CC 07-19-2022
Oral Communications
Written Communications
1 Kirsten Squarcia
From: Danessa Techmanski <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 8:38 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia
Cc: Darcy Paul
Subject: Re: Tonight's Orals--Danessa Techmanski is having technical problems Follow Up Flag: Follow up
Flag Status: Flagged
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 Kirsten,
Sorry my oral comment was a bit garbled. You did a beautiful job trying to read it! I am flat on the floor on an icepack from a back injury and reeling from a reaction to my fourth covid booster—hard to type sideways with one hand, but I knew what I wanted to say! My dog thought my horizontal condition was some sort of game and she pounced on my keyboard creating a meeting sound‐feedback loop that I couldn’t seem to fix.
Here is my exact same speech with typos corrected if anyone wants to read it.
Much appreciated,
Danessa Techmanski
I find it incredibly disappointing that the Cupertino‐Sunnyvale LWV has issued an extremely questionable statement about Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance. It is exactly the same as Santa Clara’s and San Jose’s and their leagues aren’t suing them. I’ve no idea who within the ranks of their organization promoted this, but why wouldn’t the public want lobbying organizations to file with the City‐‐non profit or otherwise. It’s not about silencing anyone and we are all free to speak or write at orals. The question begs—Why wouldn’t we want transparency in Cupertino?
It’s no surprise that residents who are paying attention have the impression that some of our LWV's more active members have strong development interests where they should be impartial.
That distrust began with the LWV’s promulgation of the false narrative that the citizen’s Measure C Initiative would create three‐story houses all over Cupertino despite that they were persistently informed that it was
basically impossible because of floor‐area‐height‐ratios in our city. Our comment cards regarding such were completely ignored at the LWV forums. Shortly after the elections, one of Vallco’s lead architects, Craig Bachelor, bragged that he was responsible for the false claim. His wife, an active League member, was also a Vallco architect.
In May of 2018 the Cupertino Sunnyvale LWV stunned residents by doing their own Vallco forum. Since when does the LWV get involved in developer issues? It got worse at the 2020 Council Candidate Forum where questions smacked of taking pokes at our resident‐
centric candidates and appeared to come straight from the mouth of one of their members who is Vallco’s biggest full‐time supporter. Their apparent candidate of choice 2 was an LWV Board Director at Large and is a die‐hard Vallco supporter. Isn’t the League’s purpose to remain basically ,impartial, but also to apprise the public of any factual and measurable negative impacts? Remember that Vallco and the Rise will leave Cupertino short housing for about 4,000 new workers‐‐a very serious issue considering our current housing crisis and RHNA issues. This was never mentioned. Many who watched the forum were incensed.
The elephant in the room is that one of the League’s very active members is also the editor and writer of the self‐proclaimed Cupertino newspaper,"Cupertino Matters," which appears to be dedicated to the glorification
of Vallco and Main Street alongside weekly smears and criticisms of our City Council (minus their favorite member). That same person is also a regular fixture at our Council orals, on Nextdoor, and anywhere else she can spew her negative Council narrative in a full‐time job to make it look like a resident majority despite that this group is only a small handful of dissenters. Residents have grown weary of the constant negative fodder and the uninformed have the right to know who is who. Is it any wonder why our City would create a lobbying ordinance?
So why would our local LWV object to an ordinance that brings transparency to the table unless it is some misguided, personal deflection by one or more of its own threatened and self‐serving members to tarnish our Council and position their own candidates before the
coming elections?
Danessa Techmanski
30‐year Cupertino Resident
On Jul 19, 2022, at 7:12 PM, Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]> wrote:
Yes, will do
Kirsten Squarcia
City Clerk
City Manager's Office
[email protected]
(408) 777‐3225
‐‐‐‐‐Original Message‐‐‐‐‐
From: Danessa Techmanski <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 7:05 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]>
Subject: Tonight's Orals‐‐Danessa Techmanski is having technical problems
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 Kirsten,
3 Could you please read this in my stead? Darcy called me and I am having technical problems:
I find it incredibly disappointing that the Cupertino‐Sunnyvale LWV has issued an extremely questionable statement about Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance. It is exactly the same as Santa Clara’s and San Jose’s and their Leagues aren’t suing them. I’ve no who within the ranks of their organization promoted this, but why wouldn’t the public want lobbying organizations to file with the City‐‐non profit or otherwise. it’s not about silencing anyone and we are all free to speak or write at orals. The question begs‐‐why wouldn’t we want transparency in Cupertino?
