One Santa Clara city councilor wants the city to stabilize utility rates.

At its most recent meeting Jan. 27, Council Member Kevin Park said the city needs to stop hanging its hat on Silicon Valley Power (SVP) being less expensive than Pacific Gas & Electric (PG&E). Instead, he said it needs to focus on doing something to staunch the rapid rate increases. 

“If rates go up faster than cost of living increases, then that’s still a net loss for a lot of people,” he said.

Park made his comments as part of SVP’s biannual report, saying he wanted clarity on what rate increases would look like if not for SVP’s comprehensive expansion. He called the increasingly frequent rate increases “raising money on the backs of residents.”

Nico Procos, SVP director, called Santa Clara the “poster child for load growth.” He said the system expansion is “on target so far.”

“We go through an iterative process where we are constantly evaluating what’s coming down the pipeline, not only for our existing customers but also we have new customers,” he said. “We are trying to stay ahead of everything.”

SVP will continue to focus on several projects already in the works, Procos said, adding that SVP is trying to remain “proactive.” Among those projects is battery storage, consultant support, rebuilding receiving stations, as well as upgrading and adding transmission. 

In addition to energizing eight other minor projects through 2030, two receiving station projects are already underway. 

The upgrade and expansion of the northern receiving station is slated for completion in June 2028. A full rebuild and expansion of the Scott and Kifer receiving stations are set for completion in March and June 2029, respectively.

In addition to updating aging infrastructure through its expansion, SVP is also performing proactive tree trimming and focusing on technology with its new outage management system and risk management software, slated to come online in mid-2026

Additionally, it is ramping up its rebate system and bolstering security, something Procos said will become increasingly important as load growth increases.

“Once you get to that higher level, your level of your expectations of security, not only physical but also cyber, really jump up a lot, so we are really preparing for that in advance,” Procos said.

Council Member Suds Jain said he is concerned with aesthetics. 

He encouraged the city to look into underground power lines and ways to hide substations, which he called “really ugly.”

“I don’t want our whole city to be crisscrossed with overhead power lines and feel like we are living inside a substation,” he said.

The council noted and filed the report. 

Mills Act Properties Get Reprieve 

At the city manager’s suggestion, the council also continued revoking tax-exempt status for two historic properties.

The owners of the properties, located at 1711 Main St. and 906 Monroe St., have faltered on their responsibilities to make improvements on the historic homes.

The designation, called a Mills Act, gives owners of homes on the historic resources inventory a tax break to help cover costs associated with maintaining an older home.

Afshan Hamid, community development director, said the owners must agree to a 10-year maintenance work plan and submit to inspections every five years.

“It is really in the city’s interest to maintain the character of historic homes,” she said.

Despite repeated outreach — via telephone, email, certified mail and hand-delivery — Hamid said the property owners have not complied.

The owner of 1711 Main St., a pioneer Gothic-style with a Mills Act since 2000, replied to emails cryptically telling city employees to “check the permits.” Hamid said such a search yielded nothing noteworthy.

The bank owns 906 Monroe St., which has had a Mills Act since 1998.

If removed from the Mills Act, the owners would incur a fine equal to 12.5% of the fair market value of their home. That money, collected by the Santa Clara County Auditor, would then be distributed to the city.

Since the owner of the Main Street property responded to the city’s email, Park said he was uncomfortable being so stringent.

After hearing the concern, City Manager Jovan Grogan suggested the council continue the topic and allow city employees time to attempt to contact both owners again before considering the removal.
The council unanimously approved the continuance and will hear the item again at its March 10 meeting.  

ICE Presence at Super Bowl LX Concerns Many

During a lengthy public comments section, several public members implored the council to agendize an item that would aim to hamstring immigration agents during Super Bowl LX.

Park requested the council take up an item on a future agenda. However, that request ballooned into a slew of public commenters calling for the city to take a stand. Many called for a special meeting ahead of the Super Bowl. 

Many called for the council to enact policies that block the U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) agents from collecting data and that would establish “ICE-free zones.”

“Whether we like it or not, violent, untrained, armed ICE agents are coming to terrorize our Santa Clara community,” said Kim Wood, with Services Immigrant Rights and Education Network (SIREN). “Whether we like it or not, ICE is coming to invade our streets and separate our families. And that is exactly why silence is not an option.”

Council Member Kelly Cox said “shame on us” for not taking the item up sooner.

Danni Razik, a San Jose resident with family in Santa Clara, said she was “horrified” and “in shock” over the “constitutional crisis” happening in the country.

“The Overton window is shifting. Younger generations are looking at this as extremely unacceptable behavior,” she said. 

No one opposed the motion.

Discussion on the item was supposed to be contained to the merits of adding it to a future agenda. However, Park spoke at length about his position despite repeated admonishments from both City Attorney Glen Googins and Vice Mayor Albert Gonzalez. 

“If we are not looking at what else we can do, if we’re satisfied, at any time, with the work we’ve already done, nothing will get better,” Park said.

The council unanimously approved bringing the item back at a special meeting Feb. 3 with the possibility of taking action.

Mayor Lisa Gillmor was absent. 

Santa Clara City Council Consent Calendar Spending

The council approved the following spending in one motion via the consent calendar:

• A $6.3 million purchase of a property, located at 3031 Corvin Drive, for use by the public works department.

The council will hold a special meeting on Tuesday, Feb. 3 in the Santa Clara City Council Chambers at City Hall, 1500 Warburton Ave. in Santa Clara. The next regularly scheduled meeting is 7 p.m. Tuesday, Feb. 10. 

Members of the public can participate in the Santa Clara City Council meetings on Zoom at https://santaclaraca.zoom.us/j/99706759306; Meeting ID: 997-0675-9306 or call 1 (669) 900-6833, via the City’s eComment (available during the meeting) or by email to PublicComment@santaclaraca.gov

Contact David Alexander at d.todd.alexander@gmail.com 

Previous City Council Meetings:
Santa Clara Puts Bond Money to Work
Santa Clara Budget Surplus to Bolster Reserves
NFL to use Soccer Fields During Super Bowl