[0:00] On major donor financing, finding major donors, so they're going to join my executive committee to search for major donors.

[0:09] We're thrilled to have them. I got a confirmation today that Roger Penske is going to give us our car.

[0:20] He wants to do a picture photo op with me sometime in the next couple of weeks, and I'm

[0:30] meeting tomorrow with two gentlemen, Dana, Stinsmore, and Craig Cuffy, that's going

[0:41] to help us find major donors, but I'm thrilled that these two gentlemen have agreed to

[0:46] take some of the burden off me and help me out.

[0:50] Thank you. Oh, we need commissioner Van Killen back

[0:57] Okay, and just one that members of the audience if you're gonna continue conversations, could you do those in the lobby?

[1:05] That the commission can continue on with their meeting. Thank you, Chris.

[1:14] So I guess it's to me. Are we?

[1:17] Yeah, can we move your conversation into the lobby, please?

[1:22] Yeah, thank you

[1:25] No, you're not laughing off. He's supposed to be a parent

[1:29] I, yeah, wrong spoke with as interacting with me in Matt, and I'm a thing significant to

[1:38] add other than where we're on board.

[1:41] Good to hear.

[1:44] Mr. Green.

[1:47] So, we met as a group of stakeholders last week with for the review of the Backways Trails

[1:57] and parks. And there's a pretty good group of people there from supporting different groups in

[2:08] the community. And we had a good presentation and asked all the participants to put stickers like

[2:19] many stickers on different things that would be priorities.

[2:25] So that is actually going to be looked at and come to us next month, correct?

[2:34] That I mean.

[2:36] So, I imagine they will present somewhat our results of that.

[2:42] And I don't know if you want me to add that.

[2:44] So looking at that Friday and Saturday evening rose on all of our locations.

[2:49] So some of our locations actually presently pollutes is adding hours, particularly in that time slot.

[2:59] Talking about what you do when you come to the library.

[3:02] So at least 34% so a third of the respondents responded that they did come.

[3:07] And they were looking at programs that were attending story times, book clubs.

[3:11] And that is, you know, almost happy to hear

[3:14] I know what all the great stuff

[3:15] Sarah Lynn and her group is doing for you.

[3:18] So, you know, 50% are coming for programs for you.

[3:24] What about what you think about the library?

[3:27] So, again, it was always nice to see,

[3:28] they believe it has to be a safe place.

[3:30] It's a clean place.

[3:32] And you can find what you're looking for when you're there.

[3:34] So, let's just kind of some percentages

[3:36] of what's going on there.

[3:40] The website.

[3:41] So our digital resources and the virtual visits, you can actually do a ton of wonderful things.

[3:48] You can check out books virtually. You can download videos, but most people place of a gun hold.

[3:53] And you can certainly do that. You can search for library materials, and then of course find out what do you have to do.

[4:06] This is a special and regular meeting of the Morgan Hill City Council, and we are just returning from a closed session.

[4:15] So, we've already called the meeting to order and all that, I will ask our acting city attorney to announce the results of our closed session.

[4:23] Mr. Mayor, there were two closed sessions tonight and I have no reportable action.

[4:27] Thank you.

[4:28] Thank you, Mr. Baum.

[4:32] Would you all please rise and join me in a moment of silent indication?

[4:53] Thank you. Please remain standing and join me in the pledge of allegiance.

[4:57] I pledge allegiance to flag.

[5:09] Thank

[5:15] you very much. We do have Mr. Gordon Sebert is with us, but he's with us on a telephone line. So I need to remind everybody to make sure you speak into the microphone and so that Mr. Sebert can hear us.

[5:35] We do have an opportunity at each of our meetings for one of our members to give a report on

[5:40] whatever they want to report on. They're outside activities or whatever, and it's my turn this evening,

[5:46] and I'd like to start by saying, I am having another copy with a mayor. It's going to be on December 10th.

[5:54] It'll be at the New Location of Booksmart, overop done Avenue on the East Side of town.

[6:01] And my guest will be more in Tobin, our communications and engagement manager.

[6:10] So invite you all 10 o'clock on Saturday, December 10th at Booksmart.

[6:16] The other thing I wanted to report on is I am on the board of something called Silicon Valley

[6:23] clean energy and it is a community choice energy is the ability to have the community

[6:34] purchase their energy not from PG&E although it's still furnished by PG&E there's no

[6:42] change to what happens at your house or anything like that but what we'll be

[6:47] doing is instituting this starting in about April of next year, we'll be offering it, and

[6:55] it will be the default. You can opt out of it and go back to PG&E if you'd like, but if you

[7:01] don't do anything, then you'll be a customer instead of PG&E of Silicon Valley clean energy.

[7:07] You'll get your bill from PG&E, you'll get the delivery from PG&E, but you will be buying the

[7:14] energy from Silicon Valley clean energy. And we are for the first three years. We're

[7:19] guaranteeing that if you go with Silicon Valley clean energy, you will save 1% over

[7:26] PG&E's rates. And then there is another option that you have and that's to opt up. If

[7:34] you don't, if you just take the normal offering, you'll get 50% of your energy will be from

[7:42] renewable sources. If you opt up and choose to pick a little bit extra, more than you

[7:47] would pay PG&E, then you can get 100% renewable energy. So that's coming. There's a

[7:55] little brochure of two-page thing about it. I put a stack of them over on where the

[8:01] agendas are. If you want to know more about it and we're looking forward to it. It's

[8:06] going smoothly, everything is falling into place very nicely. We have a staff that's

[8:16] growing by the week and the headquarters is open in Sunnyvale now. That

[8:21] opened last week and it's everything's right on schedule so it's going to be

[8:27] exciting when it comes about. With that I'll ask City Manager Mr. Steve

[8:32] If you have a report this evening, as you always do.

[8:35] Yes, I do Mr. Mayor.

[8:36] Good evening, Mayor.

[8:37] Members of the Council, members of the community and my teammates over here.

[8:40] I have a variety of updates, but to start with, this is the reason why the Council

[8:44] invested in the New Council chamber.

[8:46] We appreciate having many of you here today.

[8:48] Those of you that used to participate at Council meetings.

[8:51] You recall we were next door at a very much more small cramped space.

[8:55] So the Council invested in this space a couple of years back.

[8:57] So when we have large communities like tonight,

[8:59] It's much of our comfortable setting with improved technology, so thank you all for being here.

[9:05] I typically start my comments with a recognition of our team, our teammates, for living some of our core values,

[9:12] and tonight I'd like to recognize two of them for living our core value of teamwork.

[9:15] Recently the City Council invests in a brand new software that we're using for our development services.

[9:20] So when you pull a permit or our building, our developers are working with us.

[9:23] They use that software as well as with our fire services and business licenses.

[9:27] And Elizabeth Bassett and the Jeep collied,

[9:31] have been working together extensively

[9:34] behind the scenes of developing form.

[9:36] And I'm recognizing, because they're not just sitting there

[9:38] developing form but there's an excitement in it,

[9:40] and a passion for what they're doing to make sure we have better communication

[9:43] with our residents and development community,

[9:46] as well as a more efficient operation behind the scenes.

[9:48] So I just want to say thank you to the Jeep and Elizabeth

[9:50] for their continued efforts.

[9:53] With the holiday season approaching,

[9:55] I just want to share what the upcoming council meeting

[9:57] schedule is and so

[10:00] We have, obviously, our meeting tonight. We will have our next meeting on December 7, which is our regular meeting. We will then have a meeting, a special meeting on December 14th, at the December 14th meeting is when we will see the new council as a result of the elections that we just had last Tuesday.

[10:16] We will then be canceling the meeting on December 21st. We always cancel the first meeting in January and then the next meeting for us would be January 18th.

[10:25] So we will have meetings on December 7th, 14th in January 18th, of course, in all the next two months.

[10:32] Just for the council's sake as well as the community as you're wondering when the council will be meeting those are the three dates coming up.

[10:39] Another follow up on the election on December 7th, we plan to bring a report back to the city council,

[10:45] many of the proposition and measures.

[10:47] And one is to give you an update on what happened, but two, there are some areas that we may have to have policy discussion with the city council.

[10:53] So we want to give you a report on the 7th that's an update in the summary and then identify

[10:58] areas that we may come back with individual ports, reports where we're asking you on some

[11:02] policy discussions or decisions based on those approvals.

[11:06] An interesting note is that $32 billion worth of facility bonds were passed throughout the

[11:13] state and $23 billion of that was for school construction.

[11:18] So around the state is a variety of funds that are going into the schools and then the remaining

[11:22] was going into transit projects and other public facilities throughout the state, but an amazing

[11:27] number throughout the state, especially to support our education system.

[11:32] I want to continue to thank the community as we have done many times in the last couple

[11:35] years for being a county leader in water conservation.

[11:38] The numbers have come out for January through September this year, and morning health continues

[11:44] to be a leader not only in the region in the state, compared to 2013, we have considered 27%

[11:50] or use 27% less water during those months periods.

[11:54] So thank you for that.

[11:56] And just a friendly reminder that now that we're

[11:57] in the winter season, the only day that we allow watering

[12:01] is on Wednesdays.

[12:02] And so we ask you to make sure that irrigation is set up that way,

[12:05] as well as if you see your neighbors just

[12:07] play last them to abide by the Wednesday use.

[12:10] So we can continue our conservation efforts.

[12:16] We are recommending this as a housekeeping item

[12:18] there, recommending that item number 13, you considered before item 12, so reversals too,

[12:25] when you adopt the agenda. And then we have some supplements and fun, you supplements

[12:29] for item 7, 11, a couple for 11, and then presentations for 10, 11, 12, 13,

[12:35] and then our Yaku is here as well. And that concludes.

[12:40] Thank you, Mr. Rimer. Mr. Bomb, do you have an acting city attorney's report?

[12:45] Just very briefly. I want to introduce myself. I'm Gary Bomb. I'm just acting city attorney.

[12:49] want on a larkin is on vacation he'll be returning on Tuesday. Thank you. Thank you, Mr.

[12:55] Baum. Are there any other reports? Mr. Carr.

[13:00] We'll briefly, if I might, Mayor, tonight's going to be sort of a transportation night.

[13:03] So I just wanted to note, I know, the council, all got copies. The Valley Transportation Authority

[13:09] is going through a new strategic planning process and they have a draft strategic plan of

[13:15] I believe my colleagues have all seen and for the public it can be access to the VTA website

[13:22] and see sort of the ongoing future direction for the Valley Transportation Authority.

[13:27] They hope to take that to the board on December 8th for approval.

[13:31] So if someone, if you are interested in that before December 8th would be a good time to do that.

[13:37] And as well, I think it probably has been fairly well dispersed throughout our community that

[13:44] Paratransit services are changing in our county and there is a new service provider that

[13:49] happened rather quickly and down at the senior center I know that they have all the

[13:55] correct contact information, but really the customer service help line for VTA is now the

[14:00] line that you would want to call for any kind of paratransit needs or paratransit services.

[14:06] Thank you, Mayor.

[14:08] Thank you, Mr. Carr.

[14:09] One of the highlights of our evening is always when we have our Youth Action Council here to talk about an asset among the 41 developmental assets.

[14:19] In fact, they usually talk about two of them.

[14:22] And tonight, Lisa Fuente, Steve and Holly and Justin Hall are going to make the presentation. Come on up, guys.

[14:48] Give me a chance to have some of my first singing in nature.

[14:58] Oh, okay.

[15:00] Sorry. Good evening, Mayor Tate City Council members, City Manager and City Attorney.

[15:12] And my name is Stephen Hawley. I have been in Yack for this is my first year.

[15:18] Good evening. My name is Justin Hawng and this is my first year in Yack.

[15:24] Good evening. My name is Lisa Fuentes. This is my fourth year in Yack.

[15:27] And we are here to present the November developmental acid acid number 41 positive cultural identity.

[15:33] Young person feels proud of her or his cultural background.

[15:40] For those teens who would like to get to know and understand the background of heritage,

[15:45] make sure to ask your parents about stories from where they came from and for those parents

[15:49] who would like to get their children involved, make sure to bring them to community activities

[15:55] such as the Vietnamese moon festival or Vietnamese New Year and make sure they can get to know traditional games or your native language.

[16:10] So,

[16:14] how does, how do different cultural backgrounds apply to YACs?

[16:20] So, we, so, despite our cultural differences, we, the YAC organization, except very, very

[16:28] various teens to work together in order to make things happen and we despite our cultural

[16:41] differences.

[16:42] So we learn to work together different from our race.

[16:50] How this applies to Morgan Hill.

[16:52] Sharing and celebrating various cultures increases self-esteem and promotes cultural

[16:57] competence among young people.

[16:59] That diversity of Morgan has a benefit to our, as they're exposed to different cultures every single day.

[17:08] The complementary developmental asset for this month, this asset number 38, which is self-esteem,

[17:13] or a young person reports having a highest self-esteem increased confidence and face and who they are and what they want to accomplish.

[17:25] Okay, so now I'm going to talk to you about why it is important to have a positive self-esteem.

[17:31] So, having positive self-esteem, well,

[17:43] so having in order to have positive self-esteem,

[17:46] you need confidence in yourself in order to have positive self-esteem.

[17:51] So your foundation that you have as positive self-esteem is needed in order for you to have

[18:01] of authenticity as a person, so the specific characteristics that make up you as a person.

[18:09] And without positive cultural identity, you won't be able to have positive self-esteem,

[18:16] which will make you break down.

[18:27] Oh, wow.

[18:28] We would like to ask if one of you guys would like to share if you guys feel comfortable.

[18:32] When you were a child, were you proud of your cultural identity, why or why not, any?

[18:40] Somebody, jump in here.

[18:43] You can go.

[18:44] Go ahead, Mr. Gunstein.

[18:46] Okay, I mean, he's going to make me go first.

[18:48] My parents are from a different country.

[18:50] I'm first generation.

[18:52] They're from Jamaica.

[18:55] So that has, I think, allowed me to see things in a different perspective.

[18:58] So, I'm proud of that my parents are from another country, but I'm also proud that they

[19:07] saw fit to come here to the United States, where I was born and I was born in New York.

[19:13] And it helps to bring home, I think, more succinctly for me, that this country was based

[19:21] on immigrants.

[19:22] So, I think this having a cultural identity really plays into the fabric of what the United States is all about.

[19:32] And I appreciate you guys bringing this to our attention. Great presentation so far.

[19:37] Mr. Carr.

[19:39] Well, I would just say that my mom has done a significant amount of work in looking at our family tree and where the generations of our family have come from.

[19:50] We've been in the United States for many generations.

[19:53] But I think that that is, to me, it's interesting.

[19:56] But I think that's also helpful as well

[19:58] in understanding where our family.

[20:00] Assembly came from originally and how many generations have been here and where they have spread throughout the United States, and it's something that I share with my children as well, and hopefully they'll keep that kind of going as well.

[20:16] I'm going to send away and get my DNA looked at and all that and figured out.

[20:23] But what I've been told is on 15, 16th English and 16th Irish.

[20:30] And I love celebrating the Irish part of it.

[20:38] Well, we would like to ask, what do you do to celebrate your cultural heritage?

[20:44] Well, I wish I have a lot of pubs.

[20:51] And to make an independent day I believe it was August 7th.

[20:55] to make it was a colony of Great Britain until 1960, 1942.

[21:02] Well, I enjoyed doing the things that you all talked about at the beginning and celebrate

[21:07] in the cultural heritage and the diversity that is here in our community, whether it's

[21:12] my specific background or not, it's our communities and I think it's important to identify

[21:16] with that.

[21:17] Okay, now we would like to share something from our cultures, so I come from a Hispanic background and I'm a Catholic, so as a Catholic, we celebrate the Dia de la Vitaine on December 12, and so for my culture, I used to do dancing for my church, and we hand make our dresses and so I finished my dress first, so I got to make a wish and so I danced barefoot.

[21:47] as a sacrifice for one of my dreams to come true.

[21:50] And so that's kind of where I come from.

[21:54] I love to dance for the sweet and muddy end.

[21:58] So that's my culture background.

[21:59] Can you bring around here where we can see them a little bit?

[22:01] They're beautiful.

[22:02] They're really beautiful.

[22:07] Nice.

[22:07] Very beautiful.

[22:09] Yeah.

[22:15] All right, beautiful.

[22:17] How long are you taking to make that?

[22:29] Good job.

[22:30] Beautiful.

[22:36] A hard act to follow.

[22:39] So I'll just tell you, I don't have really anything as beautiful as that, but so I have

[22:47] something from the day of the dead, it's a, it's mostly, it's a common candy, so it's

[22:57] a new guy and all the men's, I know it's not really that beautiful, but it's good, yeah

[23:04] It is good.

[23:06] And my mom made this for you all to eat.

[23:12] So would you like one first?

[23:16] Of course.

[23:22] Justin.

[23:28] Well, he passes out candy.

[23:30] Oh, thank you.

[23:32] So we wear out yye.

[23:34] Something called out yye.

[23:35] It's mainly made out of silk, but this one's not made out of silk.

[23:38] We wear it on Vietnamese moon festival or Vietnamese New Year, or sometimes on

[23:43] So this is not iron but this was actually my mom was letting Jess. Oh wow. And she wore it

[23:51] in 1999 and then I came in their lives for years later.

[23:59] My mom has a lot of these for many like parties or festivals but this was one of her

[24:07] more special ones like I didn't even know it was hers until like two nights ago.

[24:11] Once you told me that she kept it, so yeah, that's mine.

[24:17] Very cool.

[24:18] Thank you.

[24:18] Great job, you guys.

[24:26] Is there any questions?

[24:29] I think you've covered it.

[24:31] Thank you.

[24:31] Thank you for having us and have a great rest of your night.

[24:35] Thank you, too.

[24:36] Great job, guys.

[24:37] Good job.

[24:45] Okay, it's time for public comment.

[24:48] Public comment is not opportunity for anybody in the audience to address the city council on items that are not.

[24:54] not on tonight's agenda. If they're on tonight's agenda, then we'll...

[25:00] Call you up, and that agenda item comes up. But if you have any comments, you turn in a speaker card, if you want to speak on items, not on the agenda. Do we have any speaker cards, Ms. Wilson?

[25:14] I don't have any speaker cards for public comment.

[25:17] Okay. And nobody's running up, so I'll close public comment, and we will go to adoption of the agenda.

[25:24] City Manager has requested that we put item 13 in front of item 12. If we can have a motion to approve the agenda that way.

[25:33] Some move. Okay. Motion to second all in favor say aye.

[25:37] All right.

[25:38] Opposed.

[25:40] Motion carries. I assume unanimously. I didn't hear.

[25:44] Gordon.

[25:45] All right.

[25:46] I, there we go, consent calendar.

[25:50] We have items on consent calendar that we think are fairly routine in nature and do not require

[25:56] discussion or anything, but anybody in the audience can pull an item off the consent calendar

[26:02] by turning in a speaker card and I'll ask the City Council members if they have items to

[26:08] remove.

[26:11] Mr. Constantin.

[26:12] Yes, I am seven, please.

[26:13] Number seven,

[26:18] and so I'll ask for approval of the consent calendar for all items except number seven

[26:26] Some of that means to be roll call vote

[26:31] All right, oh, because it call roll call vote because we're telephone telephone

[26:37] So we'll have a roll call vote

[26:40] Mayor T. I count some members car. I constant time. Seabird

[26:49] And now we go to item number seven, that's AB 1600 development impact P report for fiscal year 2015-16, Mr. Constantine, did you want to...

[27:03] Staff for some questions?

[27:04] Yes, please. I do have some questions, but perhaps the report may answer some of them. Thank you.

[27:10] Do you have there is the AB600 development impact fee report?

[27:15] I'm sorry we can introduce myself.

[27:17] My name is Dan Wing, finance director.

