Loading...
CC 02-21-2023 Item No. 6 Bench Dedication Policy Written CommunicationsCC 02-21-23 Item # 6 Commemorative Bench Dedication Policy Written Communications 1 2/21/2023 City Council Meeting #6 Commemorative Bench Dedication Policy Staff’s responses to questions received from councilmember are shown in italics. Q1: What if the City needs to remove or relocate a bench with a memorial plaque due to any park improvement? Would the City have the right to move the bench and the plaque without the permission of the donor? (Chao) Staff response: Yes, the City would be able to move the bench. The plaque donor is not receiving a fee interest in the park or the land. With that stated, the City would do its best to coordinate with the donor to situate the bench in a location that is acceptable to both parties. Q2: The proposed policy states: "The maximum term for any single memorial bench is 20 years, after which time the bench will be removed, and the location shall be available for re-use." => The "bench" will be removed after 20 years, even if it is still in good condition? Or do you mean the "plaque" will be removed? (Chao) Staff response: The bench and plaque will be removed after 20 years. Q3: The proposed policy states: "The City will only accept bench donations that commemorate, memorialize, or recognize an individual or family by name ... No organizations or groups will be considered." => Why do we not consider a plaque to commemorate the contribution of an organization, for example? Is there any legal consideration? (Chao) Staff response: The plaques are used to allow family members to commemorate or memorialize individual relatives. Any donations for organizations or groups will be considered under the City Donation Policy. Q4: The proposed policy states: "The City will only accept bench donations that commemorate, memorialize, or recognize an individual or family by name who has a direct connection to the City of Cupertino." => What kind of "direct connection"? Would a person who moved into Cupertino for one month have a "direct connection"? Any other city has a more descriptive requirement on the qualification to get a memorial plaque? (Chao) Staff response: The statement of “direct connection” was inserted to discourage an individual from commemorating individuals who are not associated with Cupertino. As an extreme example, we do not want to entertain requests for someone commemorating Vladimir Putin, or 2 other individuals who are part of a larger stage. This policy is focused on Cupertino and its residents. Perhaps, the application form should include a space on the reason for a memorial plaque and the reason for choosing a location? (like the forms I saw in some of the cities I reviewed.) I see that the two earlier bench donations in 2015 and 2016 came with a story about the person to be memoralized and why the particular location chosen is meaningful to the person. This makes more sense to allow a public space to be utilized to remember someone. The 2002 request for a bench plaque to be placed on an existing bench, on the other hand, had no description at all about the person being memoralized at all. Staff response: Applications will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Q5: Whether the City has any other objective standards on where benches could be placed in a park? (Chao) Staff response: Staff will work on placing benches where they will provide a positive experience for park patrons and where they will not impact with ongoing park operations. Q6: Could the staff propose a reasonable policy to select permissible bench locations to allow public review process, since these benches will occupy public spaces? (Chao) Staff response: I think in most cases, the placement of benches will not be of concern. Should a new bench location have concerns to the public, or be contentious for any reason, staff would consider bringing the application to Parks and Rec commission for input. Q7: What precedent does the City have for giving away city property to an individual? Is it good policy to give away city property when staff made an error? Who authorized staff to redo the donation policy when staff is allegedly very busy such that they cannot do the Work Plan and CIP items? Is this good strategic focus? (Moore) Staff response: Prior to this proposed formal bench policy being prepared, requests for memorial plaques were reviewed on an individual basis and were brought to City Council for consideration. We did this with Ms. Francesco’s request in May 2022. At that time, City Council directed staff to prepare a formal bench policy. The bench policy being provided for Council consideration is in response to that direction. In the case of Ms. Francesco, at that time she had requested to have a plaque installed on an existing City Bench, and staff brought this request to Council for approval in May of 2022. Council made no determination on the request, but directed staff to prepare a bench policy and 3 to return with Ms. Francesco’s request for reconsideration. The item we are bringing to Council this Tuesday, continues Ms. Francesco’s previous request to have the plaque installed on an existing