Loading...
CC 05-07-19 #9 Options for Vallco Referendum Petitions_Late Written Communications1 Kirsten Squarcia From:John Geis <jgeis4401@gmail.com> Sent:Tuesday, May 7, 2019 5:29 PM To:City Council Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager's Office Subject:5/7/19, Agenda Item #9, Vallco Specific Plan - Voters to decide Hello Council Members, I feel the city residents should be able to vote on the Vallco Specific Plan in the March 2020 election. The Vallco specific plan should NOT be repealed by only a council vote. The residents should decide this issue. Thank you, John Geis Cupertino Resident Total Control Panel Login To: cityclerk@cupertino.org From: jgeis4401@gmail.com Message Score: 1 High (60): Pass My Spam Blocking Level: Custom Medium (75): Pass Low (90): Pass Block this sender Custom (55): Pass Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. Ct s/7/19 #9 REFERENDUM he only way to put Vallco to ~blic vote!)t 1. WHAT IS A REFERENDUM? A referendum :, a time-h o n 0red tradit ion in Cali forn ia politics written into th e California Constitution to provid e t ~ e much-needed c he c k-and-balance when the public is frustrated b y an un re spons ive government controlled b y powerful eli t es.~d p u t a city cou nc il \Y ~;--~~.la u blic vote so th a t ev~ry voter ~as a ~a_y. If' The referen dum pro cess ensures that city council dec 1s 10,is cannot str ay too far fr om the majority of voters ' wish es . 2 . HOW I CAN SUPPORT IT? SIGN: C up ertin o Reg istered Vot ers p le ase s ign all fo ur petit ions (RED , GOL ). GREEN . BLUE) in Octo b er in front of Cupert ino Libra ry . Re f er to www .be r cupertino.o ~g for updated information. DONATE to he lp the re f e re ndum at www.be tt'-•;•cu.pertino.org/dona te VOLUNTEER: L"'lcourage your network and neighbor s to sign t he refere n cl u,·.~ ~etit ions and d on te to s u p po rt the effort . ....,. . .,,,_.-~-.. __.i..,,_,;;,~ pet\t ion , sl9ned the ~-,-• '"' .-1 have -~· ........ u,,,,,.:,--::1,,,,..-.:1"'-;_:~~o~~;;,_.~. .... ., ....... - 3. WHAT IS THI: N£XT STEP? -= After we collec t t he requi red nu m ber o f s ignatures (10% of Cupertino voters) for all 4 documents, th e Valko Specific P lan w ill be voted on in a future e lect ion. Cupert ino res idents will have a chance to vote t o decide if they accept the plan. It could also be adopted by City Council directly. THETRUTHABOUTTHE VALL.CO SPECBFDC PLAN : • Doub le or even triple t he t raff ic with no mitigation • 7,000-10 ,000 added wor kers • 7,800 new reside nt s (in 2 ,668 housing units) • 14-story buildings towerin g over ou r neighb ,:,rh0 0ds • No re a l park-just conc re te plazas and walkways with a 1/4-acre la wn area • Only 400,000 s9. ft. of retail (the expa nd ed Westgate Valley Fa ir will have 2 milli on s9 . ft .) • No free park in g, causing people to pa rk in nearby ne ighborhoo ds ONLY DARCY PAUL AND STEVEN SCHARF VOTED NO Th is agg ress ive Vallco plan passed at Cupe rt ino City Counci l on Sept ember 19th, with Rod Sinks, Bar ry Chang and Savita Vaid liyanath an voti ng YES City Coun ci l Candidate~ Lmg Wei , Orrin Mahoney and Savita Vai dt-/.:-..na than have publicly announc ed t heir s uppo rt for th e Va lko Specific Plan in press releases and ci ty council meetings. Can you trust th ese three? ::,, _ : .. .. _.:; ..... C u oert in o Ac :',:• .::om m itt ee. FPPC "1395411. PO Box 11 3:;,. C up ertin o C A 950·'; ' -..... --' --. ·-' I I I I VOTE for candidates supported by BETTER CUPERTINO JONWI LEY As a licensed Professional Engineer, Jon has studi ed and measured Main Street development and found ma ny violations. He docu- mented them and brought to the attention of the City Staff and the City Council and he was simply ignored . As a City Council member, he will be able to ma ke sure that deve lopers follow rules . L.IA C As a school board member, Liang has brought positive changesto-Cl.LSD , including replacing th e Si..p-er~t~n::.