[27:19] Good evening, Mr. Mayor and Councillor members.

[27:25] This item is the required annual report of the development impact fee that the state requires

[27:30] to report to the Council and the public.

[27:33] The impact fees, however, collect the development impact fees.

[27:38] These in fact fees, requirements are we have to close the amount we collected and to

[27:43] close the collected and expansions for a year.

[27:46] And it required the city to make the resolution adopted for any funds that fees collected

[27:53] over five years old.

[27:55] There are three fees that we collected that have been over five years old and they are the

[28:00] strong training impact fee from 23 in the amount of 1.1 million.

[28:05] I'm sorry, 1.1 million from the traffic impact fee and over $800,000 or $840,000 from the

[28:12] Storn Drain Impact fee.

[28:15] Approximately 1.3.1 million from the traffic fees of 1.303.

[28:21] Those fees have been collected.

[28:22] There are funds in that fees that have been over 5 years old and required to cancel to make

[28:27] the findings for the purpose of those for the purpose for the return of those funds.

[28:35] Okay. So regards to, I'm going to hit each of the three. So in regards to the Stormdream

[28:42] Impact Fund, we have a surplus of 5.2 million dollars roughly, correct, according to the report.

[28:50] Our call report is right now. The fund thousand five point two, but only about $846,000,

[28:56] I'll go five years old.

[28:58] Okay, so $800,000 will be used for

[29:01] between the storm drainage system master plan

[29:05] and the August Creek flood protection?

[29:08] Is that correct?

[29:10] Yes, just a partial of it.

[29:12] Right now we have over 5.2 million allocated

[29:16] or designated for the master plan

[29:21] and upper Yaka's Creek flood protection project.

[29:23] So, is it identified what monies will go to the Yadis Creek flight protection plan?

[29:32] If I can take that question.

[29:35] Carl, be our key public works director.

[29:39] We're going to be spending quite a bit of money of the range impact funds on that related

[29:44] to the upper Yadis Creek project.

[29:47] Once that is in place, we have in our Kepler and Pove and Program to build improvements

[29:52] that are paid for out of the storm drain master plan, so it's a plan to build those improvements

[29:59] when...

[30:00] And do you have an idea of what they might, what those improvements may be?

[30:06] Oh, they'd be a connector pipes for, you know, once this, once the upper august flood, the PL-566 project is complete.

[30:14] We're going to need to now build those large storm drains that are going to connect to that so that we can drain the city into this large.

[30:23] Okay, all right, and then thank you for that and then regarding the traffic impact fee

[30:29] How much of the 4.5 million is over five years old?

[30:36] That's I didn't find it in report. We have one point one million from traffic impact fee

[30:41] That's it has been over five years old. Okay, and that's gonna go to the do it Avenue S curve and then the hail Avenue extension

[30:47] Okay, that's correct now

[30:50] From measure B and I'll call it the good measure B

[30:54] We're supposed to be getting, I believe, $23 or $24 million for the Hail Avenue Extension.

[30:59] Do we know exactly how much is going to cost for the Hail Avenue Extension?

[31:04] We won't be getting that amount of money.

[31:07] The estimated cost to complete Hail Avenue is $13.5 million.

[31:12] We are providing a match with the traffic impact fees of about 30% of that.

[31:18] So four and a half million or so will be that'll be that's what we'll use our traffic

[31:24] impact fees for the balance of the project will come from the transportation measure.

[31:29] Okay good I did not know that and then going back to or ending with the the fire impact

[31:35] fee the land where that we're talking about the the fire station being built we own that property

[31:41] correct that's correct so where is the estimated $3 million cost of the fire house and

[31:48] I understand why it would cost 3 million dollars to build a fire station for a land that we already own.

[31:56] Actually, the estimate, it is an engineer's estimate to build that facility.

[32:00] It's going to be more than just a building.

[32:02] There will be some supporting infrastructure with that.

[32:06] But the estimate is right now about $3 million to build that facility on top of the land we already own.

[32:14] Okay. I guess when we get closer to the actual build,

[32:17] Well, I understand that that seems a little exorbitant to me, but it's an estimate at this time

[32:21] But yeah, we'll come back to when the time comes. Engineers always overbuild stuff

[32:26] Okay, so that's that pretty much answers all my questions. I do appreciate that and with that

[32:32] Mr. Mayor then I will move approval of item number seven

[32:36] We have a second

[32:37] House

[32:38] But can we

[32:40] Have a question and I may be Mr. Seabert has one as well while the side of the

[32:44] Okay,

[32:46] Carl, on the, on the, on the, on the S curve, the D would have no

[32:51] S curve, the county had that on their agenda on Tuesday to accept or reject

[32:55] this, did, do you know, did they accept the, the bid on that?

[32:58] I, I believe they accept the bid.

[32:59] I know the bid's were very favorable.

[33:02] Very, very good.

[33:03] Yeah.

[33:03] So does that mean that they have a timeline now on it?

[33:08] It does, uh, I don't need you to quote me on it.

[33:11] I think they're going to move forward with the process of getting the contract executed and they're going to start work this year.

[33:23] Thank you.

[33:26] Mr. Sebert, do you have anything?

[33:29] No questions.

[33:30] The city manager have already answered.

[33:31] Okay.

[33:32] We have the motion in a second.

[33:33] Can we have a roll call vote?

[33:35] Mayor Tate.

[33:36] Council members.

[33:37] Car.

[33:39] Constantine.

[33:40] Seabird.

[33:41] Hi.

[33:42] Thank you.

[33:43] That completes our consent calendar and the item we took off the consent calendar.

[33:48] So we move now to item number 10 and that's the September 2016 financial and investment

[33:56] report.

[33:56] Mr. Wynn.

[34:06] Good evening again.

[34:07] Backwing.

[34:08] Finance Director.

[34:10] What you have in the package is the first-quality ending September 30 financial investment report.

[34:19] We present this report to the Council and the residents on the monthly as part of commitment to the

[34:25] CEO Council Hon.

[34:26] Court and priorities of maintaining fiscal responsibility and preserving and cultivating public trust.

[34:33] Weekly and important is our commitment to the Council of Expression of maintaining high level

[34:37] transparency and responsibility and being a responsible towards our public funds.

[34:46] Overall revenue received through the first quarter for all funds total 24.1 million

[34:52] or 22% of the budget.

[34:54] Expansors include conferences total 42.9 million or 32% of the budget.

[35:00] Let's visit each of the city's major funds and let's begin with John of Fund.

[35:05] Total John of Fund revenue received through the first quarter is 6.1 million, and it is about 16% higher than this time last year,

[35:14] was mainly due to the increase in South Tax collection and Transient Occupy Tax or TUT.

[35:20] The increase in South Tax collection is due to the end of the triple flip, as the state has begun to spurse the cities to full local share of 1% South Tax versus

[35:29] three quarters of one percent in prior years. The increase into U.T. is mainly due to the

[35:35] additional new hotel which went online some of this year. It's a Lakinta. The expansion

[35:41] shows including conferences total 12.7 million or 33 percent of budget.

[35:50] Recreation operation

[35:51] is a major part of the Jennifer Calagories. Revenue received through the first quarter are

[35:57] can slightly underbudget mainly due to the lower daily emission at the Aquaric Center.

[36:04] I'm attributable to the minor weather and lower rental income and fuel-closed participating

[36:09] in the CAMS program.

[36:12] As you can see in the chart of representation,

[36:16] the recreation program impact you turn on

[36:18] in the past 10 years, the program has been sufficient in the last five years, come from

[36:23] negative impact of over 1.5 million in O607.

[36:28] This is testament to your leadership and the hard work

[36:31] that our creation teammates.

[36:36] Community development fund.

[36:38] The revenue received through the first quarter is about 1.2 million

[36:43] or $108,000 less than prior year this time.

[36:49] As many due to the return of normal level of the

[36:51] common activity. The expenditures, including conferences total 1.7 million, the front is

[36:59] forecasted to remain structured in balance with how council actions and run out

[37:04] cast in 1819. The city working with the consultants has resumed our updated

[37:11] fee study and we're going to also with the updated fee schedule in the next few

[37:19] enterprise funds to include the sewer operation and water operation.

[37:24] The sewer operation revenue received due to date is 2.5 million

[37:28] about the same time from prior year.

[37:31] The expansioners, including compressors, also at about 2.5 million

[37:36] or 23% of the budget.

[37:39] As you can see in the chart, the fund is forecast remain

[37:43] at the sea council adopted fund balance of 25% throughout the next five years.

[37:50] What are operations, revenue received today is 3.2 million or about 33% of budget,

[37:58] expenditures, including conferences, total, 3.5 million or 32% of budget.

[38:06] The fund is forecasted to meet the Council of Duffet Fund balance of 25% with the next five years.

[38:15] Earlier this year, the Council member of CBERT asked that the staff repeatedly 20 year financial

[38:22] protection at that time, the council decided staff not invested in that effort.

[38:29] Council member of CBERT asked that we considered the item again, so the staff right now is seeking

[38:34] the council direction.

[38:35] Historically, we have repatriated five year protection as part of budget development, and those protection

[38:42] can be found in the budget special section analysis and budget

[38:46] document begin in place 346 through 348.

[38:50] And that concludes my presentation.

[38:55] Thank you. Any questions?

[38:59] Go ahead, Mr. Gunstein.

[39:01] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[39:01] Regarding the 20-year financial projection.

[39:05] What would that entail?

[39:08] Well, there's pros and cons in the

[39:11] to introduce you for an answer protection.

[39:12] One entail is that we protect out the city,

[39:16] the resources, the city,

[39:17] the political lack in the next 20 years.

[39:20] The approach is that it gives you the council picture

[39:23] or help council prioritize your priorities.

[39:27] The current is because it's 20 years

[39:29] and so there could be more less visibility

[39:35] and council make some commitment

[39:38] that might future may not pan out.

[39:41] And the industry standard is fire forecast.

[39:45] Yeah.

[39:47] Based on best practices, we can recommend by the HFOA.

[39:52] This is the natural association for the local government.

[39:55] It's five years forecast.

[39:59] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[40:00] Thank you. If there's no other questions, we'll open it for public comment. Is there any speaker cards on this item?

[40:06] I don't have any speaker cards for this item. Okay, and nobody's running up, so we'll close public comment, and open it to council discussion or action.

[40:17] Mr. Mayor?

[40:18] Yeah. Please, Mr. Sever.

[40:20] Thank you very much. The reason I was suggesting that we've worked longer term, and I recognize that the accuracy,

[40:29] be less, of course, be less as you look out further.

[40:33] But there are certain items that we either know or have reasonable expectations

[40:38] are going to have significant impact, especially some of the items that are in the personnel

[40:44] costs in terms of retirement costs, especially if there are changes that are discount rate,

[40:51] and health insurance costs as we all know have been going up.

[40:55] And so to look at some of those costs over time and get an idea of what impacts they may

[41:03] have on our ability to use our discretionary funds, I thought would be a useful information

[41:10] for the council to consider.

[41:12] And that's the reason I suggested to a gross manner that we look 20 years out, not just five

[41:22] years out.

[41:24] Okay, thank you.

[41:30] Mr. Wright, I recommend one of something to report, but then I would recommend maintaining the five year forecast and not go to 20 years.

[41:40] We would be my direction to staff.

[41:45] That by no means is the motion as to my opinion.

[41:51] Yeah, I certainly don't want to make that some kind of exercise.

[41:57] It's really going to take a lot of labor a lot of time.

[42:02] If it can be done on the back of an envelope, kind of thing, I have no objection to doing it.

[42:10] But I know that we use the five-year forecast, and we update the five-year forecast,

[42:15] at least once during every year as well, to not just in the budget.

[42:19] Every budget cycle, that's correct.

[42:22] Every budget cycle is on one, every year.

[42:26] If you recall that when the counselor adopted the process of doing the two-year purchase cycle,

[42:32] the counselor wants your records to be revisited every mid-year cycle, so that's that we plan to do.

[42:38] There's still a review.

[42:40] And also gets updated if something drastic changes like the Perse rate or something like that.

[42:47] That's correct.

[42:49] As long as we have that.

[42:52] Do you have a preference Mr. Carr?

[42:55] Do you currently do any kind of projections beyond five years?

[43:02] There are some funds that we look at over five years horizon.

[43:07] I'm sorry, but some categories of special revenue funds.

[43:13] Like we've forecast in development activities in the next five years or certain property tax.

[43:18] or we gather the economic forecasts from other experts,

[43:27] naturally and locally,

[43:29] and we put that together,

[43:30] strive to make protection five years

[43:32] and look for the house possible.

[43:35] But then we provide that on the just incremental basis,

[43:39] not like three of the whole fund,

[43:41] or any particular fund or a special revenue fund.

[43:45] Okay, so I was trying to think is there is there another point in there 20 years seems like a lot of crystal ball work

[43:52] Is there a 10 year, but it sounds like you know really anything is still crystal ball work and we don't do much projections beyond five that it's

[44:03] You're taking it into account a lot of different things just to get to a five year projection that is correct

[44:09] I mean I I'd I'd love to see where we think things are going beyond five years

[44:14] but it seems like it's just not very credible

[44:18] what we would be seeing and I wouldn't want to lead us

[44:22] a stray or the public in what we would see.

[44:24] And even five years is kind of a crystal ball.

[44:26] And it's not that it's well.

[44:28] Yeah, I mean, I get Mr. Sebert's interest in that.

[44:34] And if there was some way of having some credible,

[44:38] really reliable information that took us beyond five years,

[44:42] yeah, I'd love to see that.

[44:43] but it doesn't sound like that's really there.

[44:47] Yeah, and I understand Mr. Sebert's reasoning for doing that, but I think that we have enough

[44:52] safeguards built in when we do the review with the forecast of five year forecast that would give us that information.

[45:00] That I think for casting over 20 years, being that it wouldn't be that reliable, be more like a benchmark, maybe.

[45:09] Yeah, versus really getting us firm data that we could actually act upon when we make our budget.

[45:15] I agree, the five year has served us very well, and I think we need to continue to rely on it.

[45:22] Mr. Sever, do you have anything else?

[45:24] Yes, Mr. Mayor, thank you.

[45:27] And I understand that the council's concerns and these also the use of staff resources.

[45:32] I would suggest that at the very least, for those items, we are projections of provided

[45:38] out from outside the city that those be included, perhaps, when the five years are looked at,

[45:46] just so you have longer range information, I'm specifically thinking of the cost contributions.

[45:53] It's my understanding that they do provide estimates if not on a specific basis to Morgan

[46:01] Hill.

[46:02] They do provide estimates for the system for a long time, but I think you can even get them

[46:07] for the city,

[46:11] whether the curve kind of dips down as we have done some excellent things

[46:15] in terms of incorporation without employee groups to mitigate the impact of increases, but

[46:22] would be useful to look at those items in themselves as part of the five year if that information

[46:32] is available through Poers for both health insurance and retirement costs.

[46:37] But just as a point of information, not to be calculated in terms of a long term for that.

[46:46] That makes sense. That's kind of what I was saying if something comes up with a change in

[46:51] Perse Rates or something like that then we take a look at the five year anyway and there's more information

[46:56] Beyond that we could use it. You just said it better. Yeah, you did much better.

[47:02] Okay, so can we have a motion to accept the

[47:06] And file the report and some of and keep it at five year for you. I think we can give it a

[47:16] I need a, yeah, we need a second and roll call.

[47:20] Mayor Tate.

[47:21] Council members.

[47:22] Car.

[47:23] Constantine.

[47:23] I see.

[47:25] Aye.

[47:27] Thank you.

[47:28] That completes item number 10.

[47:31] And we go to item number 11.

[47:33] Review of questions and issues for high-speed rail projects,

[47:36] coping, lecture.

[47:39] Ms. Ramirez.

[47:41] Good evening.

[47:43] Mayor and council.

[47:44] teammates and members of the public that are here or watching from home.

[47:54] We tonight

[47:54] before I get started I want to recognize that there is a number of teammates in the room

[48:01] with us in addition to all the residents that joined us as well as members from the high

[48:07] speed rail authorities that are here.

[48:13] And we should point out that there are seats available

[48:16] all over on the south side.

[48:19] Thank you.

[48:21] I have a very brief short presentation for you today.

[48:26] The purpose of the meeting is to receive additional public input from the community and

[48:34] to focus on the questions and issues that we are compelling for the high-speed rail project.

[48:44] And

[48:47] the intention of tonight's meeting is not to go into an extensive presentation.

[48:53] We have had a number of conversations before you in a study session format, in a council meeting

[48:59] format, and a number of community meetings and business meetings where we've talked in

[49:05] the links about the project.

[49:06] So that is not the purpose of tonight's meeting, but or to make any more recommendations

[49:14] or decisions on the alignments, but to simply gather all the questions that are pertinent

[49:20] to us.

[49:22] I would like to very briefly give a quick overview of the project, especially in talking

[49:28] to some of our community members that joined us at a very early meeting today.

[49:34] There are still a lot of questions in regards to the project.

[49:40] So the few comments that I want to remind ourselves of is that this is a state project.

[49:47] This is not a city project.

[49:50] This project is being designed program.

[49:54] Eventually, it will be constructed and operated by the California High Speed Rail.

[50:01] The project intends to have a rail system that runs from San Francisco to San Diego, eventually from Sacramento to Los Angeles, with trains to run approximately 200 miles per hour.

[50:16] The project coming through our community, the train essentially comes through the community, we don't have a station. There are stations in San Jose and in Gilroy.

[50:27] The project had identified early on, an alignment through Monterey, alongside the Union Pacific

[50:37] Railroad Tracks, another alignment along the one-to-one freeway.

[50:42] Most recently there's been two other alignments that have been added to the study, one that

[50:51] continues to be a long Monterey, and for the purpose of the map, this is Monterey right here.

[50:59] And just a quick clarification, when we reference the Monterey alignment, the idea is that

[51:06] the train goes immediately adjacent to the Union Pacific train tracks. As of right now, we do

[51:15] not know or think that the train will be sharing the train tracks with Union Pacific Railroad,

[51:23] but would be adjacent to the tracks, which essentially means that North of Cochrane,

[51:31] the road on Monterey Road shifts to the east, and then was it passes Cochrane, it continues

[51:39] to go along the track tracks. The, again, the Monterey alignments are two, one that is at grade,

[51:49] and by at grade, as we've talked in previous meetings, it's not flush on the street, but it's

[51:54] on a berm with a wall. That's one of the alternatives. The second one that got recently added is on a

[52:09] And along the freeway is an addition that is on the west side of 101.

[52:16] Previously there was the alignment, and I'll mark it here.

[52:20] So the previous alignment was along the east side of 101.

[52:23] The new, I think it's in some paper to reference as a bypass, goes up, but stays on the

[52:31] west side of 101 and comes down.

[52:34] So those are in essence the alignments that are being considered.

[52:40] We understand from high speed rail that they will be concluding their study and making

[52:48] a recommendation on the preferred alignment through Morgan Hill sometime in April of 2017.

[52:55] And what we want to do tonight is talk about the questions that we have put together

[53:05] that we want to compile in a letter and send to high-speed rail for their consideration

[53:10] as they're rounding up their study on the various assignments with the intent

[53:16] that regardless of what alignment, high-speed rail chooses or deems more viable, that it addresses

[53:26] all the issues and concerns that we have in this community, whether they are issues

[53:31] of safety, aesthetics, noise and how this structure is going to behave and if it's going

[53:39] provide space, recreational space under the structure, so and and so forth.

[53:46] So what you have before you is the set of questions that we have together.

[53:51] You also have a number of supplements that have been provided.

[53:55] As you know, we have tried to reach out to the community above and beyond what

[54:00] high-speed rail is doing on their meetings.

[54:03] We have held a number of meetings.

