The City Council chose attorney and lifelong Gilroy resident Perry Woodward as the city’s new mayor Monday, succeeding Don Gage, who retired last month.
Woodward will serve out the remainder of Gage’s term, which expires in December. If he wants to keep the position, he will have to run for mayor in November. Five councilmembers voted for Woodward, with Councilmember Roland Velasco voting against him. Velasco said that while he likes Woodward personally, he has had “too many policy disagreements” to vote for him.
Woodward pledged to run an open government and work with all members of the community, not just those who live in his neighborhood or show up for meetings.
“Looking out at the audience here, I see many of you who are worried because you think that Gilroy is on the precipice of losing its unique small town ambience,” he said in his first speech as mayor, after thanking his wife, mother and grandmother, who were in the audience. He promised to help develop downtown and keep the city’s small-town feel.
“You have an ally in me.”
He spoke of walking by fields downtown near Gilroy High School when the city’s population was 14,000. He also said that growth is inevitable, but should be locally controlled.
“I understand what you are saying about wanting Gilroy to remain a small town,” he continued.
“GIlroy is now a city of 53,000. There are 15 cities in Santa Clara County and Gilroy is the eighth-largest, between Cupertino and Campbell. We are a medium-sized city and we have medium-sized city problems and we have to address that. If we want a better future, we have to plan for that. That means transit-oriented development downtown on First Street. It means setting aside sufficient land for good-paying jobs. We need to build active senior housing for our retiring baby boomer generation and we need local control over our land use decisions.”
Last month, as mayor pro tempore, Woodward launched some of that local control by making the motion for the city to annex 721 acres north of the city to build a $3 billion project of up to 4,000 homes, two schools and several parks, over the objections of many residents who fear the kind of suburban sprawl that defines San Jose.
Woodward has argued that the housing is needed and Gilroy should do what it takes to control the land, even though the annexation must be approved by the county’s Local Agency Formation Commission (LAFCO), charged with preventing unsightly sprawl.
Woodward was first elected to the city council in 2007 and was mayor pro tempore under Don Gage for three years. He chaired the 2040 General Plan Advisory Committee, which is sketching out the city’s direction for the next two decades. He also chairs the Valley Transportation Agency.
He attended Gavilan College, enlisted in the Navy and got his law degree in 1996 from Santa Clara University. He has practiced law for Terra Law LLC in San Jose since April, 2000. His wife, Rochelle, is also an attorney. They have two daughters, Charlie, 7, and Sierra, 9.
He stirred up controversy in city government by initiating legislation last July to double campaign contribution limits from $200 to $750, and to raise the campaign expenditure ceiling from $26,000 to $53,000. It passed by a 4-3 vote. Woodward said elections were more costly than in the past. Opponents said the higher figures would cut down on grassroots candidates.
Woodward said in an interview that he has enough time in his busy schedule to serve as mayor, despite a full-time job and family.
Woodward touted his time on the council, which has overseen a balanced budget for the past seven years and the introduction of the open government ordinance and commission making the municipality one of the “most transparent” in the state, he said.
Acknowledging that he has had to recuse himself in the past from voting on initiatives impacting downtown because he owns a property in the district, he said he has decided to sell it so he can work to move forward with renovation in earnest.
The only hiccup in Monday’s proceedings occurred when Woodward attempted to make a motion to appoint Councilmember Peter Leroe-Muñoz as mayor pro tempore.
The item was not on the night’s agenda and three people from the audience spoke up, including the chairman of the city’s Open Government Commission, Walt Glines, who had succinct words of advice for the council, “If it’s not on the agenda, don’t do it.”
With that, Woodward reversed course, saying, “OK, you’ve persuaded me.” The mayor pro tem will be selected at the next council meeting.
The council will select a replacement for the empty council seat from candidates who apply to the city clerk by Jan. 15; it will hold interviews with candidates several days later.
Council approves general plan
Later on Monday evening, following lengthy discussion in which members of the public voiced their concerns over the city’s prospective growth, the City Council unanimously approved an updated general plan that outlines a vision for the city to 2040.
The 255-page document sets out the community’s development goals while creating a framework for future growth, covering everything from housing, conservation and public safety to land use issues.
During the public comment segment, a number of speakers including longtime Gilroy residents, local mothers, a former school board member and county roads employee, expressed their concerns about the general plan which projects a city population of 79,000 by 2040 and allows for high-density housing development on 721 acres of north Gilroy farmlands.
Prepared over the last two years and involving a series of public meetings and studies with input from consultants, Monday’s action by the council advances the general plan to an environmental review and further public input. It then goes back to the Planning Commission and City Council for a final reading, possibly this summer.
Members of the public identified issues they felt would negatively impact the quality of life in Gilroy if the city continues to grow as outlined in the general plan.
“This is a cancerous growth we are going through, not smart growth,” said Gilroy resident, Cristi Curry, who complained about unsafe streets around new housing developments, which she says are not wide enough to accommodate sidewalks on both sides, bike lanes, adequate off-street parking and the flow of utility vehicles.
Longtime resident Bryan Riewerts lamented the increased time it takes for him to drive across town, calling the traffic situation a “fiasco” and the roads a “disaster.”
Carolyn Tognetti, who was on the general plan update committee, said the application for annexation of the 721 acres in north Gilroy should have waited until after the general plan was completed, a sentiment echoed by others in the room.
“I don’t think you are doing it on purpose, but the fact is you have lost credibility with a lot of these citizens and I think you need to get that back by talking to us and listening to us,” said local resident Linda West, upset over the decision by the council to overturn the Planning Commission decision and allow the annexation to move forward.
Other issues raised during the public comment period included the impact increased housing will have on Gilroy classroom sizes, with former school board member Kim Merrill worrying that new housing would bring the city back to the days when 40 in a classroom was the norm. He said the city should not focus solely on high-end, single-family housing, but instead on diverse housing stock.
“Do something for the blue collar class,” said Merrill, “Build apartments, condos.”
Resident Henry Coletto said he grew up in Gilroy and the last “handful of mayors” have made similar speeches about fixing downtown, but then the city forgets about it and moves on to looking at developing the outer areas.
“Everybody wants to talk about the 721 acres and the big development out there in Gilroy, but the bottom line is our planners, the City Council needs to take a little more time to see what is happening with our downtown, our streets and the type of developments we are putting in and the quality of life people have.”
After the public comment period, discussion returned to the dais.
Woodward said a lot of “excellent points” were made and admitted there was a “real disconnect” between the council and the audience in the room. He walked back from comments he made at the last council meeting when he characterized those against the annexation proposal as outsiders and “zero-growth” people, acknowledging that the people who spoke up on Monday were locals.