bench. Council has the option of rejecting this request and requiring Ms. Francesco to follow the updated policy, or they may grant the waiver an allow the installation of a plaque on an existing bench. Q8: What is the relevance of Exhibit A? (Mohan) Staff response: This allows for a formal resolution and acceptance of the City Council of the Bench Policy, as opposed to a less formal guideline document. Should any major changes be proposed for the policy, this would result in staff returning to City Council for approval of those modifications. From:Peggy Griffin To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:2023-02-21 CC Mtg Consent Calendar - Please PULL ITEMS 5 and 6 Date:Sunday, February 19, 2023 5:28:37 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. Dear City Council members, I am requesting that you PULL Consent items: ITEM 5 Accts Payable Nov. 13, 2022 ITEM 6 Commemorative Bench and fee waiver I, as a member of the public, I requested that these items be pulled during the Feb. 7, 2023 CC meeting. These items were pulled prior to the rules changing and I am still interested in discussing these 2 items. I hope one of you can please request they be pulled. Thank you. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin From:Liang Chao To:Pamela Wu Cc:City Clerk Subject:Fwd: 2023-02-21 CC Mtg Consent Calendar - Please PULL ITEMS 5 and 6 Date:Sunday, February 19, 2023 6:24:10 PM I'd like to pull Item 5 and Item 6, as stated. Thanks. Liang Liang Chao​ Council Member City Council LiangChao@cupertino.org 408-777-3192 From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com> Sent: Sunday, February 19, 2023 5:28 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Subject: 2023-02-21 CC Mtg Consent Calendar - Please PULL ITEMS 5 and 6 Dear City Council members, I am requesting that you PULL Consent items: ITEM 5 Accts Payable Nov. 13, 2022 ITEM 6 Commemorative Bench and fee waiver I, as a member of the public, I requested that these items be pulled during the Feb. 7, 2023 CC meeting. These items were pulled prior to the rules changing and I am still interested in discussing these 2 items. I hope one of you can please request they be pulled. Thank you. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin From:Liang Chao To:Pamela Wu; City Clerk Subject:Fwd: February 21 City Council meeting - Staff Responses to Councilmember questions Date:Tuesday, February 21, 2023 6:53:01 AM Attachments:CC 02-21-23 Item #1 City Hall Renovation_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #1 City Hall Renovation Responses to Councilmember Questions Attachment Funding Costs Estimates.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #1 City Hall Renovation Responses to Councilmember Questions Attachment CIP Projects List.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #5 AP ending November 13, 2022_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #6 Commemorative Bench Dedication Policy_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #10 Civil Grand Jury Report_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #11 Amendments to City Committees_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #12 December Monthly Treasurer"s Report_Responses to Councilmember Questions.pdf CC 02-21-23 Item #1 City Hall Renovation Amended Attachment B - City Council Timeline City Hall Project_Desk Item.pdf image002.png image003.png image004.png image005.png image006.png image007.png image008.png image009.png image010.png (Please disregard the previous email, I accidentally hit that “arrow” to send.) I appreciate the responses and the effort taken to provide responses in a timely manner and the effort made to make all responses available to all Councilmembers and the public. I understand the need to shorten the questions. But some of my questions were taken out of context and the nature of the questions were changed as a result. I'd like to request that all of my emails with my original questions to be entered as written communication for this meeting to provide the original context of the questions. Please let me know if the staff doesn't have time to find those emails and need me to find them. Please enter this email into the written communication too. Thanks. Liang Chao​ Council Member City Council LiangChao@cupertino.org 408-777-3192 From: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org> Sent: Monday, February 20, 2023 6:45 PM To: Department Heads <DeptHeads@cupertino.org> 1 2/21/2023 City Council Meeting #6 Commemorative Bench Dedication Policy Staff’s responses to questions received from councilmember are shown in italics. Q1: What if the City needs to remove or relocate a bench with a memorial plaque due to any park improvement? Would the City have the right to move the bench and the plaque without the permission of the donor? (Chao) Staff response: Yes, the City would be able to move the bench. The plaque donor is not receiving a fee interest in the park or the land. With that stated, the City would do its best to coordinate with the donor to situate the bench in a location that is acceptable to both parties. Q2: The proposed policy states: "The maximum term for any single