Feb 2026), conduct
quarterly training
sessions (Feb, April,
July, Oct.), evaluate via
pre/post surveys.
Outcome: 90% of
trainees demonstrate
increased knowledge
and confidence
supporting recovery.
Educational
Workshops for
Families & Community
Members
Category: Prevention
Subcategory: Prevent
Overdose Deaths and
Other Harms (Harm
Reduction)
Strategy: Conduct
public education on
overdose prevention
and harm reduction.
Host bilingual
workshops for families
and residents on
understanding topics
such as: trauma
informed care,
addiction, reducing
stigma, recognizing
overdose,
administering Narcan,
and navigating
treatment supports and
referrals. Include
distribution of free
Naloxone.
Objective: By
12/31/26, conduct 5
workshops reaching 50
participants and
distributing Naloxone.
Action Steps: Partner
with community
leaders (Mar 2026),
deliver monthly
workshops (Mar–Dec),
collect participant
feedback.
Outcome: 80% report
increased awareness
and readiness to
respond to opioid
emergencies.
Planning Jan–Feb;
Implementation Mar–
Dec 2026
Community Outreach &
Resource Navigation
Category: Treatment &
Recovery Support
Subcategory: Recovery
Services and
Navigation
Strategy: Provide
Conduct outreach in
high-impact
neighborhoods,
including hard to reach
areas. Distribute
Narcan, share recovery
Objective: By
12/31/26, engage 100
individuals and link 50
to ongoing recovery or
mental health services.
Action Steps: Conduct
Planning Jan-Feb;
Implementation Mar–
Dec 2026
9
outreach and peer
navigation to connect
at-risk individuals and
families to care.
resources, and provide
navigation/referrals.
weekly outreach
beginning Feb 2026,
track referrals and
outcomes.
Outcome: 50% of those
reached engage in at
least one follow-up or
referral service.
Storytelling & Stigma
Reduction
Category: Prevention
Subcategory: Reduce
Stigma and Promote
Awareness
Strategy: Share livedexperience stories to
increase understanding
and normalize
recovery/connection.
Storytelling activities
featuring livedexperience narratives
from Healing Circles
and training graduates.
Stories shared at
community events and
through digital
channels to promote
compassion and
recovery awareness.
Objective: By
12/31/26, collect 10
stories, share 6
publicly.
Action Steps: Record
and translate stories
(May–Oct 2026),
present stories at two
community events
and/or council
meetings.
Outcome: 70% of
attendees report
reduced stigma and
improved
understanding of
recovery.
Planning Jan–Mar;
Implementation Apr–
Dec 2026
10
Budget Plan and Narrative
Total Requested: $118,675
Category Line Item Description Amount
1. Salaries and
Benefits
Program Director 0.375 FTE (15
hrs/week)
responsible for
coordination,
reporting, and
supervision of peer
mentors. Oversees
all Healing Circles,
educational
workshops, and
outreach.
$37,440
Healing Circle
Facilitators / Peer
Mentors
0.625 FTE (25
hrs/week
combined)
responsible for
facilitating Healing
Circles, outreach,
Narcan distribution,
and referrals to
recovery supports.
$34,830
Payroll Taxes &
Fringe Benefits
Payroll taxes, health
benefits, and related
personnel costs for
project staff.
$23,126
Subtotal – Salaries &
Benefits
$95,396
2. Contractual
Services
Trauma-Informed
Consultant
Provides bilingual
training and
technical assistance
in trauma-informed
care, harm
reduction, and
recovery best
practices to staff
and peer mentors.
$12,000
3. Operating
Supplies
Program Supplies Includes printed
materials, light
refreshments for
circles, and outreach
handouts for
community
engagement.
$490
11
5. Indirect Costs Administrative and
Overhead
10% of total direct
costs for
administrative
support, insurance,
rent, accounting,
and facilities
overhead.
$10,789
TOTAL BUDGET $118,675
Budget Narrative
1. Salaries and Benefits ($95,396)
The Program Director (0.375 FTE) manages implementation, reporting, and coordination of all Healing Together: Rooted in Recovery activities. Healing Circle Facilitators/Peer Mentors (0.625 FTE combined) lead bilingual Healing Circles, outreach, Narcan distribution, and recovery support referrals. Payroll taxes and fringe benefits include required employer contributions, health coverage, and payroll processing costs.
2. Contractual Services ($12,000)
A trauma-informed care consultant will deliver quarterly bilingual trainings and provide technical assistance on trauma-informed practice, harm reduction, and recovery-focused engagement.
3. Operating Supplies ($490)
Covers bilingual educational materials, outreach handouts, and light refreshments to encourage participation and connection during Healing Circles and workshops.
4. Indirect Costs ($10,789)
Calculated at 10% of total direct costs. Supports administrative functions such as accounting, insurance, facilities, and overall management infrastructure necessary for effective program delivery.
12
CHIEF EXECUTIVE OFFICER
Don Taylor
CHAIRMAN
Bishop
Oscar Cantú
BOARD OF DIRECTORS
President
Paul Sanchirico
Vice President
James Otieno
Secretary
Lisa Kloppenberg
Paul Baker
Susan Bishop
Wendy Brennan
Hyoung Chon
Bill Evans
Laura Garcia
Bárbara Gómez-Aguiñaga
Ron Gonzales
Yen Hoang Do
Liz Mireles
John Oosterhouse
Rich Ramko
Bill Roth
Dr. Judith Sánchez, M.D.