[54:05] we have created a website where we provide a platform for the community to go in and ask questions

[54:13] or provide comments. We are providing those comments to high speed rail on a weekly basis

[54:19] and what we have provided for you tonight as well is a lot of those comments and questions that

[54:24] are coming in and specifically questions that came in for the item tonight. So that will conclude my

[54:32] I think the intent for tonight's meeting is to allow the community to continue to engage with us.

[54:39] And I know that from our intent, we want to continue to make ourselves available alongside with our high-speed rail members that are here,

[54:49] and maybe continue to have more community meetings or coffees or activities where the community can engage.

[54:57] And as I finalized my comments, I know

[55:00] So our acting city attorney has a couple of remarks to make before we go into comments or questions.

[55:07] Please, Mr. Ball. Mr. Mayor, members, the council, I know that the issue of possible,

[55:13] potential conflict of interest is a risen involving any council member who may live near any of these potential alignments.

[55:21] And I have provided the opinion myself and my understanding is as well the FPPC has that these

[55:28] council members in general do not have a conflict of interest because it's considered to be

[55:33] the same as the public generally the FPPC rules have an exception called public generally

[55:40] and that's when it affects a significant portion of the population it's no longer considered

[55:45] to be a conflict for that individual.

[55:47] That said, we have sent in a request from the FBBC for a formal opinion on a council member who lives very close to the tracks, but the current state, as we understand it, of the conflict law and interpretation is there would not be a conflict.

[56:07] In abundance of caution, I would recommend any council member who does live near the tracks

[56:12] not to discuss the alignment that is well within the discussion tonight.

[56:17] The parameters of the youth has laid out already indicates that we are really not here

[56:22] to decide the alignment, but to talk about just the general issues involving high speed

[56:26] rail.

[56:27] Thank you.

[56:28] Thank you, Mr. Ball.

[56:29] I do have a question.

[56:30] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[56:31] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[56:32] Regarding the conflict of interest, is the same rule apply, whereas if you will

[56:36] property within is it 500 feet or is it just what you say near so what exactly is that mean?

[56:43] Well I have previously applied a thousand feet because it's such it's it's it's because so many

[56:50] people are affected equally that it's really a public generally type exception but generally you may

[56:57] need to do individual analysis but if you're within a thousand feet of your alignment then you don't we

[57:01] shouldn't talk about the alignment.

[57:03] I would recommend not talking about the alignment.

[57:06] Until we have that final opinion.

[57:08] Thank you, thank you.

[57:09] Thank you.

[57:10] Good to get that straight now.

[57:13] OK, if there are no more questions, Mr. Carr.

[57:17] Just to clarify tonight, we're not talking about alignments.

[57:21] Tonight is about the scoping of what we want to ask of high-speed rail, the high-speed

[57:27] of authority to investigate, to go through their reports and analysis, and we want to hear

[57:34] from the community what their questions are.

[57:36] This is not a time when we're going to discuss routing.

[57:39] Absolutely.

[57:40] You are correct, Councillor member.

[57:41] We want to make sure that we capture all the questions that would be relevant for either

[57:49] One, or all of the alignments, questions that are applicable to all of the alignments, and our intent is to influence the project through asking this questions and making sure that they had a chance to review and

[58:07] to understand the implications of the project.

[58:10] So we certainly will take route specific questions,

[58:15] but we're not going to discuss or do anything,

[58:18] but turn them in.

[58:19] Correct.

[58:21] Okay.

[58:22] Anything else?

[58:24] Then I'll open it for public comment.

[58:27] Public comment will be taken.

[58:29] I don't know how many cards that we have.

[58:33] The important figure group.

[58:34] 14 cards, so at three minutes of peace, we'll let that go.

[58:38] What I would ask though is, and this Wilson is going to call the name of the subsequent

[58:43] speaker, and that subsequent speaker should come up and stand behind the current speaker,

[58:48] so that he or she can start speaking right away, and we can get through this in a little

[58:53] bit more rapid fashion that way.

[58:55] And if you haven't turned in a card, but you think you want to speak in a card now, because

[59:00] she's only going to take them now and after we get started we won't take any more.

[59:05] So, there you go.

[59:07] Let's get started.

[59:09] The first speaker I have is Arthur Kalinsky will be followed by Sam Diaz.

[59:14] The speaker cards are on the table and the flowers are pinned.

[59:22] Hello.

[59:26] There's been little public outreach on the high speed rail and the public proposed routes through Morgan Hill.

[59:32] I've lived here 12 years and haven't heard of it until this September.

[59:35] This is the same experience, all my friends and neighbors in my neighborhood head had had.

[59:41] Projects like this need massive outreach efforts.

[59:43] There's no excuse for the lack of communication for such a disruptive project.

[59:48] I found out about the rail through a free newspaper on my driveway that I almost threw away.

[59:53] This isn't disposable information yet it's being treated as such.

[59:57] I live two houses away from one of the preferred routes.

[1:00:00] What's the formula for determining fair market value if property is destroyed for the rail?

[1:00:06] What data do you have to show what was paid for property destruction on other projects?

[1:00:11] What data do you have to show changes in property values near such projects?

[1:00:15] Somebody at the HSR Authority has this data, release it.

[1:00:19] Do I move? Play wait for the state to buy me out?

[1:00:22] I feel like I'm being held hostage in my house. Who wants to buy it with a 60 foot tall elevated train a few foot steps away?

[1:00:29] I just found out 19 homes are being planned for the empty lot near my house.

[1:00:35] This is one of the lots that the train is supposed to go through.

[1:00:38] Does it develop a note that might get destroyed in two years?

[1:00:41] Are they going to profit off the state buying the land?

[1:00:44] We've built directly on preferred route unless there's something we all don't know.

[1:00:49] There's currently a few hundred new homes planned in our hand, planned in our town.

[1:00:53] Is this to make up for the loss of property tax revenue from the destroyed homes?

[1:00:57] with any rail advocates by property tomorrow along the preferred route.

[1:01:01] Seminoz property from this rail, and it's not the homeowners.

[1:01:05] With downtown built up, there's a cost prohibitive measure for the rail.

[1:01:09] It's generally pushing for a West101 station, so they'll get seismic retrofits for the downtown.

[1:01:14] If charter school gets torn down, will you buy them another school?

[1:01:19] There's seven pages of comments today.

[1:01:21] Over 168 comments, almost all against the rail.

[1:01:25] My Spider-Sense is Tinkling.

[1:01:28] Giving me data on how this rail benefits Morgan Hall.

[1:01:31] Giving me data on how exactly my property is affected.

[1:01:34] Give us answers and help us fight the rail.

[1:01:36] The state needs to find another route.

[1:01:38] Thank you.

[1:01:40] Thank you.

[1:01:46] Not do a pause if you agree with the speaker.

[1:01:49] Just hold up your hand and wave it.

[1:01:51] That'll just make things go a little quicker.

[1:01:53] Please.

[1:01:54] Thank you.

[1:01:55] Sam Diaz will be followed by Susan Yasa.

[1:01:59] Hi, my name is Sam Diaz.

[1:02:00] Last summer, my wife and I bought a home, a long, long, long, long, growth drive, and a lot

[1:02:04] that's adjacent to the 101 freeway on the west side.

[1:02:08] The house itself was actually, to call it an iso or would be a compliment.

[1:02:12] It was a pit and, in a matter of a few months, we managed to drop about between $7,500,000

[1:02:18] into this house to restore our neighbors actually, drove by and thanked us for doing that and

[1:02:22] for restoring some of the beauty to the neighborhood.

[1:02:24] We saw the potential in this house, the floor plan, the lot size, and everything about it,

[1:02:28] most importantly, the neighborhood was in established neighborhood. People were friendly. They

[1:02:33] welcomed us. One woman even brought us a plate of cookies one night to thank us for

[1:02:36] be to find the neighborhood again. With that said, we did sign a disclosure. When we walked

[1:02:41] our house about a high-speed rail coming through Morton Hill, at that time there was no discussion

[1:02:45] about it going along the west side so they didn't seem to be any sort of risk that we would take

[1:02:49] and losing our home. With all that said, I may be the only person in the crowd tonight who is not

[1:02:54] opposed to high-speed rail. I understand the value and the benefit that it will bring to the

[1:02:58] state's economy and what it will do for the environment as well. So I remain in advocate of it.

[1:03:04] And if the state's high-speed rail authority decides that my living room, which I saw right there on

[1:03:08] the map there, the line will go through. My living room is to prefer route for that rail line,

[1:03:14] then I will go willingly. But I ask to do that only on one condition.

[1:03:19] I would ask that there would be assurance to the state as well as support of the city,

[1:03:22] that both alignments of the freeway, both the east side and the west side be studied equally.

[1:03:27] I understand that the state will only consider two alignments, one of them being

[1:03:30] that preferred route to the in Pacific Railroad corridor, and the other one be the 101 corridor,

[1:03:36] although it's not defined as whether it's the east side of the west side.

[1:03:39] What I would ask is that the state in public meetings and on the record

[1:03:44] referring to that as the better route and referring to it as being less expensive and less complex.

[1:03:49] And, until there's actually a study that's conducted on that, I understand that City Council

[1:03:53] has also made a recommendation that the route not go through downtown, and I can understand

[1:03:58] that as well.

[1:03:58] There's been a big investment in the downtown infrastructure, and, well, part of me feels

[1:04:03] that the City Council may have been a little bit premature and irresponsible by proving

[1:04:06] some of the development, knowing that the high-speed rail authority was talking about

[1:04:09] high-speed rail coming through the state.

[1:04:11] I can understand why they would not want it to go through downtown.

[1:04:14] I like downtown Morgan Hill myself, and I wouldn't want to see a train going through

[1:04:17] there either.

[1:04:18] But what I would ask is that the city no longer just punt to anywhere but downtown and be specific and be prepared to defend the decision when they talk about the east side versus the west side based on actual facts and data and not under assumptions of what may be easier or not.

[1:04:33] I could be one of the lucky ones in being forced to move and I do worry about my neighbors and very friendly people who would be facing depressed property values if they were forced to stay. Thank you.

[1:04:43] Thank you.

[1:04:45] Yeah, great followed by Roland Libran and we'll do after this speaker. We'll take a break because we've got to excuse the students

[1:04:54] Well, Maritade on the members of the council members of the community. My name is Hashem Eason

[1:05:00] I'm a guest. I'm the second person to say I'm not 100% opposed to this train. But I did listen to the

[1:05:06] 97 council member meeting in the comments by Mr. Miriz to Mr. and Mr. Proposy asking questions about the

[1:05:14] proposed alignments and we live for disclosure along the red path. Not in the red path directly

[1:05:20] be cited, our home is directly beside it. And you want to build a number of constant seeing, did

[1:05:25] ask about our neighborhood in that meeting and said it's obvious that the people in this

[1:05:30] neighborhood are going to see their property values decrease significantly. And what

[1:05:33] is the high speed we're going to do about that? The answer was some hand-waving about we

[1:05:37] try to minimize the impacts and basically we could sue if we wanted to. It might interest

[1:05:42] you to know that the official position of the high speed rail authority is although the

[1:05:46] authority does not anticipate that there will be a loss in value to properties not required

[1:05:50] for the projects. Almost the belief that they have suffered loss may fall acclaim with

[1:05:54] state of California, government claims victims board, that is ridiculous.

[1:06:00] All of us are here because we know whom ever's neighborhood this passes through is going

[1:06:04] to see significant damage to the equity that they've built in their home financially devastating

[1:06:10] damage.

[1:06:12] And we need to tell the high speed rail authority that this is not acceptable.

[1:06:15] It is not acceptable that Sarmar asked to offer so much to pay for this train when everyone

[1:06:21] in the community or the state for that matter benefits from it.

[1:06:24] that if it's as arguable, quite frankly, but some of us are being asked to be devastated, financially,

[1:06:30] not just to be the homes that aren't being bought, but are directly beside the path.

[1:06:34] It is ridiculous to say that we're not going to suffer financially destructive results because of

[1:06:40] this dream. And then it's grossly unfair and it needs to be stopped. And we as a city in the council need

[1:06:45] to speak up and say this will not stand in our community. Maybe it's okay somewhere else. I don't know about them,

[1:06:51] But in our community, this cannot stand.

[1:06:54] Thank you for your pardon.

[1:06:57] Be now.

[1:07:00] Let's do the hand thing, please.

[1:07:02] We're going to take a six-minute break.

[1:13:39] If we can talk our seats, let's start it again.

[1:14:01] Just roll some. Please read the next two names.

[1:14:08] Please read the next two names.

[1:14:09] The next speaker, I have as role in LeBron, followed by Joseph Korea.

[1:14:30] Even in May and Council, my name is Roland Cabran.

[1:14:33] I'll leave in a sign of the day, and you probably are wondering what I'm doing here.

[1:14:38] And the fact is, we have got the exact same problem.

[1:14:40] As you have, I'll leave in district 2, which is Santa Teresa area.

[1:14:43] and I would like to recognize Council Member Larry Carr, who was kind enough to let me

[1:14:49] sit down with him earlier this week and also Edith.

[1:14:55] But I believe I come from UK before I can hear.

[1:14:59] I'll leave near half.

[1:15:01] And we love it. I'm actually pretty close to the main high-speed line between London and Channel

[1:15:08] Channel. And the reason we love it is because it was well-designed. We can't hear the strings.

[1:15:14] We can't see them unless we want to go and see some early fast range blowing by and see what

[1:15:19] I said like. Okay? So that's what we do on a Sunday. We'll go for a nice drive or a bike ride and

[1:15:28] So, my house would be roughly halfway between cow train and highway 101, and the high speed line is on the other side of our runway 101.

[1:15:41] It's on the east side, and while you put it there, they are actually using the freeway for mitigation.

[1:15:47] They've actually put it right next to the freeway in a train in a train.

[1:15:51] is about 70 feet wide and you just count here it unless you actually go over there and you

[1:15:56] look them. All the other passages actually, you know, go over the line. But if I want to capture

[1:16:02] has to be trains there, some of them that do stop downtown. The proposal that you got here is

[1:16:07] not going to do any improvements to countering. It's actually improved us so we can get on these

[1:16:12] trains that will take me all the way up to London and actually eventually get on to the real

[1:16:15] It's a nice bit line, but last all the way up to London.

[1:16:20] So, the proposal, I'm trying to put forward to you here, we can do the exact same thing here.

[1:16:26] So, if you have a train that needs to stop in Giro, it would basically go between certain of the in-giro on the unit specific tracks.

[1:16:33] We use the same tracks as the freight and everything else.

[1:16:36] At speeds below 25 miles an hour.

[1:16:39] And then if you're an express train that's going to most, that's not stopping in Giro,

[1:16:42] Well, guess what? That train goes on the other side of one or one. So basically you've got two

[1:16:46] elements. You've got a classic alignment. The other one's a high speed line. But in closing here,

[1:16:52] I think what you have to do, instead of just trying to address the problem at the

[1:16:57] Morgan Hill level, you've really got to reach out to the cities if the side of you and get everybody

[1:17:02] to start collaborating, you know, on specific elements between

[1:17:10] And one thing I keep battling, and I've battled it again at the both devices, yesterday was

[1:17:15] a high speed authority.

[1:17:16] They are flat refusing to reopen the ER between San Jose and Giroi.

[1:17:21] That's unacceptable.

[1:17:22] There have made so many changes.

[1:17:24] They have to reopen that ER.

[1:17:26] They have got to restart with a scoping period, just like they did in a peninsula

[1:17:30] when the peninsula made it and take all the virus down.

[1:17:32] Thank you very much.

[1:17:34] Thank you.

[1:17:35] Speaker, I have is Justice Coriel, who will be followed by Ivonne Martinez.

[1:17:42] Joseph Coriel, I'm greatly in favor of high speed rail.

[1:17:46] Although there are some issues, you know, the alignment.

[1:17:49] I think it's good that it goes along the freeway because there's already

[1:17:53] like an easement there for the freeway.

[1:17:56] But I guess whatever alignment they choose, I think high speed rail is good

[1:18:00] for the environment because it'll decrease automobile usage.

[1:18:04] you know, more people use a train.

[1:18:08] So, and trains are energy for high speed wheel.

[1:18:10] I think it may be electric, if I am correct.

[1:18:13] But I think that's good for the environment.

[1:18:16] So, any train, any part of the landscape for the environment.

[1:18:20] So, I'm greatly in favor of the high speed wheel.

[1:18:23] And there are some problems with different alignments,

[1:18:29] but either whatever alignment they choose,

[1:18:31] It's still a great thing to have high-speed rail because it's one of the first major public transit projects in the state, so even I guess the benefit of high-speed rail outways the problems

[1:18:46] I really am in favor of high-speed rail. It should be a good project once it gets started, and I hope high-speed rail goes well

[1:18:56] Thank you. Thank you

[1:18:59] Yvonne Martinez will be followed by Dan Ernest.

[1:19:04] And if the next speaker can come up and stand behind, we can make a quicker transition.

[1:19:09] Thank you.

[1:19:10] My name is Yvonne Martinez and I love this community.

[1:19:14] I was raised here.

[1:19:16] My parents bought their home and full disclosure this would go right through.

[1:19:20] We'll write next to their home.

[1:19:23] I went to pay a wall.

[1:19:25] I went to live oak.

[1:19:26] I've seen this community change so many different ways.

[1:19:29] And I think that I haven't been able to come earlier, but I think that it's important that

[1:19:34] high-speed rail knows that there are people who have invested their whole lives here.

[1:19:38] So I realize there's people who've come for two years.

[1:19:41] They bought a lot.

[1:19:42] They built their home.

[1:19:43] They raised their Q4 girls.

[1:19:45] They raised some grandkids there.

[1:19:46] I brought my baby twins home there, and this is the kind of pain and investment that everybody

[1:19:52] is feeling now.

[1:19:53] Um, so, having said that, I also am an urban planner, and look,

[1:20:00] Looking at this and seeing the impacts that this is going to have, the reason I tell you that is because

[1:20:05] I'm not against the transportation. I understand the importance of transportation. I think many

[1:20:10] of the residents here understand the importance of transportation. But what also is important is that

[1:20:15] there's a vibrant community that exists here. And we do have downtown. It doesn't make any sense to

[1:20:22] me. I moved downtown. I moved right next door to downtown. I can get to the railroad track in probably

[1:20:28] a minute flat. And I did that because when you go to downtown, you expect to have traffic,

[1:20:34] you expect to have density, you expect to have your fingertips at transportation. These are

[1:20:40] the things in planning that you expect to see. But when you've built custom homes or when you

[1:20:46] have large tracks, you don't expect those things to happen in those areas. And so I too, as one of

[1:20:58] or has said, we want this to come through, but we want it to be in a thoughtful, productive

[1:21:06] way.

[1:21:07] I think it doesn't seem like disenfranchising those people as a productive way.

[1:21:12] It seems like downtown might be a better option.

[1:21:16] Is it possible that one day there could be a stop in Morgan Hill on this train?

[1:21:20] We could say no, but we don't really know that.

[1:21:24] We never foresaw what would happen with the Caltering, and so, who knows, possibly, wouldn't we want that to be in downtown so that if people stopped, if it did happen one day, they could get some dinner, they could contribute to our tax dollars here in Morgan Hill.

[1:21:40] Would we would be able to pull money, pull money's on the train stop design, pull money's on the environmental impacts, pull money's on traffic signs, lighting?

[1:21:50] It seems like that would be a much less costly way to go with it overall impact.

[1:21:56] I mean, look at the library in San Jose with San Jose State and with the city and they've combined those money together, and that's an awesome public private partnership.

[1:22:05] But so that might be something that we could think about.

[1:22:08] Even if it doesn't stop here, we still need safety.

[1:22:11] We still need traffic.

[1:22:12] We still have impacts that are going to happen.

