CC 02-07-2023 Oral CommunicationsCC 02-07-2023
Written Communications
Oral
Communications
From:Jenny Griffin
To:City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk
Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com
Subject:Fwd: Apple Campus 2 New Building Construction
Date:Tuesday, February 7, 2023 8:22:30 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
FYI. Please add to the Public Record for City Council meeting on Feb. 7, 2023
To eliminate ability of public to pull Consent Calendar items for Public Input
And adoption of the City Council Handbook in Consent Calendar. Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Apple Campus 2 New Building Construction
From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2023, 7:47 AM
To: citycouncil@cupertino.org
CC: grenna5000@yahoo.com
Dear City Council:
It appears that Apple wishes to build a new underground building in the
interior of their campus adjacent to Tantau Avenue and 280 highway
overcrossing. From the documents included with the description of the project
it appears that there will be a large amount of soil being removed from
the site.
Apple has always done a good job making sure that their work was
well managed and that they took care to water down public streets and run
street sweepers to control dust and debris in the roadways.
What are the proposed routes for the trucks that will be removing this dirt
from the area for the duration of the project from March 2023 to September
2024? How many trips will this be generating each day?
Are they proposing using Tantau and Stevens Creek Blvd. to gain access to
280 or will they use Wolfe Road to access 280?
It is hoped that Wolfe Road will be used for access to 280 as Tantau and Stevens Creek
Blvd are already heavily filled with cars daily.
It is assumed hat any public roads as well as Homestead and Tantau would be
swept on an on-going basis during the duration of the construction to make sure there
is no displaced dirt or rocks on the public streets in Sunnyvale, Cupertino
and Santa Clara.
It is hoped that Apple will have a successful building project and as a good neighbor
they will haul any soil with diligence, expertise and sensitivity to the neighbors living
around their greenbelt campus.
Thank you very much.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Griffin
From:Lisa Warren
To:City Clerk
Subject:Written Communication for Feb 7, 2023 city council meeting
Date:Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:00:54 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize
the sender and know the content is safe.
Kirsten and Lauren,
Please include this email (forwarded from councilmember Chao) in Written
Communications for tonight's city council meeting - February 7, 2023
Thank you,
Lisa Warren
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Liang Chao
To: Lisa Warren
Sent: Monday, February 6, 2023 at 10:50:58 PM PST
Subject: Are You Giving Away Your Rights? Speak Up.
Can't read or see images? View this email in a browser
Liang Chao for Cupertino City Council
Dear Lisa and Michael,
Happy Lunar New Year and Happy Valentine’s Day.
The City Council has been busy with 5 meetings so far: 1/17 (Regular Council
Meeting), 1/25 (Added Study Session), 1/30 (Commission Interview), 1/31
(Commission Interview), and 2 /3 (Council Workshop) The easiest way to find the
agenda material is to search for “Cupertino Council Agenda” on any search engine.
This newsletter includes some updates from these meetings.
Memorial Park Master Plan is entering the final phase of community input. The
“central park” of Cupertino will be changed and your tax dollars will be funding it.
Democracy works only if you speak up.
Attend the Community Webinar (register) on February 9 at 7pm
Provide inputs by February 22 on the three Concept Designs (Community
Focus, Nature Focus and Civic Focus) and your favored or least favored
elements.
OUR CITY
Upcoming Council Meeting on February 7, 2023
On the February 7, 2023 agenda, there are some items which will change how
Democracy works in Cupertino (in my opinion). Thus, your inputs would be
valuable. Email to CityCouncil@Cupertino.org with your comments.
The following are the Consent Calendar in the Feb. 7 Council meeting:
Report: “40% Food Service Use Cap” Turned Into “40% Restaurant
Cap” (Consent Agenda Item 14)
Main Street aspires to be like Santana Row. One of the Conditions of
Approval was “The maximum square footage of food service uses
permitted … shall not be more than 40% of the total retail square
footage.”
The Director of Community Development decided to interpret this
condition (“40% Food Service Use”) to mean “40% Restaurant Use”,
where Meet Fresh, Piltz Coffee, 85 Bakery etc. are not counted towards
the 40% cap.
Do you think the 40% Food Service Use Cap” should be enforced
so that Main Street has a healthy mix of retail uses?
Action: The proposed “Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual'' (Consent
Calendar Item 15)
The proposed “Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual'' (Item 15) is
well-intentioned and much needed. However, since the item was not
placed on the adopted 2022-23 Work Program and was only made
known informally in December 2022, it came as a surprise to
members of the public who follow the City Council meetings
closely. The proposed Manual will make the following changes which
affect how Democracy works in Cupertino.
