Second Suit Filed Against Big Development
In what will surely make an interesting closed session of the Gilroy City Council on Jan. 19, not one, but two lawsuits have been filed against the city regarding its controversial annexation plan involving 721 acres north of Gilroy.A group of Gilroy property owners, who had tried to develop housing south of Gilroy have sued to stop the city from pursuing the northern project. They said they were told not to pursue their plans and then found that the city approved the other big project.Ken Kerley and Daniel Fiorio's suit challenges the City Council’s Dec. 7 decision to approve the 721-acre project and certify the environmental impact report (EIR), without first analyzing and mitigating potential environmental impacts, arguing such actions are “unlawful under CEQA [California Environmental Quality Act] and California planning and zoning laws.”LAFCO, the state-mandated agency tasked with controlling urban sprawl, also filed a lawsuit on Jan. 13 at the Santa Clara County Superior Court, which argued the city broke the law when it approved the annexation of 721 acres of farmland as part of a planned 4,000-home development.The landowners’ lawsuit further attests the city council’s approval of the project causes the city’s general plan to be “internally inconsistent,” in violation of state planning and zoning laws.Both suits also name the project’s investors and landowners, including Martin Limited Partnership, Wren Investors LLC, and Mark Hewell.Like the first suit, this one asks the court to not allow this land to be annexed by the city.Kerley and Fiorio are no strangers to City Hall. In July 2013 they were part of a consortium of landowners that submitted their own application to amend the city’s Urban Service Area to encompass approximately 150 acres in the unincorporated south Gilroy neighborhood district (called South Gilroy USA Proposal in the lawsuit), where the two own property.The petitioners allege in the lawsuit that in January 2014, city staff provided them with an evaluation of the South Gilroy USA Proposal and advised them to withdraw their application and not to resubmit until after the city adopted its 2040 general plan, which was then underway. The petitioners followed the recommendation and withdrew their application five days later.In July 2014, the city accepted Martin Limited Partnership’s application to add 721 acres into the city’s USA boundary even as the city was still developing its 2040 general plan, contrary to the advice allegedly given to the landowners behind the 150-acre south Gilroy proposal.Approval of the 721-acre project is “premature and should await adoption of the 2040 general Plan,” the lawsuit states.The general plan was approved by the City Council on Jan. 4, clearing the way for an environmental review and final reading sometime this summer.
Gavilan School Board holds its ground; re-votes 6-1 to approve Kinsella’s $42K raise
Impassioned monologues from a handful of public speakers failed to persuade the Gavilan College School Board to reverse an “appalling” $42,000 raise, which the board approved seven months ago for college President Steve Kinsella.
Rosen edges current boss for DA seat
After a neck-and-neck race, prosecutor Jeff Rosen edged out his
Gilroy awarded fire grant, acceptance up in air
The City of Gilroy was awarded a $2.3 million fire department
Council amends gambling, massage regulations
At its Monday meeting, the city council supported allowing
City will work with nonprofits on possible garden, theater downtown
The City Council gave unanimous consent for area arts nonprofits
Meet the candidate: Heather Bass, GUSD Board of Education
Gilroy Dispatch: Briefly describe your background and experience. Why are you qualified for this position?
Council race months away, but it’s heating up already
November is only four months away, and this year's City Council
Million-plus jobless Californians are facing benefit cutoff
More than 1 million jobless California workers could have their unemployment insurance benefits cut off soon if Congress does not continue federally financed benefit extensions of up to 99 weeks, state officials said Wednesday.



