Vincent Sunzeri
Michelle VonderHaar
Patrick Waite
Ex Officio
Most Reverend Oscar Cantú
Fr. Andres Ligot
Deacon Eric Simontis
Don Taylor
Carina Baksa October 17, 2025
City of Gilroy
7351 Rosanna Street
Gilroy, CA 95020-6197
Dear Ms. Baksa,
Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County is pleased to submit this proposal in response to the City of Gilroy Administration Department in response to Request for Proposals Opioid Remediation Services No. 26- RFP-AD-527. The required information is provided below.
Legal Name of Applicant:
Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County
2625 Zanker Road, San José, CA 95134
www.catholiccharitiesscc.org
Primary Contact:
Don Taylor, Chief Executive Officer
[email protected]
408-325-5110
Primary Contact for this Proposal:
Shea Heller-Antrim, Director, Public Grants
[email protected]
408-325-5125 / 805-570-7317 (cell)
Review of Attachment B: CCSCC has reviewed and agrees to the terms of the standard agreement template attached to the RFP as Attachment B.
We are enthusiastic about the potential of collaborating with the City of Gilroy in addressing urgent behavioral health and substance use challenges within our community. Thank you for considering our application.
Sincerely,
Don Taylor, Chief Executive Officer
Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County
Response to City of Gilroy Opioid Remediation Services No. 26-RFP-AD-527 Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County 1
1. Applicant Information
Organization History and Description
Tracing its origins as far back as 1929, Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County (CCSCC) is a Santa Clara County-based, 501(c)(3) non-profit organization that has provided regular services to the community since 1955 and has been incorporated in California since 1981. Our mission is to serve and advocate for families and individuals in need, especially those living in poverty. We work to create a more just and compassionate community in which people of all cultures and beliefs can participate and prosper.
Our vision includes a valley where every child has the opportunity to learn from cradle to career and lives in a neighborhood free from fear, where families can afford to live in safe and decent housing and eat nutritious food, where enterprising workers can earn enough to make ends meet and save for the future, where immigrants are welcomed, and where those who are imprisoned, physically and mentally ill, elderly, and vulnerable can find healing and hope. We commit to act with a spirit of Compassion, Service and Justice guided by the principles of Respect, Integrity, Teamwork and Excellence as our core values.
CCSCC By the Numbers
• We serve more than 100,000 clients annually.
• Our services address five key areas of need: Food, Housing, Health, Education, and Economic Security.
• Our 30+ direct service programs include youth and family services, job skills training and placement, meals and food distribution, disaster response and emergency preparedness, older adult services, mental health and wellness, financial education, immigration legal services, homeless services and supportive housing, and refugee foster care. • Services are provided at 90+ community locations throughout the county, including Gilroy, San Martin, and Morgan Hill.
• Our work is supported by more than 550 staff and 1,500 volunteers. • CCSCC’s staff reflect Santa Clara County’s diversity – more than 80% are people of color, nearly 80% women, and cumulatively speak nearly 30 languages and dialects.
Many are themselves residents of the neighborhoods and communities we serve, fostering deep understanding and connection with local needs and program participants.
CCSCC’s Opioid and Substance Use Disorder Prevention Programs Our extensive experience operating substance use disorder (SUD) prevention programs, or incorporating SUD prevention components as essential parts of our programming, includes opioid prevention, treatment, recovery, and harm reduction through programs such as:
Response to City of Gilroy Opioid Remediation Services No. 26-RFP-AD-527 Catholic Charities of Santa Clara County 2
Bringing Everyone’s Strengths Together (BEST): Through BEST, we have implemented an array of school and community-based programming, with the City of San José for over 20 years.
This has included SUD prevention education that incorporates harm reduction strategies.
Opioid Overdose Prevention (OOP) services: This program, funded by the City of San José in 2024, served youth and families in the 95122 zip code, providing training in overdose prevention, safe decision-making, and harm reduction practices. We delivered This Is Not About Drugs (TINAD) curriculum in group settings, pro-social civic engagement activities, and opioid awareness workshops.
Morgan Hill / San Martin Late Night Gym and School-based services: In 2024-2025, CCSCC implemented these programs in partnership with the City of Gilroy Police Department South County Youth Task Force (SCYTF). We successfully deliver recreation-based out-of-school time services within a safe evening space for a target population of youth similar to this proposed program as well as evidence-based classroom sessions and assemblies delivered during the school day that teach students about opioid risks, healthy decision-making, and how to support peers in making safe choices.
In addition, we recently received notice that we were selected to implement the SCYTF’s Community-Based Youth Services program, which will build on our current activities in Gilroy.
Programs in partnership with Santa Clara County: For many years, CCSCC provided a continuum of services funded by Santa Clara County Probation for justice-involved youth or youth at risk for involvement in the juvenile justice system through programs of varying intensity. These included the Multi-Agency Assessment Center Program, Probation Gang Resistance and Intervention Program, and Support and Enhancement Services.
Currently, we operate successful programs including Community Service Learning, Young Adult Deferred Entry of Judgment, and the Youth Advisory Council initiative in partnership with Probation. All are designed to address key needs of our clients – including substance misuse – and reduce justice system recidivism.
Since 2018, we have also provided services with the county’s Social Services Agency through our Supportive Therapeutic Options Program. This program, in part, delivers services to youth and their families referred by the County's Behavioral Health Services Department, the Department of Alcohol and Drug Services, the Department of Family and Children's Services, and Juvenile Probation. Services are designed to prevent entry or re‐entry into out-of‐home placement for at-risk children.