[1:22:15] We need to wrap up your time, Ms. Up.

[1:22:17] OK, thank you very much.

[1:22:20] Anyway, I think that we should look at the cost difference of that as well.

[1:22:23] We have the option of doing an aerial or doing an at-ground train if we're in downtown versus

[1:22:28] if we're looking out by the freeway, it counts to me if you be.

[1:22:32] Thank you very much for your time.

[1:22:34] Ann Ernest, will be followed by Delores Ramirez.

[1:22:38] Hi, I'm Ann Ernest.

[1:22:39] Mayor Tate, City Council members.

[1:22:41] Thank you for listening to us today.

[1:22:43] Thank you for taking our concerns and our questions.

[1:22:46] You're very clear that in this that you want questions.

[1:22:50] So I have a list of questions that I want to put forth.

[1:22:53] So first of all, are there any?

[1:22:57] Let me say this.

[1:22:58] Can we ask Cal Train, or sorry, if we can ask HSR to come up with an alternate route,

[1:23:04] that's not one of the plans that have been laid out in specifically what I'm thinking about,

[1:23:08] is there a way to tunnel under Morgan Hill? Is there some other route that can be done?

[1:23:14] How will my next question, will be how will HR, HSR maintain the peace and the tranquility that we have here in this beautiful city?

[1:23:24] No matter what the route is, how are we going to do that?

[1:23:28] How will CalTrain, how will HSR fairly compensate the homeowners who are affected, not

[1:23:36] just with the actual footprint of the plan, but those homes that are adjacent to the properties

[1:23:42] that are affected, our house would be one of those houses.

[1:23:47] We also ask that everything be done in the open and I'm not saying it hasn't been, I'm

[1:23:51] saying any interactions that we have over the high speed rail that it

[1:23:56] would be done in the open, be done in public, and be discussed for all

[1:24:00] those people who are impacted either directly or indirectly.

[1:24:05] Next question is,

[1:24:06] is how are the valuations for each of the routes being done and when will

[1:24:10] that information be made available to the public? How are business or how will

[1:24:16] businesses be valued over home properties?

[1:24:21] And then is there a way to delay the

[1:24:23] announcement of the route until the high speed rail can show that they have the funding needed

[1:24:27] to complete the route.

[1:24:29] Now, the words what I'm saying is, if the route is named, our homes will be affected immediately,

[1:24:35] we will have to disclose that if we sell our home.

[1:24:38] If there's never going to be money raised for this or if it's going to be a long, long time,

[1:24:42] why allow us to take that hit now.

[1:24:47] And then the next question is, what environmental studies are being done and what weather studies

[1:24:53] are being done?

[1:24:54] I've heard that they wanted to elevate the options as to elevate the rail through this area.

[1:25:00] Where we are, I call it the wind tunnel. What effect does the wind have on the high-speed rail from an elevated perspective?

[1:25:07] And then what health studies have been done for those people who homes are again or not in the immediate path that may love adjacent to it,

[1:25:15] where their health may be affected. I have red online. Again, I acknowledge it's online.

[1:25:20] But I've read that there are some concerns that there may be increased cancer risk or other risk with people living next to high energy rails.

[1:25:28] Thank you.

[1:25:30] Thank you.

[1:25:31] Dolores Ramirez will be followed by Brian Sullivan.

[1:25:36] Good evening everybody.

[1:25:38] My name is Dolores Ramirez.

[1:25:40] And if the choice to go, the choice is going through west side 101,

[1:25:48] I will be heavily impacted.

[1:25:51] I will be forced to move.

[1:25:53] But all of these nice people have stated all my concerns directly to you, so that kind of leaves me at a loss, but I do need answers so that I could plan for my future.

[1:26:10] How do I get those answers?

[1:26:13] Will the send them, will age, will the,

[1:26:18] is people send them directly to us

[1:26:21] or will you meditate, have a meeting

[1:26:24] that addresses each of the concerns

[1:26:26] with appropriate answers?

[1:26:31] Are you asking me that question?

[1:26:34] Yeah, I am.

[1:26:35] I mean, how are we going to know what's the purpose

[1:26:37] of this hearing is to get the questions

[1:26:39] that we're going to ask to the hospital authority

[1:26:41] and then we will, in a very transparent way, a very open way, get the answers and get them

[1:26:48] back to you.

[1:26:49] We will have keep everything open as we go along.

[1:26:53] Okay, and it'll be in a forum such as this.

[1:26:56] Beautiful.

[1:26:57] The other way.

[1:26:58] I think any of us can plan, once we get these answers, then we can start with our planning.

[1:27:05] Thank you so much.

[1:27:06] Thank you.

[1:27:08] Brian Sullivan will be followed by Kathy Sullivan?

[1:27:12] Good evening, Maritate City Council members, members of the community and staff.

[1:27:15] My name is Brian Sullivan.

[1:27:17] I am the Chairman of the Board of the Charter School of Morgan Hill.

[1:27:21] The only route that will not affect the charter school is the East 101 route.

[1:27:27] Just about the route that will be on the West 101 will still affect the charter school.

[1:27:35] So we're concerned, obviously, about that.

[1:27:37] I think one of the things that the high-speed rail hasn't thoroughly looked into is actually building a tunnel.

[1:27:46] You look at what's been done in Europe.

[1:27:49] There's the high-speed rail that was built between England and France that goes through and underneath the water.

[1:27:56] There's a 60-mile tunnel in Switzerland for high-speed rail.

[1:28:00] 60 miles. Huge. That's been done and has been operating for a number of years very successfully.

[1:28:08] So I think we could look at that. But our concern, obviously, right now is with the routes that have been discussed and what's going to happen with those routes,

[1:28:16] reference to the Charter School. We're very concerned. Thank you. Thank you.

[1:28:22] Kathy Sullivan will be followed by John McCay.

[1:28:25] Good evening. My name is Kathy Sullivan, and I'm here to thank both the Council and the

[1:28:31] City staff for having the foresight and wisdom to engage the community and the decision

[1:28:36] makers prior to when the choice of which the proposed roads routes will be determined.

[1:28:44] This was definitely the way to go. We are very little fish against much larger interest

[1:28:51] And so city staff seeking to have the decision makers the high speed authority here to learn more about our city and our concerns helps them make a more informed choice.

[1:29:06] I'm glad the community is weighing in with its questions and concern.

[1:29:11] As this is built out, there will be a pain on no matter what decision they choose.

[1:29:17] And we'll see a lot of pain before we really see the benefits of this project.

[1:29:23] I don't want to see this turn into a civil war between people in the city about which of the proposed routes are.

[1:29:32] Rather, I think that we are taking this opportunity to present all areas which will be affected to have that be weighted so that we can have the least impact on the city.

[1:29:44] As a member of the Morgan Hill Downtown Association, I am advocating for the city to continue

[1:29:51] its goal for a strong and vibrant downtown, and she take this into consideration along

[1:29:57] with our wonderful recreation areas.

[1:30:00] Which have really made Morgan Hill the desired place it is to live. I know you don't make the decision yourself. This city council. You're just the people who are charged with telling our story and advocating for us. I hope they're listening. They will listen, but I am grateful that they are here to hear us now. Thank you.

[1:30:23] Oh, I'm sorry. One more thing. My question is how recreation areas and new downtown development will be affected and what will the sound walls will they divide our downtown into areas, because I think that it will definitely affect our being able to access parts of our town. So thank you.

[1:30:45] Don McKay will be followed by Swani Edwards.

[1:30:49] Hello Mayor, City Council members and other City teammates.

[1:30:56] So I've got prepared letter from the Downtown Association, which I am going to start to read.

[1:31:02] And it starts with the Morgan Hill Downtown Association Board Directors,

[1:31:05] recognizes that the high speed rail passing through Morgan Hill will be one of the most important issues

[1:31:10] facing our community in generations.

[1:31:12] There is no escaping hardship.

[1:31:14] This will create for those in the path of the high speed rail tracks.

[1:31:17] Both homeowners and businesses, and it isn't destined to pass somewhere through our town.

[1:31:22] As business owners and residents in Morgan Hill,

[1:31:24] we feel as best for the entire committee and not just the district we serve.

[1:31:28] So with that, I'm going to stop because the rest of it is all about alignment,

[1:31:32] which, by the way, our board has endorsed the west of Highway 101 alignment,

[1:31:39] which is actually the one that city staff.

[1:31:43] Those of us in Morgan Hill actually created and proposed using nothing but the

[1:31:47] finest ingredients to distill this plan.

[1:31:52] So that's where we were going with alignment, but actually you didn't want to

[1:31:56] hear that tonight.

[1:31:57] So what I do want to say is that I think everybody here should and I think

[1:32:01] many do recognize the fact that the high speed rail project and its impacts

[1:32:07] and disruption are not something that would normally be allowed by the city council and by anybody

[1:32:15] in the city staff. There's no policy or even a spirit within city hall that would allow

[1:32:20] these kinds of impacts to happen in our community. So I think we all have to understand that.

[1:32:25] I hope everybody does. Again, you guys, you know, where the messengers need to work together

[1:32:30] as an entire community to make sure that we can get the best plan forward to get the best results

[1:32:37] for what's best for everybody in the community.

[1:32:39] Wherever that align may end up, we need to work together.

[1:32:43] We need to be the best Morgan Hill that we can be.

[1:32:45] And I've from seen the tone of the conversation to I have Sam,

[1:32:49] I'm very impressed, I think everybody is really

[1:32:51] really sticking with the community spirit.

[1:32:55] So with that, I'm actually going to now ask my question.

[1:32:59] There were so many good questions here that the only thing

[1:33:02] that I'm left with is what happens in Morgan Hill,

[1:33:07] If we get under construction, we've suffered disruption, we've gone through, you know,

[1:33:14] relocations and all that.

[1:33:15] What happens if the funding does not complete the project?

[1:33:19] Are we going to have a wide elephant or are we going to have a long corridor of

[1:33:25] disrupted land?

[1:33:26] So I'd like to make sure that there is also an exit plan if it does not actually go to

[1:33:32] completion.

[1:33:34] Thank you.

[1:33:35] Thank you.

[1:33:35] 20 onwards, will be followed by Linda Camperry?

[1:33:42] Hall Mayor and City Council and staff.

[1:33:45] I've been here before.

[1:33:46] I've been at every high-speed rail meeting since this was a stupid idea in the governor's mind.

[1:33:54] But now tonight, after the election, we've just suffered as a nation, I am sick and tired of men and their egos dictating public policy.

[1:34:07] and huge, massively expensive decisions in our state, our country, and our communities.

[1:34:16] This has always been a legacy project, something for the governor to be reminded by

[1:34:23] in Ontario.

[1:34:24] I will remember this the rest of my life, because I feel betrayed.

[1:34:31] First of all, the funding isn't there.

[1:34:33] There's none of the private businesses jumping on the bandwagon to do the private business funding that was promised.

[1:34:42] There's no infrastructure in place to power this train.

[1:34:47] And I don't see the state of California asking this thing to be built through Napa Valley.

[1:34:54] But boy, we send it down to Morgan Hill. They roll over and let anything happen.

[1:35:00] Well, over my dead body, and I mean, the first thing that has to be changed, is this train has to run from

[1:35:08] Senisei, if it's ever going to be built, to over the ultimate, or another route, if it's

[1:35:15] toned through the mountainside, don't care. This valley at Senisei is this three miles wide. We

[1:35:21] have built a wine country community. We have agriculture here. We're holding on tightly to the

[1:35:28] last vestiges of the valley of the heart still light and they want to puke it up with a

[1:35:34] high-speed rail train that has not addressed the benefits it's going to bring here but we have

[1:35:41] a whole room full of people that know the hardships it will bring and for what? It's not going to

[1:35:48] stop another car from going up one and one. We need to build the infrastructure to get to the train

[1:35:57] First, measure B is going to take us a long way.

[1:36:00] This is a premature legacy ego-driven project by a governor that has been an office far too long

[1:36:09] and if you think the federal government in the next four years is going to help us with this

[1:36:15] project, you're dead wrong.

[1:36:17] Thank you.

[1:36:22] For hand.

[1:36:23] We'll be following the way.

[1:36:25] We'll be following the way.

[1:36:25] Go ahead.

[1:36:25] Hi, my name is Linda Campbell-Ari and I appreciate you having this meeting and I've emailed you and you emailed me back. I appreciate that as well as Larry did as well.

[1:36:39] I started a Facebook group Californians against high speed rail.

[1:36:44] I really believe that this is not going to benefit this area and I think that the cities,

[1:36:54] Morgan Hills, San Martín and Gilroy, as well as San Jose, need to be on board to actually

[1:37:01] stop this high-speed rail.

[1:37:04] It doesn't have the money, it's not going to benefit this area.

[1:37:07] I've been to four high-speed rail meetings,

[1:37:11] Gil Roy, San Jose, and Morgan Hill,

[1:37:14] and each, there's the more research I do,

[1:37:18] and the more meetings I go to,

[1:37:20] the more corruption, the more lies I've seen.

[1:37:25] They still say it's going to be two hours and 40 minutes,

[1:37:28] that was the San Jose meeting, which is not true.

[1:37:31] They need to slow down, whereas populated areas,

[1:37:35] They keep saying that the budget won't let them go into a tunnel.

[1:37:40] Let's do this right if we're going to do a high speed rail.

[1:37:42] Let's do it right.

[1:37:44] Either do the hyperloop instead of the 1964 technology

[1:37:51] or something.

[1:37:53] The more research I do on Governor Brown and the high speed rail authority,

[1:37:59] the more I realize the corruption involved with this.

[1:38:02] And you could see what the Proposition 53,

[1:38:06] those commercials were out and out lies.

[1:38:08] I don't know if you've seen them.

[1:38:10] Did you basically see them?

[1:38:12] They were out and out lies.

[1:38:14] And he spent $15 million to basically lie to us.

[1:38:21] So we wouldn't vote for the Proposition 53.

[1:38:25] And I'm hoping that I don't know if it's going to take

[1:38:30] legal action by the city or or something else. I mean, we have enough. The more people know about the high speed rail, the more they realize it's not going to benefit Morgan Hill and it's going to really

[1:38:59] Board of, you know, the high speed rail board.

[1:39:03] I'm more than happy to go with you.

[1:39:06] So, thank you.

[1:39:08] Thank you.

[1:39:09] The next speaker is Connie Ludwig,

[1:39:11] who will be followed by Mike Mark Gallardo.

[1:39:19] Hi, gentlemen.

[1:39:19] My name is Connie Ludwig,

[1:39:20] and I'd like to commend those last two ladies.

[1:39:24] I'm sorry, I can't just leave on that one.

[1:39:26] I'm the same routine,

[1:39:27] and I am missing the same routine,

[1:39:29] planning advisory committee meeting this evening,

[1:39:31] because I felt it was very important to come

[1:39:33] address you regarding this issue.

[1:39:38] I would like to ask Morgan Hill also include

[1:39:42] Cemartine as far as being an advocate against this railroad. Heist Pete

[1:39:46] Rail because I too have attended several meetings and I never get the same answer.

[1:39:53] I say, well what would you propose? I said, well how about if you go to East

[1:40:00] And they keep coming up at different excuses why they can't do this, why they might do that. They change their stories. And so my understanding is they cannot tunnel because of their earthquakes. So I understand that. I just returned from Europe on Sunday. And so I did ride railroads. And I do see the tremendous clicking that is impacting the communities. Because people have to put their cars somewhere. So my question is, what are we going to do about that?

[1:40:30] So there is not going to be any fair compensation for the loss of our homes, loss of our family heritage due to families that have lived in the same property for 100 years.

[1:40:41] There's going to be, if we have to move, it's going to be tax consequences that we have to pay.

[1:40:46] And so I too am hoping that you will make sure that they do have to do an EILR because there's so many ramifications that directly affect us.

[1:40:59] How is this going to divide our community east to west, but it's just really going to

[1:41:03] mess things up.

[1:41:04] This is a beautiful valley, the noise impacts, the noise travels and so we have so many concerns

[1:41:12] and we'll look to you to include some of our team in your decisions.

[1:41:18] Thank you.

[1:41:19] Thank you.

[1:41:20] Thank you.

[1:41:25] Canals and members on the local real estate agent,

[1:41:27] so I'm here on behalf of some clients of mine

[1:41:29] that live along the West corridor.

[1:41:32] My concern is speaking with the staff in San Jose

[1:41:36] that the half of the railway in San Jose's own

[1:41:40] by Union Pacific and the other half is owned by Caltrane.

[1:41:43] I was told.

[1:41:45] And Caltrane says, yes, you can use our railway

[1:41:48] and that's already being electrified.

[1:41:50] I think already now.

[1:41:52] But the other half, a U.P. they said that there's a 50% chance that they can use the railway in San Jose.

[1:42:01] So I'm wondering why can't Morgan Hill use the railway in Morgan Hill if it's still owned by U.P.

[1:42:07] Does San Jose have more cloud than Morgan Hill?

[1:42:10] And my other, I really liked what one gentleman had to say that now we think that the budget for this is well beyond two times.

[1:42:21] what it was initially stated in 2008 when we voted on it and can we do a feasibility study

[1:42:29] look at property values along the lines and tell the people in California how much this

[1:42:35] is really going to cost before we move forward? That's all I have. Thank you.

[1:42:42] Okay, thank you very much. That's it. Close public comment.

[1:42:48] We really don't do you want

[1:42:50] to discuss something. Well, I, there were some things that I'd like to hear. Good. Yeah. Certainly.

[1:42:56] I'll go ahead. Good. Well, first of all, I'd like to thank everyone. Thank you for listening

[1:43:04] to the mayor's request and for everyone sort of handling this well. I would like to fold the

[1:43:11] closure with City Attorney talked about in the beginning. I'm the council member that has a

[1:43:23] and we have requested from the Fair Political Practices Commission a very specific opinion on whether I can participate and things.

[1:43:32] So I want to first, I appreciate our staff putting this together in such a way that what we're talking about tonight are the issues and concerns that we as a community have and not about any specific routes.

[1:43:45] Because without knowing that opinion from the FPC, I wouldn't be comfortable being up here tonight.

[1:43:51] But being able to just talk about concerns and all of you have that I have that the rest of us have I think it's very appropriate for me to be here.

[1:43:57] But I wanted to make sure that everyone understood that because I have been asked that.

[1:44:01] A few weeks ago, maybe maybe as many as six weeks ago, Dan and Carla Ernst and his here tonight invited me to come to their home and meet with a couple of their neighbors about high-speed rail.

[1:44:10] Turned out I think we had half of Morgan Hill in your house at night and we had a great two-hour discussion

[1:44:17] I I know it was probably frustrating for a lot of people because my answer to most questions was I don't know

[1:44:22] And that's why we're here tonight is to get all of those questions out so we can try to get answers to those questions

[1:44:30] I've let the city staff know a lot of the issues that came out that night a lot of the discussion that we had that night

[1:44:37] and I've seen them, those thoughts that I shared in the document that's presented tonight.

[1:44:45] So thank you for that. A couple of items that I did want to make sure are included in any

[1:44:51] thing that we send off. I want to make sure that we are officially saying on the record that

[1:44:58] we do not want any of the—

[1:45:00] Options narrow down that we want all of the options through Morgan Hill to be available and to be thoroughly reviewed and investigated.

[1:45:09] That includes all four that Mr. Maris talked about tonight and I'd like to hear more about the possibility of a tunnel or a trench option.

[1:45:19] I don't know where that would be or anything like that, but I'd like that to be discussed a little bit more formally.

[1:45:26] I think we should be, and you know, I know the mayor has brought this up at City School

[1:45:31] liaison committee meetings, I think we are going to have to be advocates for our school district

[1:45:35] as well, and I think that absolutely includes the charter school.

