Loading...
CC 06-21-2023 Oral_Late _Written Communications (Updated 6-22-23)CC 06-21-2023 Written Communications Oral Communications From:Munisekar To:City Clerk Subject:Oral Communications on 6/21/2023. Date:Wednesday, June 21, 2023 12:02:34 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 Clerk, I am registered to attend the City Council meeting tomorrow; I plan to speak during Oral Communications asking the city to Oppose Discriminatory Law SB403. I would like you to play the following clip during my Oral at my prompting. https://youtu.be/_41wmoXLHms?t=22 Please keep the above video clip queued up for Orals. Thank you. Muni Madhdhipatla Cupertino Resident CC 06-21-2023 Item #1 Consider the Memorial Park Specific Plan Written Communications CC 06-21-2023 Item #7 Consider To Be Determined List Written Communications From:Munisekar To:City Clerk Subject:Oral Communications on 6/21/2023. Date:Wednesday, June 21, 2023 12:02:34 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 Clerk, I am registered to attend the City Council meeting tomorrow; I plan to speak during Oral Communications asking the city to Oppose Discriminatory Law SB403. I would like you to play the following clip during my Oral at my prompting. https://youtu.be/_41wmoXLHms?t=22 Please keep the above video clip queued up for Orals. Thank you. Muni Madhdhipatla Cupertino Resident From:Uday Barulkar To:City Council; City Clerk Subject:Fwd: Request to put SB-403 on Council Agenda - Call to action today! Email 3 Date:Wednesday, June 21, 2023 8:23:40 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 Mayor Wei, Vice Mayor Mohan and the City Council, The undersigned residents of Cupertino are very concerned about a new bill SB-403 being rushed through the California legislature. This bill unfairly targets the Indian Americans & the Hindu community as presumptively guilty of caste discrimination. We affirm that discrimination in any form is unacceptable, and must be addressed by the state. Existing California laws against discrimination list out the protected characteristics like race, national origin, ancestry, religion etc. They do not explicitly list specific groups, unlike SB-403 which has a focus on South Asians. Singling out a specific minority community is unfair and the bill is not facially neutral. The recent Carnegie Endowment survey shows that a majority of Indian Americans are not caste conscious with that number being higher among American born Indian Americans. Our children learn about caste in schools; they do not have any idea what caste they need to identify with, and we have no way to prove or establish our caste. Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen expressed the same concern about how to even define or determine someone’s caste (Youtube) “I know a little about caste. What I've learned is if you ask five South Asians what caste is you get 15 different opinions about what it is. I know that there have certainly been discriminatory practices in societies all over the world since the beginning of time. As district attorney I'm focused on whether there is discrimination or hate crime or violence based on discrimination in my county and while there have been hate crimes committed in our County, I'm not aware of anything related to caste and hate crimes or criminal violations. And so I just wonder if the bill is necessary. I'm also very concerned about anyone being stigmatized or any Community being assumed to be racist because they look a certain way or come from a certain place. And so one of the concerns I certainly would have about a bill that talks about caste discrimination is it strikes me as discriminating against Indian Americans and making them suspect in some way that others are not. “ Jeff Rosen, Santa Clara County District Attorney The now withdrawn lawsuit by the CRD against two Cisco Engineering leaders confirms that caste discrimination is already illegal under the existing California law. SB403 itself contains language which says that it should not be interpreted that caste based discrimination is not already covered. We do not require a new law which specifically targets the South Asian community, which will be affecting our future generations and subjecting them to caste scrutiny because of their descent. We petition Cupertino City Council under the Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.030 to study SB-403 and put it on the agenda ASAP to give us an opportunity to express our concerns. We also ask that the council pass a resolution condemning it on our behalf. The matter is urgent as the SB-403 is being unfairly fast tracked to avoid public scrutiny. It already went through Senate Judicial review, Budget review and Senate vote in less than 2 months and is being rushed through the Assembly. There are a few more articles written widely on this topic: 1. Caste bill would harm California’s South Asian communities: Legislation may be well- intended, but the unintended negative consequences are enormous. By Barbara McGraw The Mercury News https://www.mercurynews.com/2023/04/20/opinion-caste-bill-would-harm-californias-south- asian-communities/ 2. Preliminary Thoughts on Potential Constitutional Flaws in SB 403, a California Proposal to Prohibit Caste Discrimination by Vikram David Amar https://verdict.justia.com/2023/05/16/preliminary-thoughts-on-potential-constitutional-flaws- in-sb-403-a-california-proposal-to-prohibit-caste-discrimination 3. Why California’s caste discrimination bill is itself discriminatory. Suhag Shukla https://religionnews.com/2023/05/17/why-californias-caste-discrimination-bill-is-itself- discriminatory/ 4. Not all California innovations are good: stop SB 403. Samir Karla. Capital Weekly. https://capitolweekly.net/not-all-california-innovations-are-good-stop-sb-403/ 5. A letter from HAF (Hindu American Foundation) that articulates the problems with this bill. https://www.hinduamerican.org/say-no-to-sb403 6. Carnegie Endowment Survey https://carnegieendowment.org/2021/06/09/social-realities-of- indian-americans-results-from-2020-indian-american-attitudes-survey-pub-84667 7. Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen's views on SB-403: https://youtu.be/_41wmoXLHms?t=22 https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_41wmoXLHms&t=22s&authuser=0 We strongly urge the City of Cupertino to oppose SB-403. Thank you very much. From:Debra Nascimento To:City Clerk Subject:FW: Oppose SB-403 Date:Wednesday, June 21, 2023 6:21:25 PM Debra Nascimento​​​​ Executive Assistant City Manager's Office DebraN@cupertino.org (408) 777-1302 From: chitrasv@yahoo.com <chitrasv@yahoo.com> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2023 6:17 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Subject: Oppose SB-403 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. Madam City Clerk, I would like for this email to be read as part of the oral communications for agenda item 7 on my behalf. Dear Mayor Wei, Vice Mayor Mohan and the City Council, The residents of Cupertino are very concerned about a new bill SB-403 being rushed through the California legislature. This bill unfairly targets the Indian Americans & the Hindu community as presumptively guilty of caste discrimination. We affirm that discrimination in any form is unacceptable, and must be addressed by the state. Existing California laws against discrimination list out the protected characteristics like race, national origin, ancestry, religion etc. They do not explicitly list specific groups, unlike SB-403 which has a focus on South Asians. Singling out a specific minority community is unfair and the bill is not facially neutral. The recent Carnegie Endowment survey shows that a majority of Indian Americans are not caste conscious with that number being higher among American born Indian Americans. Our children learn about caste in schools; they do not have any idea what caste they need to identify with, and we have no way to prove or establish our caste. Santa Clara County DA Jeff Rosen expressed the same concern about how to even define or determine someone’s caste (Youtube) “I know a little about caste. What I've learned is if you ask five South Asians what caste is you get 15 different opinions about what it is. I know that there have certainly been discriminatory practices in societies all over the world since the beginning of time. As district attorney I'm focused on whether there is discrimination or hate crime or violence based on discrimination in my county and while there have been hate crimes committed in our County, I'm not aware of anything related to caste and hate crimes or criminal violations. And so I just wonder if the bill is necessary. I'm also very concerned about anyone being stigmatized or any Community being assumed to be racist because they look a certain way or come from a certain place. And so one of the concerns I certainly would have about a bill that talks about caste discrimination is it strikes me as discriminating against Indian Americans and making them suspect in some way that others are not. “ Jeff Rosen, Santa Clara County District Attorney The now withdrawn lawsuit by the CRD against two Cisco Engineering leaders confirms that caste discrimination is already illegal under the existing California law. SB403 itself contains language which says that it should not be interpreted that caste based discrimination is not already covered. We do not require a new law which specifically targets the South Asian community, which will be affecting our future generations and subjecting them to caste scrutiny because of their descent. We petition Cupertino City Council under the Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.030 to study SB-403 and put it on the agenda ASAP to give us an opportunity to express our concerns. We also ask that the council