It’s no surprise that residents who are paying attention have the impression that some of our LWVs more active members have strong development interests when they should be impartial.
That distrust began with the LWV’s promulgation of the false narrative that the citizen’s Measure C
initiative would create three story houses all over Cupertino despite that they were persistently informed them that it was basically impossible because of floor‐area height ratios in our city. Our comment cards as such were completely ignored at the LWV forums. Shortly after the elections, one of Vallco’s lead architects, Craig Bachelor, bragged that he was responsible for the false claim. His wife, an active League member, was also a Vallco architect.
In May of 2018 the Cupertino Sunnyvale LWV stunned residents by doing their own Vallco forum. Since when does the LWV get involved in developer issues?
It got worse at the 2020 Council Candidate Forum
where questions smacked of taking pokes at our resident‐centric candidates and appeared to come straight from the mouth of one of their members who is Vallco’s biggest full‐time supporter. Their apparent candidate of choice was an LWV Board Director at Large and is a die‐hard Vallco supporter.
Isn’t the League’s purpose to remain impartial, but also to apprise the public of any factual and measurable negative impacts? Remember that Vallco and the Rise will leave Cupertino short housing for about 4,000 new workers‐‐a very serious issue considering our current housing crisis and RHNA issues. Many who watched were incensed.
The elephant in the room is that one of the League’s very active members is also the editor and writer of the self ‐proclaimed Cupertino newspaper, Cupertino Matters, which appears to be dedicated to the glorification of Vallco and
Main Street alongside weekly smears and criticisms of our City Council (minus their favorite). That same person is also a regular fixture at our Council orals, on Nextdoor, and anywhere else she can spew her negative Council narrative as a full‐time job to make it look like a resident majority despite that this group is only a small handful of dissenters. Residents have grown weary of the constant negative fodder and the uninformed have the right to know. Is it any wonder why our City would create a lobbying ordinance?
So why would our local LWV object to an ordinance
that brings transparency to the table unless it is
some misguided personal deflection by one or more of its own threatened and self‐serving members to tarnish our Council and position their own candidates before the coming elections?
Thank you so much,
Danessa Techmanski
30‐year Resident
From: Caitlin Huang
To: City Clerk
Subject: Oral Communications
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 6:54:52 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 Paul and City Council:
With a few residents that are paid by special interests to constantly attack the City Council, I wanted to just say THANK YOU for all the City Council has accomplished since 2018, when a majority, resident-focused, City Council was elected. Councilman Willey often talks about “the residents.” He is spot-on.
The residents elected all of you and it’s vital that you act in residents' best interests.
Major accomplishments that I have seen in the past six years:
• The official opening of the Apple Park Campus and the wonderful open house that my family attended.
• The funding and completion of the Library expansion and the $1 million in federal funding that was received.
• The overturning of the Vallco Tier 2 approval. The SB-35 project, while flawed, provides a lot of affordable housing. It’s sad that we didn’t have a resident-focused City Council back in 2017 because we gave up the chance for a really great project at Vallco.
• The funding of the All Inclusive Playground at Jollyman Park. • The VIA shuttle, which my elderly parents use when visiting from Taiwan, and the $8.5 million in grant funding received to expand it. • The acquisition of the Lawrence-Mitty land which was discussed earlier tonight.
• The off-leash dog area at Jollyman Park. I bring our golden retrievers there often and they have a great time.
• The response to Covid-19 which resulted in Cupertino having the lowest infection rate in the County and perhaps the entire State. • The seamless transition to remote-working for which the City and its IT director were praised in Forbes Magazine.
• The addition of the Linda Vista and Regnart Creek Trails. • The protected bicycle lanes that will help us become less dependent on cars.
• The paving program that has resulted in the best roads in the region.• The lobbyist registration ordinance. It’s unacceptable when organizations hide behind their non-profit status to lobby the City on behalf of their corporate sponsors. Now one of the worst offenders is suing the City over this vital ordinance.
• The investigation into taxpayer's money being given away to the Chamber of Commerce.
• The recruitment of a new City Manager. The City Council acted quickly to rectify an unfortunate hiring decision. Sometimes these mistakes happen despite best efforts to avoid them.
