Loading...
CC 07-03-18 Written Communication Special Meeting Item #1Kirsten Squarcia From:Joseph Fruen <jrfruen@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, July 03, 2018 4:57 PM To:City Attorney's Office Cc:City Clerk; Grace Schmidt Subject:Re: Today's closed session on pending litigation: Friends of Better Cupertino v. City of Cupertino To the Acting City Attorney and those concerned: I note that today's closed session of city council includes discussion of an action brought against the City of Cupertino last Monday by Friends of Better Cupertino (writ petition verified by Caryl Gorska) and Cupertino residents Kitty Moore, Ignatius Ding, and Peggy Griffin. Owing to Councilmember Steven Scharf's association with Better Cupertino and its relationship to Friends of Better Cupertino (to the extent that a meaningful distinction between these two exists), including Mr. Scharf's own litigation against the City of Cupertino now pending before the Court of Appeal (Committee Supporting Cupertino Citizen's Sensible Growth Initiative, et al. v. City of Cupertino, et al., Case No. H043940) on his own behalf and in support of Better Cupertino, I ask that your office carefully consider the potential for waiver of the city's litigation privileges in this matter through disclosure to a presumed member of the organization presently bringing action against the City of Cupertino. As the scope of any waiver of privilege is generally narrowly construed (Manela v. Superior Court, 177 Cal. App. 4th 1139 (2009)), please carefully consider the nature and extent of any information to be disclosed in today's session to ensure that the city's litigation privileges may be preserved in future should the Friends of Better Cupertino action continue. In particular, I highlight the precedents laid down in Rodriguez v. Superior Court, 14 Cal. App. 4th 1260 (1993), and People v. Hayes, 21 Cal. 4th 1211 (1999), which illustrate how the disclosure of some information need not constitute a waiver as to all privileged information. Many thanks for your time and attention, -- J.R. Fruen, Esq. Cupertino resident 408-828-2859 Total Control Panel Login To: cityclerk@cupertino.org From: jrfruen@gmail.com Message Score: 1 High (60): Pass My Spam Blocking Level: High Medium (75): Pass Low (90): Pass Block this sender Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. CC 7/3/18 Special Meeting Item #1 From:Ignatius Y. Ding To:Darcy Paul Cc:City Council; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject:Resident communication -- re: Item 1 of Special meeting on July 3, 2018 (Legal matter regarding litigation "Friends of Better Cupertion," et al vs City of Cupertino. Date:Tuesday, July 03, 2018 5:02:42 PM ** Please please this letter in the city record archive for future reference. Thank you. ​ Dear Mayor Paul and members of the Cupertino City Council, Despite of repeated clear verbial and written warnings from Cupertino residents, based on a series of extensive research, study, thorough investigation and close analysis in the past few months, the city staff, who are in charge of the ministerial review and approval of the development plan for the “Vallco Site” submitted by developer/owner Sand Hill Property under the state legislation SB35, have chosen to overlook or ignore the colossal failure to meet many critical criteria stipulated by the California state laws, including SB35. That has made it necessary for the residents and a community organization, i.e. the “Friends of Better Cupertino,” to file a “Mandamus Petition” in the Superior Court of the Santa Clara County to demand the city to perform its judicial duty to properly examine the said development proposal according to all relevant government codes, regulations and laws. The lawsuit is now pending between “Friends of Better Cupertino” and the City of Cupertino. The City Council has the legal obligation and responsibility to the voters to provide oversight and guidance in this matter that would have tremendous impact to the future of the city and the quality of life of all current and future Cupertino residents. . . . Among other things, this court petition details why the proposed “Vallco Site” development project is NOT eligible for SB35 benefits because i. it does not offer 2/3 residential square footage; and ii. the site is listed on the statewide hazardous waste site list Also, as noted on p. 22 of the document, the Vallco project does not comply with the General Plan in that some of the proposed buildings offer no first-floor commercial facilities. Numerous other eligibility issues are discussed in detail in Exhibits 5, 6 and 7.   Under the SB35 statute, the entire application fails if any one of the eligibility criteria is not satisfied. We demand the city to do its due diligence!! In short . . . By filing the “writ of mandamus petition” before the legal 90 day deadline in conjunction with City’s filing of its formal response, i.e. “the eligibility letter for the Vallco Town Center SB 35 Application,” the “Friends of Better Cupertino” has, in turn, preserved its right to challenge the substantive aspects of the City’s “eligibility approval” of the application. Filing this Petition has become necessary all because either the city staff, including the acting city manager and the planning staff, are completely incompetent or unconscionably colluding with the developer, or both to fail performing their legally required duty to ascertain the applicant of the Vallco project to fully comply with the state laws, including the particular criteria mandated by the SB35 that developer is trying to take advantage of. A majority of the council members has repeatedly obstructed the effort to remove the provisional 2 million square feet of office space allocation at the Vallco site. We are all painfully aware the ongoing and rapidly deteriorating housing shortage crisis in Cupertino and in the Greater San Francisco Bay Area. The deliberate attempt by the city staff and certain members of the city council to collude with commercial developers to push an agenda to continue building more offices, while there is no demand or shortage nor it’s desirable or supported by the majority of the Cupertino residents (as demonstrated in the defeat of Measure D in 2016), it would gravely worsen the imbalance of the office and housing supply ratio as time and again warned by various experts and nonpartisan independent organizations. We strongly urge the city council to take immediate corrective actions to remedy its own failure. Thanks you for your attention. Ignatius Y. Ding 41-year resident of Cupertino ​ Total Control Panel Login To: cityclerk@cupertino.org From: ignatius.ding@gmail.com Remove this sender from my allow list You received this message because the sender is on your allow list.