[1:45:38] We know that most of these routes affect the charter school, and we need to make sure that

[1:45:42] that is looked into.

[1:45:44] It was suggested tonight that the environmental impact report for I believe the route between

[1:45:50] Mercedes and San Jose that it is a document that the high-speed rail authority is not reopening.

[1:45:56] I'm not sure what that means for what we're trying to accomplish.

[1:46:00] I thought that there was going to be a specific environmental document that was done for this segment.

[1:46:06] And if that's not the case then I think we ought to be asking about that and why.

[1:46:13] We had lots of questions, lots of funding questions tonight, and I think that is addressed

[1:46:17] in the staff presentation, and I want to make sure that we hear some things about that,

[1:46:25] including things about compensation for loss of property values.

[1:46:29] And then finally, I think we shouldn't, we don't have to have a decision about it tonight,

[1:46:34] but I think we should be thinking internally about, and maybe we already do this, should potential

[1:46:39] development proposals that are along any of these routes should we as a city be identifying

[1:46:45] to those developers that these are possibilities and how are we letting people know about

[1:46:50] that.

[1:46:52] So that may be, again, not for discussion tonight, but you know, there's something we should

[1:46:56] think about.

[1:46:57] And then whatever we submit, formally to the high-speed rail authority, I'd like to make

[1:47:01] sure that we copy that to both our state and our federal legislators as well, so that

[1:47:07] are aware of Morgan Hills concerns, and so that we can be

[1:47:10] using them as advocates on our behalf a little bit more.

[1:47:14] I include federal in there because we know that this won't be built without

[1:47:16] federal dollars, including, I think, what's being built today.

[1:47:21] And one of the real important questions for me on funding is I'd like to

[1:47:26] make sure we have a really good understanding of how the project will be built.

[1:47:33] And what I mean by that is, is there a possibility that ground could be

[1:47:38] could be broken on a segment between Gilroy and San Jose,

[1:47:42] before Pacheco passes figured out.

[1:47:45] I don't think that it should be built until it is segment

[1:47:49] by segment, by segment, by segment.

[1:47:53] And because Pacheco is a big question

[1:47:56] in how it's going to come through Pacheco

[1:47:58] and how that's going to be paid for and determined.

[1:48:02] And so even before it gets to touching our community,

[1:48:04] those kinds of things we should learn more about those before it actually begins to touch our

[1:48:10] community. Thank you, mayor.

[1:48:16] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I appreciate all the comments that were

[1:48:18] made this evening and it brought up some questions for myself. One of the things I think we should

[1:48:25] find out is that it's already being built. The highest we built on the construction as we speak.

[1:48:30] So a lot of the concerns that are brought up in this room tonight, I'm sure high-speed rail has

[1:48:35] already had to address.

[1:48:37] So I would like to find out how they address some of the property value issues and some of

[1:48:43] the questions that those communities have brought up because, again, I don't want to reinvent

[1:48:47] the wheel.

[1:48:48] And if those have already been dealt with, it will give us a better idea of what we can

[1:48:52] expect once that reality comes to Morgan Hill, and as far as the EIR, I'm going by memory

[1:49:01] was that when high-speed rail authority now is it down to two, then there we're going to do

[1:49:07] an EIR based on that. If that's my recollection, and then it was brought about, you know,

[1:49:15] tunneling and why can't we do that? Understand, Morgan Hill doesn't have the authority to

[1:49:22] high-speed rail, what to do. That is the harsh reality of where we are right now.

[1:49:29] Prop 1-8 was voted on in 2008. It was approved by Californians, California wide, and most

[1:49:39] of California doesn't have to deal with what we're dealing with. So I just want to caution

[1:49:45] And the members of the audience to understand that this is the very beginning of a process

[1:49:52] that actually has been going on for I've been involved with it for six years.

[1:49:56] When I was first elected, the high speed rail became...

[1:50:00] A reality. In fact before, as I said, it was voted on 2008. I remember there was a presentation that was done by the

[1:50:09] ice-beater rail authority to our council, but it was in the basically the conference room there. It was

[1:50:15] very small. So, not as big as what we have now, but that's how long it's been going on.

[1:50:24] So, I just

[1:50:26] limit things that we as a city can do, but we are going to be doing this together.

[1:50:33] And understand that this is very preliminary.

[1:50:35] I understand that especially for the people that are going to be directly affected either one

[1:50:40] of the alignments.

[1:50:42] I understand that the fear of the unknown is very difficult to deal with.

[1:50:47] But I just asked that we are learning this and we're doing this together and just understand

[1:50:53] that we're going to work together to have these questions answered.

[1:51:00] But I understand also that Morgan Hill cannot stop the high speed rail.

[1:51:06] We don't have that power.

[1:51:09] And my understanding is also that high speed rail is only going to tunnel where they have to.

[1:51:14] They're not going to tunnel because it's going to, it's expensive.

[1:51:18] So, I agree we should look at all aspects but what I've been told and what I've been told

[1:51:23] over the six years that I've been involved with the high-speed rail authority is that

[1:51:28] they'll only do what they can't, what they have to do.

[1:51:33] Sam Martins are going to be telling them because of the airport.

[1:51:37] So when you hear, when you hear that they're going to be telling, in Sam Martins, why don't

[1:51:42] they do it in the market?

[1:51:43] Well, the reason why they're telling is that they have to.

[1:51:45] the FAA mandates that they have to tunnel.

[1:51:49] So it worries me that the high-speed rail authority

[1:51:53] will do only what they have to do.

[1:51:55] But I also want to give them the benefit of the doubt.

[1:51:57] I don't want to make them the bad guys, because like I said,

[1:51:59] it was voted on in 2008.

[1:52:03] Some of the very people in this room voted for it.

[1:52:07] So understanding that we didn't know what was going to happen.

[1:52:11] But now that we do, we are still really

[1:52:14] in the very beginning stages and just understand that we are going to work through this together

[1:52:19] and try and come up with an answer that is not going to be right for everybody, but we're

[1:52:27] going to try and do what's best for Morgan Hill with the least ramifications.

[1:52:31] I know that for some people in this room, that's not going to give you solace, but we will

[1:52:38] try and work this up together and understand this is the first of many meetings that we're

[1:52:43] not going to hold, but that are going to be done in the community, and then we are going

[1:52:47] to be continually going through this process as it goes through. This is going to be years

[1:52:51] in the making.

[1:52:54] Thank you, Mr. Speaker.

[1:52:55] Mr. Seber, do you have anything?

[1:52:59] No.

[1:53:01] Okay. I will, I'll make some comments. I really appreciate the input that we got tonight. I will

[1:53:09] tell you, I really respect the fact that you're looking to us as your city council to

[1:53:14] represent you. And so it's so frustrating that Mr. Constantin is absolutely correct. We have

[1:53:20] not, we have no authority. But we, I think we have a good relationship with our high-speed rail

[1:53:28] staff. And I think we can work together and just try to build as much influences we possibly can.

[1:53:35] I had the same reaction that Mr. Card did on the IR and Mr. Constantin. I felt we were going to

[1:53:42] another round of the I.R. We'd like to see it as Mr. Car pointed out on all four routes

[1:53:49] or at least preliminary to get to the point where it gets more limited to that, because we

[1:53:55] think they all have to be studied thoroughly. And the biggest question that I had, I didn't know

[1:54:02] how to phrase the question, but I think again, Mr. Car kind of hit the nail on the head. My question

[1:54:09] was how, where does funding have to be in order to put a shovel in the ground? And just think

[1:54:18] we have to totally avoid putting a shovel in the ground if we don't know how to fund what's

[1:54:24] being built. And he kind of hit the nail on the head saying, well, you know, if you don't

[1:54:28] even know how to get to Bacheco pass, why are you, why are you digging here? And why would we

[1:54:33] do that? So I think that's a kind of help me cement in my mind with that question is,

[1:54:38] And we really need to get that understood that we're not doing things that are going to be a rail to nowhere, kind of thing.

[1:54:50] So thank you.

[1:54:51] Thank you for cooperating.

[1:54:53] A little bit on the applause and standing behind each other and so forth that made it very streamlined and we appreciate it.

[1:55:00] We appreciate that very much. And is there any final comments before we go forward?

[1:55:11] Mr. Ramirez, did you get what you need?

[1:55:15] Thank you, Mr. Mayor. I did get what I need. I we collected the questions and we will work with high speed rail to try to provide answers to all the questions.

[1:55:27] Um, reminding, uh, taking this opportunity to remind members of the audience here or at home.

[1:55:34] If you have not had a chance to sign up on the city's website, please do so.

[1:55:40] Not only your comments or questions are getting forwarded, but it is a way for us,

[1:55:46] a city hall to manage the communication back to you.

[1:55:50] So it is a way for us to inform you if we have received new information,

[1:55:54] or we have answers to questions that we have just recently posted.

[1:55:59] And if people don't know how to get to that page on the city's website,

[1:56:03] if you just find the city of Morgan Hill's website

[1:56:06] and in the little box type in high speed rail, you will take you there.

[1:56:12] Thank you.

[1:56:13] Okay. Thank you.

[1:56:15] We move now at item number 12 on our agenda.

[1:56:20] Yeah.

[1:56:22] We're going to move 13 in front of 12.

[1:56:24] We did that. You thank you, Mr. Constantine, preliminary plan review for a better field of MOS proposed and

[1:56:32] industrial development. We'll give it a minute to kind of clear this out and then we'll go forward.

[1:57:06] I'm going to go to the hotel.

[1:57:12] I'm going to go to the hotel.

[1:57:15] I'm going to go to the hotel.

[1:57:19] I'm focused.

[1:57:21] Hey Miss Polini, please go ahead.

[1:57:29] We're going to resume now if we can have some quiet, go ahead.

[1:57:38] Hey, good evening.

[1:57:40] Dina Paulini, to me, development.

[1:57:43] This is a preliminary plan review for the Better Field M West Project.

[1:57:47] You're familiar with this.

[1:57:49] So the applicant has requested some council comments on the preliminary plan review of the

[1:57:57] industrial side of this project.

[1:58:00] The Planning Commission has reviewed this, so this is the Council's opportunity to provide

[1:58:05] some input on the project before they move forward with it.

[1:58:09] So it's 39 acres in the Morgan Hill Ranch Business Park.

[1:58:13] They are proposing approximately 550,000 square feet of buildings, 10 buildings, approximately

[1:58:22] four acres of park improvements, one acre of greenway, potential 7.9 acres of passive recreation

[1:58:30] that would be on the city's detention basin area and extension of a setter boulevard west

[1:58:36] of a federal full of art.

[1:58:38] So this is a bigger area of the development.

[1:58:42] Here is the residential area.

[1:58:45] And then these are the 10 buildings here.

[1:58:49] And here is the development area.

[1:58:52] I'm going to point out central park.

[1:58:55] Here is one of the areas that we'll be discussing tonight.

[1:58:58] Sutter greenway separates the commercial

[1:59:01] from the residential.

[1:59:02] that's one of the primary key areas of buffering the industrial from the residential.

[1:59:15] So, some of the areas for discussion for Council tonight is the consistency with the

[1:59:21] PUD interaction with the buffers with the residential, the loss of additional industrial land

[1:59:28] with central park, the approval process for central park, the center connection and timing for public improvements

[1:59:40] This is an opportunity for us to have a high-end office development, which we don't have at this point.

[1:59:48] And some of the key design elements that we'll be looking at when this comes through the process

[1:59:53] is the parking layout for the project, how it complies with architectural review guidelines for the PUD.

[2:00:00] Enhancement of landscaping, emphasizing the design elements along Butterfield Boulevard, and compliance with a lot coverage for that area.

[2:00:10] We just preliminary, we see that it may exceed that, but that's something we can look at when it comes through the official process.

[2:00:20] When the Planning Commission looked at this project, they did support the park development.

[2:00:26] They thought that it would really benefit both the residential and the industrial portion of the project.

[2:00:32] They did recommend that it be built with either the first phase of the housing portion of the project or the industrial.

[2:00:39] They really thought that it really needed to be built up front.

[2:00:44] They also wanted the industrial to be shovel ready, which they thought needed to have the public infrastructure in, including wiring for the telecommunications.

[2:00:53] and they expressed some concern that the industrial was dependent on the residential development site of the project.

[2:01:01] They didn't really get into the design of the project itself.

[2:01:08] So the entitlements that would be required for this project would be the development agreement,

[2:01:13] as you call the council did ask us to work with them on the industrial development agreement which we have been doing.

[2:01:20] They would need a subdivision map, site, and architectural review, and then either a conditional

[2:01:27] use permit if the park was to remain private or general plan amendment if the park was

[2:01:32] to become a public park.

[2:01:36] So those are, that's the summary for the project and I know that the applicant does have

[2:01:42] a presentation also tonight and be happy to answer any questions that you have.

[2:01:47] Questions?

[2:01:52] Gina, can you go back a slide or forward button?

[2:01:58] What?

[2:01:59] A second to last slide.

[2:02:02] One more.

[2:02:04] So second bullet recommended building parking phase.

[2:02:07] One of housing or industrial development.

[2:02:10] Is that what we typically do in housing developments?

[2:02:13] I know where I live, the amenities I have been built with,

[2:02:17] very last phase of where I live, but I live in perhaps a very different kind of development.

[2:02:23] So is that what we would typically do that's to say in phase one of a housing development,

[2:02:28] you have to put in the amenities?

[2:02:29] Well, this is a little bit different because this park is actually part of the industrial.

[2:02:35] So we don't require parks for industrial.

[2:02:38] So that's part of the discussion tonight and this was part of the discussion that the

[2:02:42] planning commission had.

[2:02:43] So, through RDCS, the Central Park was actually taken out of the project because they needed

[2:02:52] to have an actual agreement with the city in order to have the Central Park in obtained points.

[2:02:59] So, the park is actually part of the industrial development.

[2:03:03] So, it's a bit, I think.

[2:03:04] I get that.

[2:03:05] But, according to the slide, I'm looking at right now, the planning commission tied the

[2:03:09] to the housing development. So they're fine-minded. What do we typically do with housing

[2:03:14] developments when building amenities? Do we ask the amenities for built-in phase one or

[2:03:19] in later phases? In later phases. Okay. Thank you. If I may, Mr. Mayor, go ahead.

[2:03:23] To ductail on that question, and it says, or industrial development, you've said in your presentation

[2:03:31] that the catalyst for a new development, industrial development, it really is the housing.

[2:03:38] So, with that or, isn't that mean, doesn't it really mean that it could be after the first phase

[2:03:45] and after the housing is done, because it says or industrial development or industrial development

[2:03:49] means that we're putting up buildings?

[2:03:54] They discuss that.

[2:03:56] The park is going to benefit both sides of the project and industrial and the residential,

[2:04:02] and so it's just something to negotiate with the developer as we're going through this development

[2:04:06] agreement process well my point is and you may not be able to ask this question but going

[2:04:11] to Mr. Cars question if if the really the the the the catalyst to have industrial

[2:04:18] come is that there's the housing if you put a park you don't have the housing and you don't

[2:04:23] have the industrial so you I mean it doesn't it to me just to make it makes much sense that

[2:04:28] you have to put the housing or that the the part before you actually have anybody there that

[2:04:33] can use it. That's really what this looks like to me.

[2:04:40] Mr. Constantine, if I may jump in here again, you know, from here is the economic development

[2:04:45] director. The plan and commission was reacting to the request of having a park that would

[2:04:55] essentially translate into the addition.

[2:05:00] Regional loss of 3, 4 acres of industrial land and converting that into a park. So, in the conversation

[2:05:10] that the Planning Commission had and in responding to the comment made by the applicant that

[2:05:16] the park would be a catalyst for development or an amenity to attract companies and make the

[2:05:23] the industrial business part more attractive.

[2:05:27] There was simply the suggestion and the request from the planning commission that

[2:05:31] they want to see the part come in first with the first face of whether it's the residential

[2:05:36] or the industrial development because it is being touted as an amenity that will

[2:05:42] attract the companies. I understand that and I'm getting a little bit in discussion

[2:05:48] I apologize, but to address what you've just said, I'd have never heard of a company going

[2:05:55] anywhere to build a building because there was a nice park right next to it.

[2:06:01] I don't know, I may be wrong, but it did that aspect of it just to me and Mr. Carbauded

[2:06:08] up doesn't make any sense to me. But we'll go on. I don't think it's going to stop it.

[2:06:14] Yeah, you are in discussions.

[2:06:15] You have other questions.

[2:06:20] Mr. Seaver.

[2:06:22] Okay.

[2:06:23] I think my colleagues have combed in on the T issue that I want, which is the nature of

[2:06:30] that park and the last of industrial land.

[2:06:33] Okay.

[2:06:34] Well, that's later for discussion.

[2:06:36] Absolutely.

[2:06:37] Let me go ahead, Mr. Carl.

[2:06:39] I have other questions that perhaps we want to clear the presentation from last and have a

[2:06:44] we'll need to ask some questions.

[2:07:12] First set up a fighting visual.

[2:07:15] We're going to slow things down.

[2:08:00] Good evening.

[2:08:01] I'm Anthony Cataldo with Wormulcomarctex,

[2:08:04] and I'll be making the presentation on behalf of DIVCO West,

[2:08:08] along with Alma with populists.

[2:08:10] First I'd like to thank staff for an excellent report on the project.

[2:08:15] We've been working for the last year and a half with staff

[2:08:19] and the community developing this.

[2:08:24] Our site is located right here on the edge of Morgan Hill Business Park.

[2:08:31] Through developing the site, initially we talked with the broker community to try to figure

[2:08:36] out what the best need was for the site and we determined that there were three products

[2:08:41] that could be used in Morgan Hill.

[2:08:44] We have Study Area A, which is shown on the upper left-hand side, which is a smaller incubator

[2:08:51] spaces or startup companies. Study Area B, which is a slightly larger user and Study Area

[2:08:58] is C, down at the bottom of the site. One thing that makes this unique is we felt it was important

[2:09:06] to have one thing we've been learning through developing and Silicon Valley a lot of the current

[2:09:10] users are looking not only for a building, but something that has amenities that ties to the

[2:09:15] landscaping and space around the building.

[2:09:18] So pathways, walkways, something to do on their lunch break.

[2:09:22] Being close to housing, so they have work life balance that can easily get back and forth.

[2:09:27] So we felt that this park overall helped tie everything together.

[2:09:34] Study area A ranges from the smaller building at 18,000 square feet to 30,000 square feet,

[2:09:39] but each of the buildings are divisible, buildings four and five on the slider to

[2:09:44] visible down to about 4,000 square feet spaces for your start-ups or your incubators.

[2:09:51] Now this is the architecture for study area A and an alternate on the architecture for study area A.

[2:09:58] Study area B is the slightly larger.

[2:10:00] After building, we're picturing research and development and manufacturing care. These spaces range from 20,000 square feet to 86,000 square feet, and the goal is to get a variety of different user sizes. Each of these buildings can also be visible to two users to allow for more variety of space. We do have loading docs in the back, so you can bring product in and out for manufacturing purposes.

[2:10:27] And here is the architecture for study area B, very similar.

[2:10:34] And then study area C on it was determined that there's also a need for a larger product in there.

[2:10:40] So we have a 200,000 square foot manufacturing industrial building.

[2:10:47] And the architecture for study area C is a derivative of the other two.

[2:10:53] And here's the building.

[2:10:56] I'll now turn it over to Alma, who can talk about a lot of the landscaping and amenities throughout the park.

[2:11:03] Thank you.

[2:11:05] So in the, so genesis of this project, one of the main elements that we've been studying and trying to incorporate is the open space, not only as, you know, a park, but as actually as a network that really work for both sides, the residential and the industrial and even the community around the existing industrial park and the residents are nearby.