We are so fortunate to have a resident-focused City Council. It was not always like this. It is vital that Cupertino residents continue to elect Council Members that act in the best interest of the City and its residents, and that are not beholden to special interest groups and their lobbyists. We must not go backward.
Caitlin Huang
Cupertino Resident
From: [email protected]
To: City Council
Subject: Please don"t take away our golf course
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:22:21 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 Council members,
I’m pleading for you not to tear down our beloved golf course. For years, my family and I have enjoyed spending family time playing golf at BBF golf course. I grew up having a place to develop a healthy and active hobby with friends and family, thanks to having the course in my neighborhood. I also enjoy jogging at the Stevens Creek Trail and feel that the addition of more space from tearing down the course does not add anything to the already vast and sufficient outdoor trail.
The golf course is run and managed by very kind people that I adore. To think that they would be out of their retirement job is saddening. I also know that the restaurant is a very popular local spot for the retired to go dancing and meet up. Taking away the restaurant would take away the social venue that the elderly in our community cherish.
Please keep the golf course, instead, the community is fine with more water saving measures to maintain the course such as putting artificial grass on certain less traveled parts of the course. Hope enough people in the community can get heard on this important decision today.
Alicia Sia, Cupertino Resident
10358 Leola Court, Cupertino.
From: Don Halsey
To: City Council
Subject: Possible future homeless site in Cupertino - Blackberry Farm Golf Course Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 12:18:46 PM
Attachments: image.png
image.png
image.png
image.png
image.png
image.png
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.
To the Cupertino City Council:
Below is the City's image of Blackberry Farm golf course and the surrounding areas.
No homeless 'encampments' exist on the BBF golf course, for several practical reasons.
One can wonder if converting BBF to Natural Habitat would invite homeless persons, and the usual attendant problems, to this part of Cupertino. The riparian width runs about 100 to 200 feet.where the creek borders the golf course. If the current BBF acreage were added, that would increase the width to 250 to 600 feet.
As a "what if" we can look at Los Lagos golf course in San Jose, which straddles Coyote Creek. Below is a picture. The riparian width runs about 150 to 490 feet.where the creek borders the golf course.
Los Lagos has about twice greater riparian width - about 320 feet vs 150 feet. More room to camp. Los Lagos has more homeless, too. I suggest they are related.
Below are a few 'encampments' adjacent to the Los Lagos golf course.
It seems likely that widening the Stevens Creek riparian path would invite a homeless problem, if Cupertino already has a homeless problem. But we do!
Here is a link to the full article. https://www.svvoice.com/the-dilemma-of-homeless-encampments-in- cupertino/
Given this information, it is less risky to keep BBF as a golf course than to convert it to Natural Habitat.
The City Council needs to be aware of this.
Don Halsey
650 996 3021
From: Don Halsey
To: City Council
Subject: Blackberry Farm greens fees
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 6:04:49 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.
Blackberry Farm non-resident greens Fee is $18.00
Sunken Gardens, a similar course, has a weekday non-resident rate of $23.00. (For residents it is $16 and $21.)
This suggests BBF could achieve 28% [23/18 = 1.278] more revenue if it raised its rates to match Sunken, assuming no price elasticity of demand.
The City's Use Analysis points to a $2 million total cost advantage by keeping Blackberry Farm open (over 25 years) compared to converting it to Natural Habitat. That's $2 million of taxpayer dollars saved. For any City Council member to vote for Natural Habitat given the numbers just doesn't make sense. But if you changed the BBF revenue projection to be 28% higher, that would be .28 x $9.4M = $2.6M more revenue, hence $4.6M advantage over Natural Habitat.
Some golfers may be so passionate about the game that they ignore financial considerations.
Likewise some habitat lovers.
From the viewpoint of a taxpayer
, though, keeping BBF open is the financially responsible thing to do.
Don Halsey
650 996 3021
From: Munisekar
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; Munisekaran Madhdhipatla Subject: Help protect local residents home ownership.
Date: Monday, July 18, 2022 5:20:33 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 & Council,
My name is Muni Madhdhpatla, an engaged resident of Cupertino and vice chair of the planning commission. I am writing this email as a resident representing myself; not in any official capacity.