Currently, two Councilmembers can propose an agenda item, as done in
most cities. The proposed procedure will allow three Councilmembers
to remove an item, which essentially shuts down the minority voice
before any discussion, which is a step backwards in Democracy.
In common parliamentary procedures, such as Robert’s Rule or
Rosenburg’s Rule, to shut down future discussion, namely a motion to
“Call the Question ', requires a supermajority vote. In the proposed
procedure, the Mayor alone would be able to shut down deliberation
to request a vote on an item, which undermines our Democracy.
The California Public Records Act (CPRA) specifically clarified that the
elected Councilmembers have the same right to file a CPRA request as
any member of the public. The proposed manual states “No
Councilmember shall circumvent the City Manager’s direction
regarding a request for information by seeking information through
a Public Records Act request,” which will likely make Cupertino the
first city to allow the City Manager to limit access to information of
elected officials through CPRA.
Cupertino has never taken any action on a study session item, where
the Council normally only gives directions. But the Council Procedures
Manual item on January 17 was in fact a study session with a
Resolution, which the Council could take action and adopt. The
proposed Council Procedure would allow this never-done-before
practice (taking action on a study session item) to continue.
In the past, the Mayor has “made recommendations” to assignments of
Councilmembers to the committees, but the assignment is still discussed
and approved by the Council. The proposed manual will give the Mayor
the authority to make the committee assignment, which will be only
ratified by the Council later.
In the past, any member of the public could pull an agenda item off the
Consent Calendar in order to comment individually and have the city
discuss the item. The proposed manual has taken away the right of
the public. Instead, only a Councilmember may pull an item off the
Consent Calendar but it must be before the meeting starts or at most
one item during the meeting.
Should we limit the types of items which could be put on Consent
to limit public input and Council deliberation? Such as brand new
policies, such as the Bench Dedication Policy (Item 13) on this agenda.
The proposed manual puts no limits.
Action: Bench Dedication Policy and Fee Waiver for One Existing
Request (Consent Calendar Item 13)
This is another item, which is not in the adopted 2022-23 Work Program.
In May 2022, there was a request to place a memorial plaque on an
existing park bench when the “donor” paid only $114 to cover the cost
of the plaque itself. The Council rejected the request in May 2022 and
directed the staff to develop Bench Donation Policy and identify proper
locations first. This item was not a high priority item and did not get
into the 2022-23 Work Program. But here it is.
Ideally, such an item for a new policy should follow these steps:
1. Put on the Council Work Program.
2. Refer to Parks and Recreation Commission to study and make a
recommendation.
3. Research similar policies in other cities and get public input.
4. Research proper locations for donated park benches or a process
to identify proper locations and get public input
5. Put on Council Meeting agenda
The process utilized by this Bench Donation policy on Feb. 7 agenda
1. Put directly on the Consent Calendar of the Council
agenda, which would bypass all public input processes unless
the item is pulled and postponed.
Do you think the City Council should adopt a brand new policy “on
consent”, meaning without any discussion?
Do you think a resident should be able to buy a plaque on their own
and place the plaque on any existing city bench to claim the public
space?
Do you think the Bench Dedication Policy should be administered by
the Director of Public Works without any venue for public input,
such as Parks and Rec. Commission in terms of location of the donated
benches?
The following are regular items (not on Consent Calendar) in the Feb. 7
Council meeting:
An appeal of the Sign Ordinance to allow extra wall signs facing I-280 on
two public storage facility buildings (Agenda Item 16)
The City’s response to 2022 Civil Grand Jury of Santa Clara County
Report entitled, “A House Divided" (Agenda Item 17)
Consider scheduling a study session to refine research scope regarding
placing a potential vacancy tax ballot measure in the upcoming election
(Agenda Item 18)
Tip of the Month:
Did you know that you can speak on any agenda item or non-agenda item at a
regular City Council meeting? You can speak either in person or through zoom.
Find the instructions from the PDF of the February 7 Council agenda.
OUR CITY
Some Updates from the January 17, 2023 Council Meeting
On 1/17, the Consent Calendar was packed with 20 items. After the Mitty-Lawrence
Park item was pulled off the Consent Calendar, the Council approved the direction
to move forward with the Final Concept Design with the preferred option
“Concept B, “Story Trail” (Attachment A,) with some features from Concept C,
“Play It Up.”