[2:11:25] So, we have the central park as a main amenity as a proper park, a little bit more

[2:11:32] than four acres, and then that connects seamlessly with what we call the Sutter Greenway,

[2:11:37] which is a broad kind of green connection that has also some amenities in there, and it ties

[2:11:42] into an enhanced sidewalk along Butterfield, and then even we studied by direction from

[2:11:51] of the potential of even the city expanding in the future into a larger park in the current

[2:11:58] basing that is south of our site. So to give you an idea what sort of the scale and the

[2:12:03] tribal man is that we're talking about central park really links to two uses and it's also

[2:12:08] provides almost like a gateway to this part of the city with access directly from all corners.

[2:12:16] So, we have sports courts, we have playgrounds, we have a number of pathways types.

[2:12:24] We have a multi-use sort of green area that can be used for informal gatherings or sports.

[2:12:32] The interest or the benefit of having industrial next to this park is that doing weekends,

[2:12:37] this park can actually transform a little bit into a different type of space given the change in users

[2:12:42] and then you have residence right next door that really can activate that space daily.

[2:12:48] So even the amenities that were located on the park really respond to that context.

[2:12:53] This is a video of what we call the side of the wingway.

[2:12:56] Again, it varies from upwards to about 52 almost 80 feet in some portions.

[2:13:01] So you can see that you can have plenty of amenities there,

[2:13:03] providing access to a lot of the industrial users as much as a residence that basically line this connector.

[2:13:11] And then we have, we're proposing some ideas of programming that can be responsive to both

[2:13:17] industry and the residential such as this food trucks and weekends or even during lunch

[2:13:22] hour.

[2:13:23] Again, the treatment of Butterfield avenue the response to the context on the residential

[2:13:29] and how this Butterfield, the sort of greenway has direct access from residential to enter

[2:13:35] the site and then connect directly through this greenway to the center park.

[2:13:40] And then again, the idea that in the future, the CD could even expand this and create this additional open space.

[2:13:49] We were studying here just for scale.

[2:13:51] But this is more trails and potentially a dot-bar.

[2:13:54] That can be part of these complex open spaces that are linked together.

[2:13:59] Again, the main goal was trying to not only monetize the proposed users,

[2:14:05] to really provide an network of open space that would tie with the city of

[2:14:09] modern hill in many, many ways. Thank you.

[2:14:17] Is that it? Okay.

[2:14:21] Do we don't have any speaker cards on this side?

[2:14:25] I have one speaker card.

[2:14:26] I do have a question of the presentation.

[2:14:30] Yeah, well, I'll ask the question now. Yeah. Okay, thank you.

[2:14:33] In regards to the industrial buildings that you just went over,

[2:14:38] those are just concepts of what it could look like.

[2:14:40] You're not, those are not plans that you're going to be building those buildings correct.

[2:14:44] Right.

[2:14:44] Those are concepts for future.

[2:14:47] I just want to make sure that people are confused by saying that those buildings are

[2:14:50] going to be built when somebody could come in and especially in the area at one or

[2:14:57] area, a build is one building there if they wanted to.

[2:15:00] Right? The building size could vary depending on the user's most likely study area, it would be the smaller product, based on the size of the lot, then yes, you're correct. Okay, thank you.

[2:15:12] Okay, and who's the speaker?

[2:15:13] I actually do not have a speaker card any longer.

[2:15:17] Okay, it was withdrawn. Okay.

[2:15:20] Then we'll close public comment.

[2:15:23] Yeah, and open it to council discussion.

[2:15:25] I'm

[2:15:29] not going to go out.

[2:15:30] I think this is progressing nicely.

[2:15:36] I like the the the the part aspect.

[2:15:38] I think that we're finally coming to a point where

[2:15:42] this project can actually go forward.

[2:15:45] I think we've been at this for quite some time.

[2:15:48] And I like the concepts.

[2:15:50] Again, in the picture though, I think it would be better

[2:15:53] and maybe less confusing for some of the people that aren't

[2:15:58] Maybe not even put the buildings in the industrial part there and it's really focused on the residential aspect of it, which I think

[2:16:05] Will help to not only help to eventually maybe get somebody to put or to build something on the industrial land, but also

[2:16:16] will allow us to

[2:16:20] Showcase this because I want it's going to I think it's going to give us what we really need in Morgan Hill, which is

[2:16:26] apartments

[2:16:27] The business leaders in this community have said that that's what they need to attract

[2:16:33] people to work in their facilities and then hopefully that will help bring companies

[2:16:40] to Morgan Hill to build because we do need our industrial space to be built out and not

[2:16:44] to have empty lots.

[2:16:47] Thank you, Mr. Carr.

[2:16:50] Thank you.

[2:16:54] One of the things that I've always been interested in this is making sure that once we

[2:16:58] improve the residential that there is not an opportunity for there to be more residential

[2:17:05] creep on this site. So by approving a development agreement for the industrial are we locking

[2:17:11] in the industrial?

[2:17:19] I'll take that. I'll take that. The real intent of the industrial development agreement

[2:17:28] It's to lock in the benefits that the developer is seeking from the city, the benefits that the city is seeking out of this development,

[2:17:44] including memorabilizing the entitlements that they have worked to achieve for a period of time.

[2:17:52] The ultimately changing any additional industrial space into residential will come back to you through a general planned amendment if that is something that happens in the future.

[2:18:08] And outside of the industrial VA that could happen.

[2:18:13] Okay,

[2:18:17] um, the Southern Boulevard extension, um, is that a requirement for, is that an RDCS committed requirement?

[2:18:27] It, it's actually a requirement, it would be a requirement as part of the conditions of approval for this project.

[2:18:33] And we do have Scott, clear here to answer any questions on the setter extension.

[2:18:40] Are you referring to council member? Are you referring to the street or the, yes, the would,

[2:18:48] would the street be built as a requirement? It would be built as part of the residential

[2:18:53] and am part of the industrial, but only a segment of it would be built as part of the residential.

[2:19:00] So, the residential project here has access through here and access through here.

[2:19:12] This street is what we needed for the residential component of the project regardless of what

[2:19:19] happens to the industrial segment.

[2:19:21] So we believe that at a minimum what seems to be three quarters of that industrial street will

[2:19:28] be required as part of the residential development?

[2:19:34] So the timing of that will be a commitment made when they get entitlements for the resident.

[2:19:41] For the residential, so what we expect with the first phase, that portion of the setter

[2:19:47] extension will not be built because they are a build of the front half of the development.

[2:19:52] And so that will not happen at the beginning and it will happen towards one of their second

[2:19:57] phases, second or third phases.

[2:20:01] Okay.

[2:20:05] And again, with central part, just so that I understand the park issue here, the park is really part of the industrial site.

[2:20:15] So it is not part of their RDCS commitments or their RDCS application and we'll actually have to do a general plan change for that.

[2:20:24] Correct, it is actually part of the industrial and it's to be determined on whether a general

[2:20:31] planet amendment would be required or a conditional use permit.

[2:20:34] It's whether it's a private park or a public park and what that process is.

[2:20:41] I think I've heard from the developer that it's their interest for it to be a public park,

[2:20:46] in which case we would have to do a general plan change.

[2:20:48] We would also want, we have a process for that.

[2:20:53] We would have to bring it to the Parks and Recreation Commission, come back to the

[2:20:57] Plan of Commission, and then come back to you for you to accept the land dedication.

[2:21:03] So it's just a matter of process for us to identify that and we are aware of the interest

[2:21:10] to make that a public park.

[2:21:11] We didn't make this common in the remarks but I think it is important to say that, yes, we have been at the table for quite a while working on this project, but we think we have made progress the layout that you currently have is something that we have worked on collectively, the residential component on its own has also improved to the point that the developer has scored well.

[2:21:41] through that process. It's difficult because we are combining a number of, we're combining

[2:21:47] two different, we are intertwining two different projects and conversations that are really

[2:21:52] intended to be separate. The conversation for tonight is simply at a high level conceptually

[2:22:00] does the City Council support this layout that is currently been developed, including changing some

[2:22:08] the Industrial Land to create this book?

[2:22:11] OK, so thank you, that's a good way of framing.

[2:22:14] I think what we need to try to accomplish tonight,

[2:22:19] and I want to thank both parties who are having what I think

[2:22:22] has turned into a quite a good conversation

[2:22:24] and turning out to be quite a good project.

[2:22:29] You're right, these are two very distinct

[2:22:31] different processes that the council asked you

[2:22:34] to intertwine, so I appreciate everyone's cooperation

[2:22:37] in trying to do that. And that's the exciting thing about the project for me that we're really

[2:22:42] building as Councilmember Constantine said, these live work spaces and these places that actually

[2:22:50] hopefully will work quite well together. I think trying to provide some comment or direction for

[2:22:56] you tonight if that's what we're trying to do. I think the site plan is coming along quite well.

[2:23:01] Well, the question is about the park, yes, I like the park.

[2:23:06] I think the park adds a great amenity and a great buffer between the industrial and the

[2:23:13] residential.

[2:23:14] I'd like to make sure that the park is open to the public, whether that means it's a public

[2:23:20] park or a private park.

[2:23:22] The details can get worked out, but it needs to be open to the public, so the entire business

[2:23:26] park on both sides of Butterfield can enjoy that, the residential can enjoy it and quite frankly

[2:23:32] the rest of the community should be able to enjoy it as well.

[2:23:36] I think when I say that, we're going to have to think about where when my son and his friends

[2:23:42] go play soccer, where they're going to park, because they shouldn't be parking in the drive

[2:23:46] ways of the residence a lot, obviously.

[2:23:48] So we're going to have to think about that.

[2:23:49] If it's truly a public park open to the public, we need to make sure it has access.

[2:23:54] I think we, I realize that the park is different because it's in the industrial side of this and we're going to have to do some things with that.

[2:24:01] But I think we should be considering it like an amenity for the housing like we would consider any housing project and that it shouldn't be.

[2:24:09] It shouldn't necessarily be required to be done up front.

[2:24:12] I mean, there's a very practical reasons why it shouldn't be both for a funding standpoint and as well.

[2:24:19] I would imagine space like that is going to be needed for construction and sort of the way that they lay out their project.

[2:24:27] So we should think about it in terms of the way that we think about any housing project.

[2:24:33] And I'm okay if we want to ask the Parks and Rec Commission about amenities and things like that apart that size.

[2:24:40] It's, you know, we don't get to do that every day in Morgan Hill, so asking the commission for some thoughts on that would be great.

[2:24:47] The road, if I heard you correctly, is tied to RDCS commitments and there is a certain amount of the road that will be done at a certain point as entitlements.

[2:25:00] I, through the entitlement process, will be committed to, I think that's appropriate.

[2:25:06] I would like us to move forward with the industrial development agreement and figure out how to

[2:25:12] start putting that, actually putting that development agreement together and locking some of these things in place.

[2:25:19] I realized that a future council's could make other general plan changes, but my point in improving the general plan change

[2:25:29] it allows for this residential was that we would do these together and do our best job to

[2:25:33] lock in the industrial that is there today so that it won't be changed in the future.

[2:25:40] And I love on this drawing that Levy Park, I realize there's a lot of work to be done

[2:25:45] to actually figure out how to get that done and that I hope we're all interested in trying

[2:25:49] to do that as well because I think that is a great improvement as well.

[2:25:55] Thank you, Mayor.

[2:25:56] Thank you, staff.

[2:25:57] Mr. Seamer?

[2:26:00] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:26:03] I perhaps have a different perspective than Council Member Clarke, but that makes it interesting to be Council.

[2:26:11] I'm quite concerned things

[2:26:15] one, the reduction of industrial land while I think it's a great idea.

[2:26:20] I mean, a buffer that's smaller than that that doesn't take three or four acres, but maybe

[2:26:27] it takes,

[2:26:30] it comes out, I wouldn't mind it coming out of the residential side, not the

[2:26:35] industrial side, I think we are too easily led to reduce the amount of industrial land, and

[2:26:41] that's going to provide jobs and revenue for the city in the future.

[2:26:46] And second, I was quite concerned by staff comment that said, well, maybe in the future,

[2:26:51] you know they might come back and seek to further reduce that. I would caution us to not put that

[2:26:57] statement out there. I think you know very firm statement that says no we're not going to

[2:27:04] consider it at all. Would be much more in keeping with what the city's long term needs are.

[2:27:16] Okay I'll make some comments. I, uh, nobody's commented on it yet, but I thought our instructions were

[2:27:24] that the industrial was pre-eminent that we wanted that.

[2:27:29] And now we're hearing that the industrial

[2:27:31] is dependent on the residential.

[2:27:34] And that very much concerns me.

[2:27:36] How do you very much concerns me?

[2:27:40] Why are we turning it around?

[2:27:43] Why is what we really want to get?

[2:27:47] What we allowed the residential to be there

[2:27:49] for is so that we can get the industrial.

[2:27:53] That's the, you know, now we're putting the cart before the horse if you ask me so I'm very concerned about that.

[2:28:01] I've listened to the presentations and to my colleagues and, and, you know, I had the same kind of reservation at first blush that Mr. Sebert did in terms of losing that much industrial land to the park.

[2:28:16] But I'm hearing that it really can be an amenity

[2:28:21] that I'll help both sides flourish and work.

[2:28:26] And Mr. Carbrod, up the concern about parking,

[2:28:28] which was something that I noticed as well for the park

[2:28:32] and stuff like that.

[2:28:33] But I think those things can be worked out.

[2:28:36] But I don't quite understand why now we're

[2:28:39] saying the industrial depends on the residential.

[2:28:42] We need industrial now.

[2:28:44] You know, we need to be able to accommodate anybody that wants to come forward if we need to build the road all the way and all those kind of things we should be getting that done.

[2:28:55] The only reason that we approved the residential was to get the industrial.

[2:29:01] So that's my priority.

[2:29:07] I don't know where we go from here. Let's see what our actions are.

[2:29:17] Provided comments.

[2:29:18] Yeah, so today's to provide comments on the industrial development, the applicant is going

[2:29:26] and the applicant is going through the RDCS, so that's separate with the residential right now.

[2:29:33] We're working with the applicant on the bullet points for the development agreement, so that provides us with some direction to continue to work to move forward on the development agreement.

[2:29:45] And so, right now, we're just asking to provide some comments on the preliminary plan review,

[2:29:51] what you have before you today.

[2:29:53] We wanted to really hone in on the park, whether it if you would accept it.

[2:30:00] Taking some of that industrial land and use it for park purposes. And whether the use of it could be public or if it would be private. So we know what the process would be down the road.

[2:30:16] So we're hearing these comments taking them down and then we know where to move from this point.

[2:30:22] I didn't mean to agree with Mr. Carr on the public use of the park.

[2:30:30] That kind of confusing me because I was under the assumption that the city asked them to make the park bigger.

[2:30:38] So, now you're asking us to say whether or not we want to take more industrial or...

[2:30:47] I'm really not sure what exactly you're asking, but I'm kind of confused because I know when I...

[2:30:52] the first iteration of this plan, it was only like an acre park, and then having met

[2:30:57] with the developer, they stated that the city has asked them to make the park bigger.

[2:31:04] So now you're asking us to give you direction on the park, and I thought that was already

[2:31:11] done.

[2:31:11] So I'm confused as to what you're asking us to do if you want us to make the park smaller,

[2:31:16] do you want to make it bigger?

[2:31:17] Are you asking us if that park is perfect?

[2:31:22] Council member, if I may I like to address that. And this is this is a useful conversation

[2:31:29] for staff, particularly those of us that are working on the Industrial DA. And if I may

[2:31:35] just very briefly take a step back and cover how we got here to begin with, at least

[2:31:45] my perspective on the project, as I've been engaged with it, when the developer came in

[2:31:53] and requested that the City Council consider changing approximately 20 acres of industrial

[2:32:01] land to residential. The developer at that time made a number of assertions in regards

[2:32:10] to the benefits that they would provide for the entirety of the business park.

[2:32:18] In previous meetings we have referred to a letter that they provided the council, which we

[2:32:24] have used as the foundation for the negotiations that we have had on the Industrial DA.

[2:32:30] Some of the key elements of those commitments that were made to the community in exchange

[2:32:36] for the consideration of the general plan, amendment included, providing the letter says up to

[2:32:45] five acre park and building out the infrastructure, securing the entitlements for the industrial,

[2:32:55] making the park business ready. So again, now we're going into the bucket of the industrial

[2:33:01] DA, which was not necessarily the intention, but I think it's relevant to understanding how we

[2:33:06] got here. So has city staff been requesting a five-acre park? Yes, to the extent that we

[2:33:15] were trying to implement the direction that was given to us on the Industrial DA, which

[2:33:20] is we're supposed to get a five-acre park. To that end, we have even offered considering

[2:33:29] repurposing a portion of the detention fund that could create enough space to accommodate that

[2:33:36] five acre park and we've been in conversations with the developer on that.

[2:33:41] So, we are trying to implement the direction that was given to us for the negotiations of the

[2:33:47] industrial DA, trying to tie in this park amenity, the straight improvements, the timing of

[2:33:56] entitlements. And those are the basic deal points of the Industrial DA. We have arrived to this

[2:34:03] place that essentially brings almost a five-acre park potentially if they use the detention

[2:34:09] pond they can definitely get to the five acres. And I think that this is a really good piece to

[2:34:15] start is to simply understand if conceptually the layout of the Industrial Residential and

[2:34:21] communities work for this community.

[2:34:25] But the detention pond isn't in, they don't have that acre, that's city.

[2:34:29] Correct.

[2:34:30] So they can't, they can't use that for part of the five acres, correct?

[2:34:36] Well, that is part of the conversation that we have been exploring.

[2:34:40] In trying to assist achieving what we thought were the goals in the direction from council,

[2:34:48] which is create a master plan community that has all those amenities.

[2:34:51] So at this point we don't even know if the detention could even be used because it still needs to provide for

[2:35:00] The water detention for the entire industrial park. So that is still remains a question. But we have

[2:35:07] you still as part of the internal conversations with the developer.

[2:35:12] Okay, thank you very much for the clarification. I just think we've been talking way too much about a park. When it comes to this project.

[2:35:18] I mean, I'm not being facetious. I mean, we've struggled over whether or not we were going to even have apartments in this area, whether or not we're going to take over industrial.

[2:35:26] I think our energy should be used on making sure that the infrastructure is put in place so that

[2:35:34] and the entitlements, so that the land's fully entitled so that it becomes more attractive for a company to come in and say,

[2:35:44] oh, you know what all the time it's already done, all the infrastructure is put in, I think I want to build a building here as I said earlier

[2:35:50] I don't think a company is going to come here because it's a nice part across the street

[2:35:54] Because of the cost of what it's going to cost to actually build a building for their needs.

[2:36:01] It's going to be difficult as we've all heard that we have anywhere between 10 to 20 years of industrial land.

[2:36:10] That is going to remain vacant for that time and it's foreseeable future because of that fact.

[2:36:15] So I thought that our main emphasis for the housing and going with what the Mayor talked about was that

[2:36:22] We're going to build a housing and then have all the entitlements done so that it'd be more

[2:36:26] attractive so that the remaining industrial would be purchased and then buildings would be

[2:36:33] built.

[2:36:34] And so I'm thinking that that's the same goal and again, I just think we're talking way too much

[2:36:41] about a park and how big it's going to be and where it's going to be instead of really

[2:36:44] worrying about what we started off this project for in the beginning, which was to have

[2:36:50] something that will entice companies to build on the industrial lot.

[2:36:56] That's my two cents.

[2:37:01] We have a request from the applicant to reopen the public hearing.

[2:37:05] Would you consider that?

[2:37:08] So, okay, come on up.

[2:37:13] Good evening, carry Williams with Divco West.

[2:37:17] So just a few, I've been sort of taking notes here

[2:37:20] during the conversation, just a few notes of clarification.