I have sent multiple emails in the past on this topic; this is one more email on it. I will continue diving this point until I see something done about it.
I would like our city to explore ways to enable home ownership to hard working local residents of our community. It is unfair to allow foreigners not living in this country to purchase beautiful homes in our city totally unhindered and rent it back to our residents at unaffordable levels. Who knows how those foreigners acquired that wealth as the financial controls are not as stringent as ours; it could be drugs or bribery or blood money acquired through the mafia.
Foreign Buyers Rebound, Purchase Nearly $60B in U.S. Properties - DSNews Please do something to help our local residents realize the American dream of owning and living in a home instead of becoming perennial renters subjected to unfair competition from overseas. Many countries and provinces around the world have implemented several schemes such as Foriegn ownership tax to help on this front.
I understand this is a free market and we should allow the market to work; unfortunately, it is not a free market when people are subjected to different sets of rules. The foreign investors can buy stocks and other products available in the free market; but not the homes that are essential for living.
Thank you.
Muni Madhdhipatla
Cupertino Resident
CC 07-19-2022
Special Meeting
Item No. 1
Lawrence-Mitty Update
Written Communications
From: Liang Chao
To: City Clerk
Cc: Matt Morley; Dianne Thompson (she/her)
Subject: Communication shared during 7/19 Council meeting - Lawrence-Mitty Park Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 9:15:09 PM
Attachments: image001.png
image002.png
image003.png
image004.png
image005.png
image006.png
image007.png
image008.png
image009.png
image010.png
The images I shared at the Council meeting. For your record for the 7/19 Council meeting. ==============
Liang Chao
Vice Mayor
City Council
[email protected]
408-777-3192
From: Caitlin Huang
To: City Clerk
Subject: Comments to be read for item 1, Lawrence Mitty Project.
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 5:51:52 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, Vice-Mayor, and City Council:
I am so happy that we will have a new park on the east side of Cupertino near my house. Thank you Mayor Paul for being the driving force to get this done.
The new park should be named Darcy Paul Park, but hopefully not for another 50 years or so.
I hope that there can be a fenced in area for off-leash dogs as part of the new park. I currently take my golden retrievers all the way across town to the Jollyman Park off-leash dog area, or drive even further to Sunnyvale. We need an off-leash dog area on the east side of town. I know that it will take many years to develop this park, but I plan to be in Cupertino for a long time.
A big thank you to the City Council for all you do to make Cupertino a wonderful place to live. You have a tough job and receive a lot of unfair attacks from special interest groups and the media but you persevere. Keep up the great work.
Caitlin Huang
Cupertino Resident
From: EAC Chair
To: City Clerk
Subject: Lawrence-Mitty Park project - Public comment to be read into the record Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 5:51:33 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.
Good evening, Mayor Paul and Councilmembers,
My name is Annie Yang, and I am the Chair of the Environmental Action Committee of the Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society. I am also a Cupertino resident. I am really glad that the city has decided to develop this site as a park. I would love to see the area restored to some of the natural habitat it once was to bring back some healthy biodiversity. As mentioned in the Environmental Summary Report, this site is adjacent to Saratoga Creek, an important wildlife corridor that runs through largely developed areas that lack natural space for resident and migratory species to shelter, forage, and breed. In fact, one California species of special concern has been identified as using the area now. Once the park is developed, I am sure more species, special-status or otherwise, will also be found in the park.
Therefore, in order to protect the ecosystem and allow for safe recreation, I encourage three things.
Number one, please plant all native trees and plants appropriate to the riparian habitat of Saratoga Creek. Please also protect the existing native trees that are there.
Number two, put trails as far away from the creek as possible. I've walked on trails in the south bay that are too close to water, and you can see inevitable bits of trash and trampling by humans or pets along on the banks.
Finally, please do not put artificial lighting at the park. The City Council, members of the public, and environmental experts have all discussed here previously the dangers of artificial light at night to birds, insects, and the ecosystem, especially in sensitive areas such as the location of this park.
Again, I am looking forward to seeing healthy natural habitat thrive at Lawrence-Mitty Park.
Thank you.
Annie Yang
Annie Yang
Environmental Action Committee Chair
Santa Clara Valley Audubon Society
22221 McClellan Rd
Cupertino, CA 95014
[email protected]
From: Eugene
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: City Council, July 19, Agenda #1 Lawrence Mitty Park 1. Subject: Consider receipt of an update on the Lawrence- Mitty Park project.