/campaigns/org790997498/sitesapi/files/images/802505012/Lawrence_Mitty_Park_Timeline.png
After the Housing Element item was pulled off the Consent Calendar, the staff
presentation gave a clear timeline on the remaining steps with specific dates. which
were made clear before. On August 29, 2022, the Council approved the sites for
Tier 1 and Tier 2. The first administrative draft of the Housing Element was made
available to staff on October 4, 2022 and posted for public review on November 18
and submitted to HCD (Housing Community Development) on February 4, 2023.
The Jan. 17 staff report states “The City expects to adopt its Housing Element
by December 2023… Staff expects to have the initial work on the EIR begin in
February, with the Notice of Preparation (NOP), the first step in the EIR process,
being released late in the month. It is staff’s goal to have the EIR certified in
conjunction with approval of the Housing Element in order to be in
compliance with State housing laws.”
Links to a list of City Newsletters:
Council Actions Newsletter - monthly newsletter by Mayor Darcy Paul in 2022
Items of Interest - City Manager’s semi-monthly newsletter, which includes
monthly crime reports (archive since 2018)
Cupertino Scene - monthly newsletter, which is also mailed to all households
(archive since 2002)
Cupertino Scene 50+ - monthly newsletter of Cupertino Senior Center (archive
since 2014)
Safe Route 2 Schools (SR2S) Newsletter - monthly newsletter on traffic safety
issues around schools (archive since 2016)
Block Leader Updates - quarterly updates to block leaders (archive since
2017)
Cupertino Business Connect - quarterly newsletter for Cupertino businesses,
formerly Business Buzz (archive since 2016)
Cupertino Green Digital Newsletter - quarterly newsletter on sustainability
events and programs (started in winter 2022)
City News Release - individual news articles (archive since 2008)
Development Activity Report - monthly report presented at a Chamber of
Commerce meeting (archive since 2019)
E-notification Signup: to subscribe to any city newsletter or other project-specific
notifications through email
COMMUNITY CONNECT
Events and programs of interest in Cupertino
Join YAPA (Young American Policy Advocates) to study local issues with
Liang Chao and other adult mentors
10-Week Projects (March-April)
Age Range: 8-12th grade
Registration and more details: www.yapadvocates.org/spring-2023
Deadline: February 15, 2023
Questions: yapaofficers@gmail.com
Project 1: SVSCI (Silicon Valley Senior Citizens Interview) Oral History
Project 2: Bring Your Own Utensil (BYOU) Campaign
Project 3: Fentanyl Dangers and Solutions
Cookie Decorating Fundraiser with Recology staff members and Public Work and
Emergency Management employees.
Date: February 12, 2023 2-4pm
Location: Collins Elementary School lunch tables
Hosted by: Cupertino Change Agent
Councilmember Liang Chao
Representing only myself
City Email: LiangChao@Cupertino.org
City Phone: 1-650-208-1786
Campaign Email: Liang4CupertinoCouncil@gmail.com
Campaign Phone: 1-408-585-9303
Paid for by Liang Chao for Cupertino City Council 2022 FPPC # 1450210
liang4cupertinocouncil.com
Cupertino, CA 95015-2672
408-585-9303
This email was sent by liang@liang4cupertinocouncil.com to la-warren@att.net
Not interested? Unsubscribe | Manage Preference | Update profile
Liang Chao for Cupertino City Council | P.O. Box 2672, Cupertino, CA 95015-2672
From: Jose Yow <joseyow@gmail.com>
Sent: Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:13 AM
To: Liang Chao <LiangChao@cupertino.org>
Subject: RE: Comments to Tonight's Meeting items
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
HI, Councilwoman Liang Chao:
Thank you so much for providing the information concerning our city. I can't attend tonight's meeting
due to a meeting conflict. But, I'd like to voice my opinions for the following items:
• Report: “40% Food Service Use Cap” Turned Into “40% Restaurant Cap:
o This defeats the purpose of setting this standard. All of the exceptions are
parts of the food service categories. It's ridiculous to exclude them and
give the cap more space than it intends to.
• The proposed “Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual'' (Consent
Calendar Item 15)
o We should stay with the original method meaning two council members
can propose an agenda item.
o We should stay with the original concept of not allowing the mayor alone
to shut down the deliberation to request a vote on an agenda item.
o The California Public Records Act (CPRA): We should not allow the city
manager to limit access to the information of the elected officials through
CPRA.
o Taken any action on a study session item: Council members shall not
take action and adopt the study session item.
o The Mayor has “made recommendations” to assignments of
Councilmembers to the committees: The mayor can only recommend
the council members to the committees, not the authority to assign the
council members to the committees.
o Should we limit the types of items which could be put on Consent to
limit public input and Council deliberation? Yes. We should not limit
the public input and council deliberation.
Bench Donation policy: We should follow the following steps to approve the bench donation policy and
should never bypass public opinion. The policy should not be approved by council members' "On
Consent), it should have discussions and public opinions and then have PArks & Rec commission make
the recommendation to the council. Also, no one should buy a plaque and put it on the public bench by
him or herself.
1. Put on the Council Work Program.
2. Refer to the Parks and Recreation Commission to study and make a
recommendation.
3. Research similar policies in other cities and get public input.
4. Research proper locations for donated park benches or a process to identify
proper locations and get public input
5. Put on Council Meeting agenda
Thank you for spending the time reading my comments. All policies should be transparent to the public
not dictated by one person or one organization. Public opinions are important since all policies are for
the good of the citizens and they definitely need to be involved in the approval processes.
Wish you a successful council meeting tonight!
Regards,
Jose Yow
From:Rose Grymes
To:City Council; City Council
Subject:February 7 Oral Communications
Date:Tuesday, February 7, 2023 11:40:15 AM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless
you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Dear City Council and Staff,
I write again to communicate my continued support for plans to return the Blackberry Farm site to a natural habitat
with sensitive access available to the local community.
There are compelling arguments to support such a decision, many of which I have made previously and also have
been expressed by others. Today I offer comments on the viability of the alternative golf course plans. Some recent
suggestions address improvements to golf course maintenance activities; such as reducing the water, fertilizer, and
pesticides required, possibly by altering landscaping. While this might appear to address some of the substantial
concerns regarding water waste and maintenance cost, I believe these proposals are, at best, impractical and ill
informed. Without extensive substantiation and the opportunity to review the operational costs and impacts of such
installations at comparable sites, it is hardly possible to assess this as a realistic possibility.
Further, the future operation of such a reimagined golf course would require significant and consistently continuing
commitments on the part of the city—a consistency that requires a leap of faith on the part of residents. In addition,
such operations rely on anticipating predictable climatic conditions—bridging droughts and atmospheric river
storms while maintaining accessibility to golfers.
While golf course supporters are reluctant to lose the leisure and exercise opportunity, a feeling I can share, I
suggest the more sustainably successful long term plan remains the one which returns this land to natural habitat
with beautiful vistas and walking trails.
Rose Grymes
Cupertino resident
Sent from my iPhone
From:Rose Grymes
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fwd: February 7 Oral Communications
Date:Tuesday, February 7, 2023 4:18:56 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
Sent from my iPhone
Begin forwarded message:
From: Rose Grymes <ragrymes@gmail.com>
Date: February 7, 2023 at 2:40:10 PM EST
To: citycouncil@cupertino.org, citycouncil@cupertino.org
Subject: February 7 Oral Communications
Dear City Council and Staff,
I write again to communicate my continued support for plans to return the
Blackberry Farm site to a natural habitat with sensitive access available to the
local community.
There are compelling arguments to support such a decision, many of which I have
made previously and also have been expressed by others. Today I offer comments
on the viability of the alternative golf course plans. Some recent suggestions
address improvements to golf course maintenance activities; such as reducing the
water, fertilizer, and pesticides required, possibly by altering landscaping. While
this might appear to address some of the substantial concerns regarding water
waste and maintenance cost, I believe these proposals are, at best, impractical and
ill informed. Without extensive substantiation and the opportunity to review the
operational costs and impacts of such installations at comparable sites, it is hardly
possible to assess this as a realistic possibility.
Further, the future operation of such a reimagined golf course would require
significant and consistently continuing commitments on the part of the city—a
consistency that requires a leap of faith on the part of residents. In addition, such
operations rely on anticipating predictable climatic conditions—bridging droughts
and atmospheric river storms while maintaining accessibility to golfers.
While golf course supporters are reluctant to lose the leisure and exercise
opportunity, a feeling I can share, I suggest the more sustainably successful long
term plan remains the one which returns this land to natural habitat with beautiful
vistas and walking trails.
Rose Grymes
Cupertino resident
Sent from my iPhone