[2:37:25] First of all,

[2:37:27] the location of the park actually portions of it are within the residential

[2:37:32] area, the 19 and a half acres that was rezoned to residential, and it's not, you can't

[2:37:39] see from this site plan where the zoning line is, but a portion actually of the park is

[2:37:45] in the residential and a portion of it is in the industrials.

[2:37:49] to our larger portion in the industrial.

[2:37:52] With respect to how we got to hear.

[2:38:00] So when we entered into discussions with the city regarding the change

[2:38:06] from residential, I mean, to residential,

[2:38:10] we heard loud and clear what Mr. Council Member Car was saying,

[2:38:14] which was that a priority for the city was to prevent

[2:38:18] residential creep from occurring, and so what we said was that we would be one way that we could

[2:38:24] provide assurances to the community and to the council that our intent was not to come back six months later and

[2:38:32] reason another X number of acres, but was to enter into a long-term development agreement that would lock in the

[2:38:39] industrial uses for the life of that DA. Our expectation is that it'll be a 10 year DA with up to 10 years

[2:38:47] worth of extensions.

[2:38:52] Additionally, what we said was that we were going to take steps to start processing entitlements

[2:39:00] for the industrial concurrently with the residential that we would undergo both planning

[2:39:05] processes concurrently.

[2:39:07] What we're actually in right now is the planning process and the entitlement process for

[2:39:13] the industrial.

[2:39:14] And we already have PD zoning on the property so we don't need a zoning amendment.

[2:39:21] What we need is, we do need to address some of the lotlines on the property.

[2:39:27] We're proposing a realignment of the existing or the proposed location of the road.

[2:39:36] And then in addition, we need to do the development agreement because that was our commitment

[2:39:42] to do that. In order to move the development agreement forward, we need to have a stable project

[2:39:48] description. There's a SQL requirement for development agreement in order to do that analysis.

[2:39:53] You have to have a project description. So we submitted this preliminary review plan, which we submitted.

[2:40:00] I don't know, six months ago or nine months ago to the city and the city reviewed it, provided comments back to us. We took it to the planning commission, they provided comments back to us.

[2:40:10] We're here before you tonight to provide comments back to us. If you say we love the plan, we think it's great, then we come away and we say, okay, now we can start the sequel work as we have a project description on the DA. We get feedback from you tonight on the DA terms.

[2:40:26] In addition, we can start processing some lot-line adjustments that we want to do in

[2:40:31] initiating subdivision map.

[2:40:34] So the industrial for Mr. Mayor is not contingent upon the residential.

[2:40:40] We're moving full throttle on the industrial.

[2:40:42] These are the steps we need to take to make it business ready and we are actively

[2:40:46] marketing it now.

[2:40:48] However, until we get through this process and we have a solid site plan.

[2:40:53] We know where the road's going to go exactly, and we know if there's going to be a park there.

[2:41:00] Once we know that, then we can adjust the lot lines around it and we can begin to create

[2:41:04] business ready lots.

[2:41:08] Oh, and on the detention base and last thing on the detention base, and we've been extensive

[2:41:12] research, or hydrologist, has been working with city staff for many, many months, probably

[2:41:17] here, on the detention base, and although the hydrologist isn't here tonight, we do have

[2:41:23] our civil engineer here who can answer any questions as well as Scott Creer who we've been

[2:41:27] working closely with and we have determined that a significant part of the part could be made

[2:41:32] available for a public open space and for trails so that has been officially determined.

[2:41:39] Thank you.

[2:41:43] Anything to add?

[2:41:44] Mr. Car.

[2:41:45] We didn't talk at all about a lot of line adjustments.

[2:41:48] Is there, did this women just talked about them?

[2:41:50] Are there any issues that we see with a lot of line adjustments?

[2:41:55] Yes.

[2:41:56] Okay.

[2:42:00] Okay, I think we're done.

[2:42:02] So if I might just finish my, I think to sort of meet the vision that you have of these things moving together,

[2:42:09] we should move forward with the development agreement on the industrial side.

[2:42:13] And I think I agree with Mr. Seabirds.

[2:42:16] I would like to see some language in there that talks about this development agreement.

[2:42:21] Cannot allow for more residential at the loss of industrial.

[2:42:28] Thank you.

[2:42:29] That's a good thing to add.

[2:42:33] Just comes out of his mouth.

[2:42:35] It's magic.

[2:42:36] This is there.

[2:42:37] It's just there.

[2:42:39] Okay.

[2:42:39] Thank you.

[2:42:40] We'll move right along.

[2:42:42] In fact, we'll go backwards.

[2:42:44] We're so flexible.

[2:42:46] Agreement to negotiate exclusively

[2:42:48] with Brookfield residential properties

[2:42:51] for the development of a portion of

[2:42:53] depostry and the community and cultural

[2:42:55] center site.

[2:42:57] This is Ms. Wemers' lucky day.

[2:42:59] for Mirrors is still on the line.

[2:43:03] Good evening, once again.

[2:43:07] This particular item, I get to smile a little more, not that I'm not super excited about

[2:43:12] the previous item, favorite development team, but this one is a tricky one that I'm just

[2:43:29] This is an agreement to negotiate exclusively with Brookfield residential for a project that would use three separate properties, including using part of the depost street, part of the community center parking lot and the Hail Lumber site.

[2:43:47] Taking us step back, this is something that we use as a foundation of the conversations

[2:43:55] for tonight.

[2:43:58] The general plan, the previous one and the new one, they just got approved, including our

[2:44:04] specific plan and our circulation element, all talk about realigning depostrid to connect

[2:44:13] to church.

[2:44:13] It specifically says that we are going to do that by going through the community center parking lot.

[2:44:21] So it's been part of our guiding documents.

[2:44:24] And with that in mind,

[2:44:27] we have, whenever we have had an opportunity to meet with developers that are interested in our community,

[2:44:34] We talk about this opportunity and just for reference here, this is the Hail Lumber site.

[2:44:42] This is Deepo Street that currently dead ends right here.

[2:44:48] Our guiding documents suggest that Deepo Street should connect over here to church.

[2:44:54] Again, bisecting and going through our community center parking.

[2:45:01] So, we have had an opportunity to converse and bring forward an idea to a number of residential developers, which is if you could look at the hilllumber site as a development opportunity.

[2:45:19] And if we look at realigning depot, could there be a development project that essentially provides enough land that might make the project feasible and

[2:45:29] interesting for you. And we have engaged with several housing developers, some of them

[2:45:40] that have actually engaged in conversations with the property owner. But not until now,

[2:45:48] have we found a developer that actually has invested enough time and energy that would

[2:45:54] us bringing this project to you tonight.

[2:45:59] So, the idea is that we use the Hill Lumber side, the Deep-O Street,

[2:46:05] and the CCC, the Community Center parking lot to create a development opportunity.

[2:46:10] A little bit about Brookfield residential.

[2:46:12] It is a pretty well-established company that has been around since 1956,

[2:46:20] the Ex-58. They are the fifth largest residential company in North America. They do a lot

[2:46:29] of high-end residential, single-family homes, but this is where we get a little bit lucky.

[2:46:34] They do have a focus and a mandate to do infill urban development near transit stations,

[2:46:43] and this would be considered an infill development, and we do have a transit station.

[2:46:50] So we

[2:46:50] We have been working with Brookfield Residential in exploring what could the development look like.

[2:46:58] We brought their team of engineers and architects and we brought our engineers and planners to a room

[2:47:06] and spent quite a bit of time exploring what could this development look like, what would the layout be.

[2:47:13] And after looking at a couple of options, this is the concept plan that resonated the most with our teammates.

[2:47:23] The idea would be that this development would provide for the realignment of Deepostrid would have to replace all of the parking at the Community Center.

[2:47:36] And what you see in yellow would be the residential portion of the project, which currently

[2:47:42] the developer anticipates or it conceptually has identified as 56 or so town homes.

[2:47:54] The project provides a number of opportunities including creating a better circulation plan

[2:48:02] for the downtown implementing our general plan and downtown specific plan.

[2:48:09] The realignment of Depot Street would be beneficial for the future development as we envision

[2:48:15] in our community.

[2:48:17] But I think that one of the most exciting things, especially for me on this project, is that it

[2:48:23] would allow us to move out of the downtown and industrial use that in previous times would only

[2:48:32] done with a redevelopment agency assistance. This community has previously done. Otherwise, I

[2:48:41] don't know how a project like that could really happen. So moving out the lumber yard, which

[2:48:49] as a business, we appreciate and we're grateful that they're here. But if bringing a residential

[2:48:55] project could yield this opportunity of realigning the post-street, moving out on industrial

[2:49:03] use, and creating more housing that will support the existing businesses, as well as the new

[2:49:08] retail shops that are coming. And we think this project would implement the vision that we

[2:49:14] have developed for our downtown to make it the most walkable bike-friendly urban, family-oriented,

[2:49:20] and transit-oriented neighborhood in the city of Morgan Hill.

[2:49:25] So before you, we have the direction to direct the city manager to negotiate an agreement,

[2:49:36] an exclusive agreement with Brookfield Residential, to explore if we can figure out the

[2:49:50] that we currently have at the Community Center that would explore the potential relocation of the lumber yard and that would provide housing.

[2:50:00] We have the understanding with a developer that this would be a very short period for negotiations.

[2:50:10] We have enough knowledge today, and I think it's important to say, we have enough understanding to know that the number yard by itself, because of the setback restrictions by Union Pacific, as well as our own design guidelines for noise mitigation.

[2:50:28] This particular segment of depot, which is different than the other end of depot, because the trains are on a berm.

[2:50:37] The tracks are on the on a berm would have a setback of about 50 feet, making the development potential of this site really unlikely.

[2:50:47] So it would mean that we would not see the redevelopment of the Hill Lumber side on its own.

[2:50:54] We also know that there is a financial gap right now, so we still have some work to do.

[2:51:03] And we know that it is likely that the city would have to finance the re-enlightment of depostreied on its entirety,

[2:51:11] which, again, part of our work ahead is to develop a financing plan for that.

[2:51:19] So with that, I just would like to say that Joe Weira, with Brookfield Residential, is here

[2:51:27] to address the council and to answer any questions, as well as Mr. Bob Hammond, one of the

[2:51:34] representing the ownership of the hell-lumber yard site.

[2:51:40] And that concludes my presentation.

[2:51:43] Thank you. Are there questions?

[2:51:46] Just a car.

[2:51:47] Peter Thun your project scope.

[2:51:50] The second bullet point replaces all of the CCC parking spaces.

[2:51:53] You mean all of the existing parking spaces?

[2:51:57] Correct. One of the big parameters that we thought would be important is to make sure that we

[2:52:03] placed all of the parking within the community center.

[2:52:08] So the only way that that would happen is if it is with building a parking deck in the portion

[2:52:16] the remaining portion of the community center and the question is can we fit all those parking spaces

[2:52:23] and what the project still be financially viable for the developer in exchange for what I think

[2:52:30] It's 1.2 acres of remaining development land for the developer.

[2:52:34] Okay.

[2:52:35] Thank you.

[2:52:37] But thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[2:52:40] Regarding the parking, the report says that there's 244 spaces currently.

[2:52:46] Is that correct?

[2:52:48] I think that is correct.

[2:52:49] The report says there's 240 plus I think 16 on the street.

[2:52:54] Right.

[2:52:54] So the remaining now, doing the math at this,

[2:52:58] I don't know if you have that in your presentation, but in the report, it shows the two

[2:53:02] level parking garage with plus or minus 145 spaces plus the well the spaces that are in

[2:53:14] the parking lot, so that doesn't add it to 240 and then with the spaces parking would be on

[2:53:22] the street.

[2:53:23] So I had a question basically asking if we could add a third level, because that

[2:53:28] would give us another maybe 72 spaces, which would bring us up to about 237, closer to the

[2:53:33] 240, and then we wouldn't have to burden on the neighborhood with streets.

[2:53:38] But I hear you saying that all the parking that we currently have is going to be in the

[2:53:43] CSC spot.

[2:53:44] So did I misread that?

[2:53:45] Or is that?

[2:53:46] Thank you for your question, Council Member.

[2:53:48] I see the developer has approached the bench to make sure that I don't misrepresent what

[2:53:54] is willing and not willing or able to do, but before he addresses the council, I want to say

[2:54:01] that right now, for example, this concept plan that we currently have provides parking on

[2:54:09] here on a parking deck, provides some parking that is more accessible outside of a parking

[2:54:15] garage, some diagonal parking to make it a little bit friendlier for folks using say the preschool

[2:54:22] or what have you. It also provides on-street parking right here that it currently would be closer

[2:54:29] to the community center than the current on-street parking on depostrate at the other end.

[2:54:34] And it also finishes providing the rest of the parking on this section of the hill lumber site

[2:54:41] that is we refer to as a panhandle. We still need to figure out this issue of the parking

[2:54:48] and we're not done.

[2:54:51] The intention and our direction

[2:54:53] are request of the developer

[2:54:55] is that he tries to accommodate all of the parking.

[2:55:00] In this section, it's much as possible. That's the intention that's our request. We don't know if it is feasible.

[2:55:07] There is, again, in addition to solving for the parking and the location of the parking, there's still a financial gap that exists

[2:55:15] between the developer for the project. And again, we're going to be solving for that over the next 60 days.

[2:55:23] And, Joe, would you like to address the council if it's okay with the council or should we wait for any other questions?

[2:55:29] It sounds like his presentation will have to be parking answered there.

[2:55:35] So, come on up.

[2:55:35] Better let him talk because he's anxious.

[2:55:39] Good evening Mr. Mayor members of the council. Mr. City Manager.

[2:55:43] My name is Joe Gwer. I'm director for planning at Brookfield Residential Bay Area.

[2:55:47] I would never be anxious to stop Mr. Marish from speaking in any occasion.

[2:55:53] I learned that years ago.

[2:55:55] The one thing I did want to say just to start off this evening is sort of no matter where

[2:55:59] this goes tonight or going forward.

[2:56:02] I really wanted to commend you on the staff that you've got in Morgan Hill.

[2:56:06] I work for the City of San Jose for a long time. I work for a lot with a lot of cities in the area.

[2:56:11] Your staff have been quite honestly incredible from the standpoint of

[2:56:15] bringing everybody into a room together, and maybe that needs to be in the conversation

[2:56:19] and was in the room, folks will really open to try to work out to try to figure out

[2:56:23] relatively complex development transaction.

[2:56:28] A couple of points I did want to make, and I will get specifically to the issue of the

[2:56:32] parking and what we think we can do at this point.

[2:56:36] The concept plan that you have in front of you is probably two generations ago.

[2:56:41] We've been through about six iterations of site plans trying to figure this out.

[2:56:45] We did start just with the Hail Lombo property and attempting to figure out what was that

[2:56:49] developable by itself and has Mr. Mirrors pointed out. There are some setback issues. It's relatively

[2:56:55] narrow-side. So there was some discussion about including the realignment of depot in the excess

[2:57:02] land that would come with the realignment of depot. It was very clear to us that the parking needed

[2:57:07] to be replaced. Park is getting used. You've got a very active community center that needs to be replaced.

[2:57:14] In the multiple generations that we've gone through, we do fit more on the community center side of Deepo Street than what you see on this exhibit.

[2:57:23] It doesn't quite get to the 240. I think about 20 to 30 may need to be on the other side of Deepo, but the overall majority, north of 200, we can get into the footprint that exists today of the parking lot.

[2:57:38] It is for the community center, but it does, you know, the suggestion of a third deck for the parking

[2:57:46] structure.

[2:57:47] The rally is, it gets more expensive than more decks you put on the parking structure.

[2:57:52] And as was pointed out, there already is a gap to try to make this steel work from the standpoint

[2:57:57] of the realignment of depot and replacing the parking.

[2:58:01] So we're trying to squeeze not only the physical reality of the number of parking stalls, but also

[2:58:06] economic reality, but it is something that from the standpoint of what we've been able to get

[2:58:11] to today and some preliminary conversations with staff about the city potentially participating

[2:58:18] in the order of magnitude of the cost of depot that we do think we can make it work financially.

[2:58:24] The statement was made about us being a single family home developer. We are that. We are also

[2:58:31] to do quite a bit of multi-family housing in the barrier.

[2:58:35] We've got projects from Gilroy to Ronald Park to Dixon to Dublin to Fremont to Hayward.

[2:58:42] We have a 2000-unit project in Dublin right at the BART station in Dublin that has a significant

[2:58:47] amount of high-density urban info within a quarter mile of the Dublin BART platform.

[2:58:54] We do have a very clear directive to continue to increase our portfolio.

[2:58:59] So we are one of the largest home developers in North America.

[2:59:04] We're actually a Canadian-based company.

[2:59:06] The Bay Area Division is located in Danville, I live in San Jose, and I'm the director

[2:59:11] of former planning.

[2:59:12] I would be the one who would be bringing it through the process from the standpoint of both

[2:59:16] negotiating with the city on the CCC property as well as the entitlements.

[2:59:21] But really, we're just here today sort of echo, staff recommendation, request your support.

[2:59:26] As was mentioned, the owners of the Hill Wumber property are here.

[2:59:30] We are in contract to purchase their property.

[2:59:33] They are supportive of what we've been doing.

[2:59:35] They know what we've been working on with City staff as far as the additional city property

[2:59:40] as well.

[2:59:41] But I'm really just here this evening if you had any additional questions beyond the parking

[2:59:45] questions.

[2:59:46] Well, I do want to thank you for your comments on our staff.

[2:59:49] We do agree that they are incredible.

[2:59:54] I have a question of regard in the street, because of the proximity to the, the, the, the,

[3:00:00] Daycare, you're going to be like kids right there. Is there any barrier? I know that you're looking

[3:00:08] at street parking there. So I can't imagine there'd be too much of a barrier between that street

[3:00:14] and the CCC. But that is going to now be a thoroughfare now. That's going to be pretty close

[3:00:20] to where we have kids being dropped off. So I was wanting if there's going to be anything that was

[3:00:24] going to be. I don't think that we've got to the point yet of getting the

[3:00:29] that level of specifics.

[3:00:30] And one of the things that we've talked a lot about that staff are very much an agreement

[3:00:33] with is that anytime you take a straight, straight, and make it curved, it helps with traffic

[3:00:39] calming because people just slow down because they can't sort of see a straight shot.

[3:00:44] And even though you're connecting deeper with church which may alter some volumes, it will

[3:00:49] be slower traffic.

[3:00:51] We have worked already and was put out there's the roadway, the internal sort of driveway

[3:00:57] circulation that will also be separated the community center from the new

[3:01:02] depost street. That's the kind of stuff that we clearly will get in. At this

[3:01:06] point we're just looking at right away as and how wide it has to be to fit two

[3:01:09] lanes of traffic and parking. But I think that's, you know, one of the things we

[3:01:12] definitely have to pay attention to to make sure that we have maximum pedestrian

[3:01:16] safety in that area. Thank you. Go ahead, Mr. Car.

[3:01:26] I'm excited about this idea as well, realizing it's a conceptual plan, we're not talking details, but as we think about an exclusive negotiating agreement and deal points on there, I'd like us to consider a conversation about the railroad crossing right there.

[3:01:44] If we move forward with this now all four corners of the railroad tracks and done will be

[3:01:51] residential and how can this deal and how can Brookfield help us with turning that into

[3:01:56] a quiet zone into a quiet railroad crossing that hopefully will help us see if that is really

[3:02:02] the right thing to do for our community and other crossings.

[3:02:05] So I would like us to explore that a little bit and maybe with the size of your company

[3:02:09] you guys have some ideas about how to do that since you've done a lot of transitoring to

[3:02:13] development. And then as well just to make sure that we keep in mind that this new

[3:02:20] depot and done connection will continue to be the entryway into our community and cultural center

[3:02:26] and should be recognized as such. Again, knowing we're not in any kind of details yet,

[3:02:33] but it does need to be recognized that that's still going to be the entryway into our community

[3:02:37] cultural center and not just, you know, another intersection in town.

[3:02:42] Sure.

[3:02:43] Thank you.

[3:02:45] All right.

[3:02:46] I guess the one question I'd ask is, um, is he set up a whole bunch of hurdles

[3:02:52] you've got to get over as 60 days enough time to do it?

[3:02:57] I like the confidence.

[3:02:58] Yeah, I know.

[3:02:59] It's quick.

[3:03:03] Your holidays.

[3:03:04] There you know.

[3:03:06] I understand.

[3:03:10] Thank you.

[3:03:11] Our action is to authorize your cards.

[3:03:15] Oh, we have speaker cards.

[3:03:17] Go ahead.

[3:03:18] The first speaker I have is Bob Benavento.

[3:03:21] You will be followed by Eric Wallace.

[3:03:28] Good to see you.

[3:03:29] Mr. Mayor.

[3:03:30] Members of the council.

[3:03:31] Mr. Manager.

[3:03:32] Mr. Attorney.

[3:03:32] My name is Bob Benavento.

[3:03:34] I am a longtime resident of Morgan Hill.

[3:03:36] And I would never be a person to try and deflate

[3:03:40] It's a great idea, I don't have a problem with it at all, but I'm speaking to you this evening as a member of the Board of Directors of the Mushroom Artigraph.

[3:03:50] And as some of you know, in some of you have worked, that is a big draw for our community and we bring in about 60 to 80,000 people on a good weekend over the Memorial Day holiday.

[3:04:03] Besides ourselves, we had the Friday Night Music Series, which brings a lot of people down

[3:04:08] town.

[3:04:09] My concern is the loss of that parking space.

[3:04:12] In fact, I had noted it myself, and I thank Councilman Constantine for bringing it forward,

[3:04:18] because I, too, noted that a hundred and forty-five spaces in that garage and two hundred

[3:04:21] and forty spaces in the lot.

[3:04:22] So this is some more problematic.

[3:04:24] But the thing I ask of you this evening is to please consider us as these plans go forward.

[3:04:31] The change of the geography of this area will impact the festival and we will need to work

[3:04:37] with the city to be able to accommodate future festivals or we could be out of business

[3:04:41] in a couple of years.

[3:04:43] So that is the problem that would, that's what I would like to address with you.

[3:04:46] So thank you very much for your time.

[3:04:48] Thank you.

[3:04:49] Eric Wallace will be followed by Nancy Reynolds.

[3:04:55] May your council members, thank you for letting me take a moment to share with you.

[3:04:59] I just-

[3:05:01] I just wanted to encourage you to go forward with this negotiation. I'm not sure what will come of it. But frankly, it looks like it has the chance of being a very good idea for the downtown. I don't know. I can't remember how long we've been talking about the alignment of the depot and church street and all it would along with that. And I'm really happy to see what he did in the staff members have done to put a lot of effort into this.

[3:05:30] So, I just want to encourage you to see if we can make this work and make it a winner for both the citizens and the city of Morgan Hill.

[3:05:38] So, thanks for your time.

[3:05:42] I'm happy to have you inside.

[3:05:45] Ms. Reynolds.

[3:05:46] Hello, Mayor Tate City Council and City staff.

[3:05:49] I too am really in support of this as a soon to be former business owner of a retail business downtown.

[3:05:58] I know how desperately we need residential downtown.

[3:06:01] So please let them explore this.

[3:06:05] And I love the design.

[3:06:06] I think the through way with the street connecting

[3:06:10] to the other side of Dunn makes a lot of sense as well,

[3:06:13] just as a resident.

[3:06:15] But, yeah, I'd like to see more residential downtown.

[3:06:17] Thank you.

[3:06:20] Thank you.

[3:06:22] What's my guess?

[3:06:23] That's it.

[3:06:25] That's it.

[3:06:27] OK, we'll close public comment or an open-it discussion

[3:06:30] the action that we're being asked to take is to authorize city manager to do that.

[3:06:39] Mr. Mayor.

[3:06:43] Mr. Speaker.

[3:06:45] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:06:48] I think the concept and design I think is a great idea.

[3:06:54] I've been looking at it 27 years.

[3:07:00] I see something moving forward.

[3:07:01] I think as Mr. Gray pointed out, the project would not be economical without the city's

[3:07:09] participation and willingness to

[3:07:13] vacating depostrete as it is and having it re-aligned.

[3:07:16] We have said in mind, I believe that it would be appropriate for the city not to share,

[3:07:23] or not to shoulder all of the costs of the re-alignment, but rather since I'm sure the developers

[3:07:31] was taking this project on in the expectation of making a profit, it would be, I think, appropriate

[3:07:37] that they share some of that profit and pay for a significant portion of the realignment

[3:07:43] of DFO street rather than the city having to have all of that cost on it.

[3:07:50] Okay.

[3:07:50] Thank you.

[3:07:55] Mr. Conestine.

[3:07:56] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:07:57] I would like to echo Mr. Guerrero's comments when I was reading this in my mind's eye,

[3:08:03] when I was reading the staff report in my mind's eye, I was trying to visualize what this

[3:08:06] going to look like. And I just couldn't picture it because I just had the depostry

[3:08:10] of how it currently looks in my head. And then when I got to the page with the map or with

[3:08:14] the concept plan, I was just like, wow, that, I mean, to have that vision to come up with

[3:08:21] that idea, I just want to commend staff on coming up with that. And this fix to really put

[3:08:28] forth a plan that had no way of being able to put residential on it and then coming up with

[3:08:35] idea that has a possibility of having residential on it. I just want to commence that for putting

[3:08:41] this forward and getting all the parties together to hopefully have this plan come to fruition

[3:08:48] because I think it would be fantastic. I did not think about some of the events though that

[3:08:53] we have downtown in the Mushroom Art and the Parking. Again, I know this isn't preliminary,

[3:08:59] but I just kind of zoned in on that and then also even though yes it's a curve street and

[3:09:06] It's going to slow traffic down currently. We have a parking lot right next to where we have kids dropping up and

[3:09:11] The speeds are much much slower in a parking lot than they would be on a street. So I just want also want to make sure that we are cognizant of the fact that

[3:09:22] we're moving a street closer to where children are

[3:09:28] And that, again, we also take into account of what we're going to be doing with some of

[3:09:33] our downtown festivals that we rely upon for tourism.

[3:09:37] But other than that, I think this is a great concept and I really want this thing to go

[3:09:41] forward.

[3:09:42] And I think it'll work.

[3:09:45] Thank you, Senator.

[3:09:45] Okay.

[3:09:47] Anything else?

[3:09:47] I would move to accept staff's recommendation and give authority to the City Manager to

[3:09:55] exclusively negotiate with real-field residential properties for the development of this

[3:10:02] Second, I was going to give Mr. Seward. Okay. We have a motion in a second. Can we have a roll call?

[3:10:08] Mayor Tate. Aye. Council members, car.

[3:10:11] Constantine. Aye.

[3:10:12] Aye.

[3:10:14] Aye.

[3:10:15] And that concludes item number 12, which makes us able to skip right over to item.

[3:10:22] Mr. Seward.

[3:10:23] You want a quick recess?

[3:10:25] I don't but you.

[3:10:26] We need a quick recess.

[3:10:28] We must have a quick recess.

[3:10:29] We are going to take a four and a half minute break.

[3:10:32] We're going to take a four and a half minute break.

[3:10:38] We're going to record.

[3:10:40] It's 10 minutes after.

[3:17:11] A assignment of a drone, cow home, loans as credited for certain eaten housing, crest, avenue, housing, LLC, outstanding housing loan payments.

[3:17:36] This is the one last outstanding matter to resolve, back in November of 2015, staff accepted

[3:17:51] checks to link in the amount of about 300,000. We applied that 300,000 towards the overall

[3:17:59] self-county housing settlement as partial satisfaction for their total obligations to the city.

[3:18:06] We've since learned that the 300,000 payment we received was actually issued from the

[3:18:11] Crest Avenue Housing Partnership Funds, which is a separate and distinct entity that was

[3:18:18] under the control of South County housing, but is now under the control of Eden Housing.

[3:18:25] Naturally, Eden, as the new owner, is responsible for the crest avenue housing loan that they have

[3:18:31] with the city. They Eden also intended for that 300,000 payment to be provided to the city.

[3:18:38] However, the distinct differences they assumed it would be applied to the crest loan that they're now

[3:18:44] responsible for. So somehow there was something lost in translation between South County Housing

[3:18:50] and Eden Housing but we do believe we've come to a solution. The council is being asked to adopt

[3:18:57] a resolution accepting 11 Madron Cal Home mortgage notes from South County Housing to satisfy

[3:19:07] Eden's crest housing loan obligation as a residual receipt payment just for this one year.

[3:19:15] So in essence, the request is to accept the 11 notes valued at 357,000 and treat it as payment just this one time towards the $300,000 obligation of Eden for the Crestalone.

[3:19:33] This achieves a few things. It prevents us from having to reopen the South County housing settlement that we completed months ago.

[3:19:41] The city would keep that original 300,000, or it's actually 295,404.

[3:19:48] So we would keep that money. The city would increase its loan portfolio value by 357,000.

[3:19:55] And that concludes my report, the staff report.

[3:20:00] Displains how we arrived to this point, but we are happy to answer any questions.

[3:20:05] Any questions?

[3:20:11] I guess there are no questions. So I will open it to public comment. No cards?

[3:20:18] I have no cards, sir.

[3:20:20] And we'll close public comment and open it to council discussion.

[3:20:28] Would you like to entertain a motion?

[3:20:33] I'd move to resolution. I'd adopt the resolution as directing staff to authorize the same engine,

[3:20:38] take necessary action in this matter.

[3:20:41] Second.

[3:20:41] We have a motion in second.

[3:20:44] All in favor.

[3:20:45] No.

[3:20:46] We'll roll call.

[3:20:47] Again, please.

[3:20:48] May I take?

[3:20:48] Aye.

[3:20:49] Council members.

[3:20:50] Aye.

[3:20:50] Constantine.

[3:20:51] Aye.

[3:20:52] Aye.

[3:20:54] And one more item on our agenda.

[3:20:58] With a much shorter title.

[3:20:59] Housing authority loan for giveness.

[3:21:01] San Pedro Gardens, self-help homes.

[3:21:03] I've been shorter.

[3:21:04] I've been shorter.

[3:21:07] Okay, so this report involves two housing matters.

[3:21:11] The city council is being asked first to forgive the housing authority 400, 425,000 dollars

[3:21:19] plus interest, so about 500,000 dollars for a loan made to them back in 1991.

[3:21:26] This loan was to acquire the Sam Pedro Gardens site in affordable home ownership and rental

[3:21:32] project in exchange for accepting seven-sam Pedro homeowners notes. The

[3:21:39] principal value of these notes is 167,000 plus another 1.4 million in

[3:21:44] interest. So about 1.6 million. So before that sounds like a good deal I'll

[3:21:50] explain the second part. The second thing the council is being asked to

[3:21:54] approve is to allow staff if we accept that assignment of the seven notes to

[3:22:00] modify them and mirror them after our cities notes, which allows the homeowners to have no

[3:22:07] balloon payment at the end of their 30-year mortgage term. The way they're currently structured,

[3:22:12] they have 10% compounding interest so they have these huge payments after the end of their 30-year

[3:22:17] term. So the goal is to obtain these notes from the housing authority to restructure them and

[3:22:22] relieve the homeowners who are low income below 80% AMI. Then you payment due at the end of their 30-year

[3:22:31] In an effort to correct this and ensure the intent of the affordable housing program and mission is met, staff is recommending that the city council do three things.

[3:22:42] Adopt the resolution accepting the assignment of the seven notes.

[3:22:47] Two upon receiving those notes allowing staff to modify and city manager to execute those notes so that there's no payment to do at the end of their mortgage term.

[3:22:57] And then the third recommendation is not included in the resolution or staff report because I apologize my forgot to add it.

[3:23:05] But that all of this should be subject to any ground lease being removed from any of the homeowners properties.

[3:23:12] So because it was mixed with a rental and ownership, we just want to make sure that there's no ground lease on the ownership units.

[3:23:20] Okay.

[3:23:22] That also concludes my presentation and happy to answer any questions.

[3:23:26] Are there any questions?

[3:23:29] Yes, I did have a question.

[3:23:31] Have a head guard, Walid Gonzalez, the scoto,

[3:23:34] and asked why these notes were structured differently?

[3:23:39] No, I did not ask her that.

[3:23:42] Did you, Leslie?

[3:23:43] No, this is Leslie Little, Gordon.

[3:23:46] Excuse me, Council Member Sever.

[3:23:48] These were notes that were structured by the housing authority,

[3:23:52] not by the city of Morgan Hill.

[3:23:54] I think authority of Santa Clara County, our involvement in this project historically was making

[3:24:00] the loan and creating some kind of an arrangement where the project land was purchased

[3:24:06] with a loan from the redevelopment agency and then the housing authority was responsible

[3:24:11] for both the rental and the home ownership, sweat equity portion of the project.

[3:24:17] There's also a park area, a common area park area, which the housing authority will maintain

[3:24:24] ownership of.

[3:24:25] The city didn't, we did not want to suggest to you that you take over the ownership

[3:24:30] of that park.

[3:24:32] So since I've been here, which is almost six years now, this has been one of those projects

[3:24:37] where we haven't been able to figure out exactly how these got structured.

[3:24:43] Ms. Garcia also, I think, put in the staff report that there are a couple of other layers of financing here.

[3:24:50] It's not just the county's loans, but there's a couple of, like, down payment assistance, smaller loans in here.

[3:24:58] And not uncommon that we lay.

[3:25:00] Mayer financing for affordable housing, but it's certainly unusual that the majority of the loan is not fully

[3:25:08] amortized, so at the end of 25 or 30 years, there's no balloon payment. So we've been working with housing authority

[3:25:17] for some time to see if they wouldn't restructure these. And because their portfolio is vastly different

[3:25:24] and there are other pressures on them.

[3:25:27] They didn't think that they would ever

[3:25:28] restructure those loans.

[3:25:31] So it ended up being this solution where we take these loans on,

[3:25:35] and then we take a look at trying to restructure them.

[3:25:38] So they look more like our typical portfolio,

[3:25:41] which we think is far more equitable.

[3:25:46] OK, thank you.

[3:25:48] Anything else, Mr. Seabird?

[3:25:52] No, so.

[3:25:53] OK.

[3:25:55] So the new loans will be fully amortized?

[3:25:58] We would just pick them up and mirror them and just restructure the repayment terms.

[3:26:03] So we will give them credit for all the years of payment and we will just try and conceptually

[3:26:10] pick up the remaining term that is left on them and restructure that portion.

[3:26:18] The value of the homes is you would run those numbers.

[3:26:21] about 140, their market value was 140 to 150,000 at the time that they purchased.

[3:26:28] Oh, at the time that they purchased.

[3:26:28] At the time that they purchased.

[3:26:30] The average notes are around 130.

[3:26:35] There's about four or five, 140.

[3:26:39] And they do have affordability restrictions on them for 30 years too.

[3:26:43] So at the time of their affordability restrictions are retired at 30 years,

[3:26:48] the loan will be fully amortized. We have some cases where if you have the compounded interest

[3:26:58] accrued, somebody would have to make payments anywhere from $350 to $600 to the city after

[3:27:05] living in a payment on that house for 30 years. I've never really seen anything quite like it.

[3:27:13] So we have some wonderful families who work very hard to be in these houses and so there

[3:27:20] were it's been troubling and we would structure it in a way that it's forgiven with

[3:27:25] every year that they occupy the unit so it's incentive for them to stay in the unit.

[3:27:30] So it's not all forgiven at once it's forgiven at the end of the 30 years.

[3:27:36] Do we have anybody that wishes to address the council on this item?

[3:27:41] Seeing no one, I will close public comment and entertain a motion or further discussion.

[3:27:48] Mr. Costa.

[3:27:49] I just want to commend staff for finding a solution for these families.

[3:27:53] I think this is one of the reasons why people say such nice things about our staff.

[3:28:00] It's because of things like this that we try and find solutions for problems that are not

[3:28:11] I live in this community and again, I just commend you guys for doing such a great job in doing this and finding a solution and making this work.

[3:28:22] And with that, I would like to make a motion to Dr. Resolution adding the third bullet point that you had mentioned that I don't know if that was such a full ground relief.

[3:28:33] So I would adopt the resolution directing the authorization of City Manager to do all three of those recommendations from staff.

[3:28:44] Second. Motion in a second. Would you please read the role?

[3:28:48] Mayor Tate.

[3:28:50] Council members far.

[3:28:51] Constantine.

[3:28:52] Hi.

[3:28:55] Almost done Gordon.

[3:28:56] Okay Gordon, we're almost there.

[3:28:58] And I know what time it is back there, I think you did it myself.

[3:29:04] Is there any council initiated future agenda items?

[3:29:09] Mr. Scott?

[3:29:09] Yes, Mr. Mayor.

[3:29:11] Oh, Mr. Sebert, go ahead and then we'll get Mr. Scott.

[3:29:14] Well, having had the discussion with you, Mr. Mayor, regarding that position, I said,

[3:29:23] have probably the meeting of the 14th, although I know it's going to be actually ceremonial.

[3:29:29] You might want to initiate the discussion on how to replace me, because if it was going

[3:29:35] to be through application process, you would allow for people to start thinking about that

[3:29:39] as they gather for the holidays and talk to their friends and relatives about the relative

[3:29:45] narrative doing so.

[3:29:47] Well, our kind of tentative plan from an agendas standpoint was to accept your resignation

[3:29:54] on at the meeting of the seventh in person, and then...

[3:30:00] At the future agenda item, part of that meeting, we could then schedule for the 14th to have the discussion on the method we would select to replace you.

[3:30:12] but that looks well, as well.

[3:30:16] Great.

[3:30:18] Then we'll go with that.

[3:30:20] Mr. Costa.

[3:30:21] Thank you, Mr. Mayor.

[3:30:22] I would like to place on a future-generate agenda item,

[3:30:27] an ordinance that makes receiving a certificate of occupancy

[3:30:31] from the city contingent on making sure that all workers

[3:30:37] in the construction project are paid in accordance with state law.

[3:30:42] There is an issue of wage theft going on in California.

[3:30:50] It's not necessarily by a purposeful omission could be accidental.

[3:30:57] But this is one way that we as a city can make sure that people who work in our city are paid their full wages.

[3:31:06] Okay.

[3:31:06] I just know you have material for this and I give good Mr. Scott.

[3:31:13] In our ongoing discussion with the county and the open space authority about developments

[3:31:19] in county areas, I think it's time that we have a discussion about how we want to move forward

[3:31:29] with that and how we might want to put some parameters on what the county is doing.

[3:31:37] Tuesday at the county's Board of Supervisors meeting, they had another item, I don't know what the result of it was was, but to do another lots of blitz and to do allow more housing development.

[3:31:46] Just outside the city limits of Morgan Hill and open spaces, right off of Hill Road.

[3:31:53] And so we continue to go on while they continue to tell us to wait for their process that we're never they come before us, they cannot define what their process is or their timeline.

[3:32:03] And it may be time that we formally request the Board of Supervisors put a moratorium on development in unincorporated areas around Morton Hill

[3:32:13] Yes

[3:32:16] Yeah,

[3:32:19] I agree. Okay, he's got that anything else

[3:32:24] Thank you all for sticking with this. Wow. They're still here. Okay, with that all I'll just

Special / Regular City Council Meeting (6:00 PM Closed Session / 7:00 PM Regular Meeting)

Agenda

Transcript