__ de nt. Liang wil l strengthen city policies to protect Cupertino from state laws, such as SB 35, before they thre aten our quality of life . Help elect them to hold developers accountable and bring power back to residents. fhen you won't need to sign any more Vallco petitions! Referendum Q & A: 1. If we sign this referendum. can Vallco still be revitalized? Yes ! We know the importance of Valko to t he community but believe we sho ul dn't sac rifice h ealth, schools. traff ic flow, and quali ty of life for hefty developer profits. Signing the referendum petition lets voters te ll City Council th at a decision to urban ize Cuperti no belongs to residents , not th ree City Council Members. We believe our community deserves better! With more Council members who truly care about the community, we w ill be able to create a com muni - ty -friend ly plan , as we sho uld have do ne all a long . 2. If the current Vallco plan is rejected by voters. will the next one be even bigger and denser? Deve lopers must foll o w the C l.'.nera l Plan, even t h ose app lying SB 35 . H owever, the C u pe-': · : '.'.: ,,ri l amended t he G en era l P lan to allow p-::_~. -which is t h e real prob lem . Af ter t he e ec:~ ::-,~. ~.,:, a p ro-reside nt m ajority on City C o unc:. :;..e, ca:, adept policies t o regulate deve lopers. 3. Who can sign the referendum? Who can help and who can donate? On ly registered voters living in Cuperti no can sign thi s re f e re n dum . If you li ve in a nearby c ity . you c an donate t o s u ppo rt the referendum effort www.bettercupertino .org id onate . You can a lso encou rage your Cupe rti no friends a nd coll eagues who are registered voters to s ign the referendum petitio n s. 4. Has the Vallco SB 35 plan been approved? Is it true that if we sign the referendum the SB 35 plan .. ,ill l.:ie brou~ht lnck? W e bel ie ve the Va llco SB 33 Plan s -:cmpl,ant with stat e o r loca 1 laws a nd ,a .lie•efore is not q-lali fied fo r tt>e :;:·eari liri ed approval the C it y h a s g ranted the : 'ope rty c -,•.--e-=-c:-::: ::ii Bette r Cupertino has fil ed a lawsu1: ag a .rs: ::;~ City regarding its approval of t h e SB 35 Plan . lJ.:igation o n th e matter moves forward. Once Liang \ C ;..a o an d Jon Wi ll e y are e lecte d to the council, they w ill hold ' :..,e ci ty stah a, :ountable for their act ions. Th ey w ill ensure :)e :e lo pers fo \\0,•.-city and state laws . Pa id f or!:,_: 3~·.·,; · : .. = ~-'. • o -~cti o n C orn~ ;:t" =::-::: = :' :-:..: · . PO 8 :,, : .::,e-:ino CA 950;5 I \ I I I I I I I I I I From:Ping Gao To:City Council Subject:Please Adopt the Referrendum Date:Tuesday, May 7, 2019 10:40:34 PM Dear City Council Members, Please respect the voice from these more than 4000 - 5000 Cupertino residents. The signature has been collected only within 30 days, which is incredible! It's a clear sign that Cupertino residents has a strong bounce back to the so-called "SB35" plan from the developer. Vallco is crucial to the future of Cupertino, and will have a huge impact on nearby cities as well. I sincerely hope the city council to respect the city's general plan, and respect the voice from the us, the residents. Best, Ping Gao Cupertino resident Total Control Panel Login To: citycouncil@cupertino.org From: gaoping@gmail.com Message Score: 1 High (60): Pass My Spam Blocking Level: Custom Medium (75): Pass Low (90): Pass Block this sender Custom (55): Pass Block gmail.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level. From:Ann Cleaver To:City Council Subject:Vallco Date:Tuesday, May 7, 2019 6:11:38 PM Please work for the best interests of the people of Cupertino. You work for the citizens. Please move Vallco Tier 2 forward. Place it on the ballot so we citizens can move it forward. We have been waiting for Vallco to be built for a long, long time. It’s an embarrassment to the city of Cupertino. Ann Cleaver Sent from my iPad Total Control Panel Login To: citycouncil@cupertino.org From: anncleaver@mac.com Message Score: 1 High (60): Pass My Spam Blocking Level: Custom Medium (75): Pass Low (90): Pass Block this sender Custom (55): Pass Block mac.com This message was delivered because the content filter score did not exceed your filter level.