pass a resolution condemning it on our behalf. The matter is urgent as the SB-403 is being unfairly fast tracked to avoid public scrutiny. It already went through Senate Judicial review, Budget review and Senate vote in less than 2 months and is being rushed through the Assembly. Most of the contents read above have already been sent to you in writing which I have also attached to this email here. That email was on behalf of myself and 69 other residents of Cupertino. That email was not acknowledged. I urge you now to please schedule a special meeting with this topic being the only item on the agenda ASAP. Regards, Chitra Iyer Cupertino Resident since 2004. CC 06-21-2023 Item No. 8 Consider approval of the May 16 City Council minutes Written Communications From:Kirsten Squarcia To:Kitty Moore Cc:City Clerk Subject:RE: Item 8 20230621 FW: 2023-06–6 City Council Meeting, Agenda Item 2-May 16 Minutes Date:Wednesday, June 21, 2023 9:38:49 PM Attachments:image021.png image022.png image023.png image024.png image025.png image026.png image027.png image028.png image029.png image030.png image031.png image032.png image033.png image034.png image035.png image036.png Councilmember Moore, your comments will be included as requested. Kirsten Squarcia​​​​ City Clerk City Manager's Office KirstenS@cupertino.org (408) 777-3225 From: Kitty Moore <Kmoore@cupertino.org> Sent: Wednesday, June 21, 2023 9:01 PM To: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.org> Subject: Item 8 20230621 FW: 2023-06–6 City Council Meeting, Agenda Item 2-May 16 Minutes Dear City Clerk, Please add the following to the written communications for Item 8. Thank you, Kitty Moore Kitty Moore​ Councilmember City Council Kmoore@cupertino.org (408) 777-1389 From: Peggy Griffin <griffin@compuserve.com> Date: Tuesday, June 6, 2023 at 2:44 PM To: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org> Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Subject: 2023-06–6 City Council Meeting, Agenda Item 2-May 16 Minutes 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. PLEASE INCLUDE THE FOLLOWING EMAIL AS PART OF THE WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE CITY COUNCIL MEETING AGENDA ITEM #2. Dear City Council and City Staff, In the Meeting Minutes for the May 16, 2020 City Council Meeting, under CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 2-12), second paragraph it states “Peggy Griffin was concerned about the conformity of accounts payables and treasurers reports…” For the record, I’d like this email and the following text to be placed in Written Communications for ITEM2 Approval of the May 16, 2023 Minutes to clarify exactly my concerns. I’d like to bring these violations listed below to your attention. In the May 16, 2023 Cupertino City Council Agenda, it includes the March 2023 Monthly Treasurer’s Report (Agenda Item #18) which is late and violates both Cupertino municipal code and California state law. This is not the first time sinceDecember 2022. They are continually late. I-Violation of Municipal Code Section 2.24.030 Monthly Reports and California Government Code Section 41004. The May 16, 2023 Cupertino City Council Agenda Item #17 “Receive the Monthly Treasurer’s Investment Report for March and April 2023”, the March 2023 Monthly Treasurer’s Investment Report is late. II-Violation of California Government Code Section 53607, Cupertino Municipal Code 2.24.050 and the CupertinoInvestment Policy This is an excerpt from the top of the December 2022 Monthly Treasurer’s Investment Report. This is included in every Monthly Treasurer’s Investment Report as background information. Link to current and about to be updated Cupertino Investment Policy https://cupertino.legistar.com/View.ashx?M=F&ID=11960748&GUID=32777BC5-C26B-4777-AFD8- 125ECE8D6F2D&G=74359C04-A5F0-4CB2-A97A-0032996BB90E Last year, the Cupertino Audit Committee chaired by Councilmembers Moore and former Councilmember Paul worked to getour city into compliance with these laws. Since their removal from this committee the city Treasurer has fallen out of compliance despite their response to the Santa Clara County Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) report “Show Me the Money”. Link to the CGJ’s report “Show Me the Money” https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2022/Show%20Me%20the%20Money%20- %20Financial%20Transparency%20Needed.pdf Link to City of Cupertino’s Response to the CGJ’s report “Show Me the Money”https://www.scscourt.org/court_divisions/civil/cgj/2023/Show%20Me%20the%20Money-City%20of%20Cupertino.pdf In summary, Mayor Wei and the city staff decide when and what appears on each City Council Agenda. With regard to these reports, they have the duty and obligation to follow state and municipal code by ensuring these documents are included on the agenda in a timely manner yet they chose not to do so. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin