Citizen Portal
Sign In

Residents and outreach providers urge Gilroy council to delay Camp Hope sweep and allow time for housing placements

Gilroy City Council · January 27, 2026

Loading...

AI-Generated Content: All content on this page was generated by AI to highlight key points from the meeting. For complete details and context, we recommend watching the full video. so we can fix them.

Summary

Dozens of residents, volunteers and service providers told the council that Camp Hope, a concentrated encampment near Highway 101, is enabling outreach, sanitation and progress toward housing; speakers asked for a 90-day to six‑month extension before planned removals so caseworkers can place residents.

Dozens of Gilroy residents, volunteers and legal advocates urged the City Council on Jan. 26 to delay a planned sweep of a temporary camp known as Camp Hope and allow time for outreach workers to secure housing and services.

Speakers described Camp Hope — located near Sixth Street adjacent to the Costco area — as a self‑organized site where residents have access to porta‑potties, trash pickup and regular outreach. Tristia Baumann, director of housing at the Law Foundation of Silicon Valley, said the camp “has not been a problem” and recommended the council support the site for 90 days so service providers can house vulnerable people and avoid costly, disruptive sweeps.

Multiple residents and volunteers said the concentrated location makes it possible to deliver food, medical attention and help with identification and benefits. Aubrey Tasby, who described themself as the de facto mayor of Camp Hope, said the camp had 20 residents, several of whom are already moving into permanent housing, and asked council to allow the group to remain for three months for reevaluation.

Others warned that dispersing people around the city would sever links to social workers, services and outreach and could increase unsheltered homelessness in residential areas, creeks and business frontages. Robert Torres, a Camp Hope resident, urged officials to prevent outside agencies, including the water district, from exercising authority to displace residents without a plan.

Council did not take a formal vote on the encampment during the meeting. The council heard the public comments as part of the general public‑comment period and moved on to scheduled agenda items.

The council’s next steps were not announced on Jan. 26; several speakers asked the council to extend the camp’s permitted presence by 90 days to six months while social workers pursue permanent housing placements. The City Council will consider policy and operational responses in subsequent sessions.