memorial bench is 20 years, after which time the bench will be removed, and the location shall be available for re-use." => The "bench" will be removed after 20 years, even if it is still in good condition? Or do you mean the "plaque" will be removed? (Chao) Staff response: The bench and plaque will be removed after 20 years. Q3: The proposed policy states: "The City will only accept bench donations that commemorate, memorialize, or recognize an individual or family by name ... No organizations or groups will be considered." => Why do we not consider a plaque to commemorate the contribution of an organization, for example? Is there any legal consideration? (Chao) Staff response: The plaques are used to allow family members to commemorate or memorialize individual relatives. Any donations for organizations or groups will be considered under the City Donation Policy. Q4: The proposed policy states: "The City will only accept bench donations that commemorate, memorialize, or recognize an individual or family by name who has a direct connection to the City of Cupertino." => What kind of "direct connection"? Would a person who moved into Cupertino for one month have a "direct connection"? Any other city has a more descriptive requirement on the qualification to get a memorial plaque? (Chao) Staff response: The statement of “direct connection” was inserted to discourage an individual from commemorating individuals who are not associated with Cupertino. As an extreme example, we do not want to entertain requests for someone commemorating Vladimir Putin, or 2 other individuals who are part of a larger stage. This policy is focused on Cupertino and its residents. Perhaps, the application form should include a space on the reason for a memorial plaque and the reason for choosing a location? (like the forms I saw in some of the cities I reviewed.) I see that the two earlier bench donations in 2015 and 2016 came with a story about the person to be memoralized and why the particular location chosen is meaningful to the person. This makes more sense to allow a public space to be utilized to remember someone. The 2002 request for a bench plaque to be placed on an existing bench, on the other hand, had no description at all about the person being memoralized at all. Staff response: Applications will be reviewed on a case by case basis. Q5: Whether the City has any other objective standards on where benches could be placed in a park? (Chao) Staff response: Staff will work on placing benches where they will provide a positive experience for park patrons and where they will not impact with ongoing park operations. Q6: Could the staff propose a reasonable policy to select permissible bench locations to allow public review process, since these benches will occupy public spaces? (Chao) Staff response: I think in most cases, the placement of benches will not be of concern. Should a new bench location have concerns to the public, or be contentious for any reason, staff would consider bringing the application to Parks and Rec commission for input. Q7: What precedent does the City have for giving away city property to an individual? Is it good policy to give away city property when staff made an error? Who authorized staff to redo the donation policy when staff is allegedly very busy such that they cannot do the Work Plan and CIP items? Is this good strategic focus? (Moore) Staff response: Prior to this proposed formal bench policy being prepared, requests for memorial plaques were reviewed on an individual basis and were brought to City Council for consideration. We did this with Ms. Francesco’s request in May 2022. At that time, City Council directed staff to prepare a formal bench policy. The bench policy being provided for Council consideration is in response to that direction. In the case of Ms. Francesco, at that time she had requested to have a plaque installed on an existing City Bench, and staff brought this request to Council for approval in May of 2022. Council made no determination on the request, but directed staff to prepare a bench policy and 3 to return with Ms. Francesco’s request for reconsideration. The item we are bringing to Council this Tuesday, continues Ms. Francesco’s previous request to have the plaque installed on an existing bench. Council has the option of rejecting this request and requiring Ms. Francesco to follow the updated policy, or they may grant the waiver an allow the installation of a plaque on an existing bench. Q8: What is the relevance of Exhibit A? (Mohan) Staff response: This allows for a formal resolution and acceptance of the City Council of the Bench Policy, as opposed to a less formal guideline document. Should any major changes be proposed for the policy, this would result in staff returning to City Council for approval of those modifications. From:Kitty Moore To:City Clerk; Kirsten Squarcia Subject:Please pull Consent Item 5 and 6 Date:Tuesday, February 21, 2023 3:14:44 PM Dear City Clerk, Pursuant to City Council Resolution 23-021 I request that Items 5 and 6 be pulled from Consent. Thank you, Kitty Moore Kitty Moore​ Councilmember City Council Kmoore@cupertino.org (408) 777-1389