Date: Monday, July 18, 2022 10:42:33 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.
For public comment for meeting on July 19th:
Mayor Paul, Councilmembers and City Manager,
I'm a longtime resident of Cupertino and I am excited about Lawrence Mitty Park. I wanted to provide 3 suggestions as you are developing the park:
1) I urge you to include native trees and plants in the park. Native trees and plants support biodiversity while non-native trees can actually harm biodiversity. Various species, insects, birds, and animals native to the area have co-evolved around trees and plants that are native, over thousands of years. These native trees and plants are sources of food, shelter, and protection, and therefore important to the health of the local ecosystem. 2) I urge that the city consider placing the bike path as far away from the creek as possible to reduce noise disruptions to the numerous species living in and around the creek. Studies have shown that man-made sounds disrupt the delicate ecosystems in nature. A multitude of animals and insects rely on sound to communicate, to hunt, to escape predators. 3) I urge the city to reduce artificial lighting in the park. Artificial lightning disrupts many animals' natural biological rhythms and can cause damage to the ecosystem. Some animals rely on the darkness of night to hunt, while others need darkness to rest. They don't have the luxury that humans have of going to their bedrooms and closing the curtains.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Eugene
From: Rose Grymes
To: City Clerk; City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject: Lawrence Mitty Park
Date: Monday, July 18, 2022 3:40:20 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.
Mayor Paul, City Council Members, and City Manager:
Thank you for the opportunity to address plans for Lawrence Mitty Park. A new park in Cupertino is a wonderful development, to be enjoyed and appreciated by residents and visitors now and for decades to come. Your focus on parks and green spaces advances Cupertino’s commitment to sustainability and environmental stewardship. In fact, in very fundamental ways it contributes quite directly to Cupertino’s future.
Several associated plans; General Plan, Bikes/Pedestrian Plan, Parks and Rec Plan, and CAP 2.0; address balancing resident and business interests with the requirements of the natural environment sustaining us all. Adding a tree canopy as a priority in the CAP 2.0 plan is a significant benefit. Please include, also, native plantings—grasses, shrubs, and trees. This offers longterm advantages through reducing the need for irrigation and providing essential habitat for native fauna. Keeping bike and running paths away from quiet, contemplative enclaves allows both humans and plants/animals to find sequestered resting places. Finally, please keep artificial lighting to a minimum.
Artificial lighting is not only a monetary cost for installation and power, it has detrimental impacts on the natural environment. Essential safety concerns should be met, but low intensity and motion-activated lighting can minimize the impact of ‘un’-natural lighting.
Thanks for the opportunity to provide input,
Rose Grymes
22111 Lindy Lane
Cupertino 95104
From: Connie Cunningham
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: City Council, July 19, 5:30 pm--Agenda #1 Lawrence Mitty Park Date: Sunday, July 17, 2022 3:26:50 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.
City Council, July 19, Agenda #1 Lawrence Mitty Park 1. Subject: Consider receipt of an update on the Lawrence-Mitty Park project. Recommended Action: Receive an update on the status of the Environmental Summary Report, public outreach process, and joint commission recommendations for the Lawrence-Mitty Park project and provide input.
Mayor Paul, Councilmembers and City Manager,
Thank you for the excellent update about the new Lawrence Mitty Park. This is an exciting topic—a new park in Cupertino—I have walked the length of the planned park from Bollinger Road to Lawrence and Mitty at the pedestrian crossing. My friends who live near this park, are also excited about walking this trail. I noted the Yellow Warbler discussed in the report. I am a bird lover so am particularly interested in bird life here.
Several plans referenced, General Plan, Bike-Ped Plan, Parks and Rec Plan, and CAP 2.0 all speak to balancing the needs of nature and the needs of the community. It is heartening to read about the community input supporting the local wildlife habitat and use of parks that promote education about nature and play that allow time for interaction with nature. The CAP 2.0 plan is different from the existing CAP: the addition of the tree canopy as an important climate change strategy.
1. I urge you to include California native trees, plants and grasses. This park is large enough to accommodate them. It already has several of California native trees so new plants will support existing natural growth.
2. I urge designers to put the bike trail as far from the creek as possible to keep the faster traffic away from the quieter area of the creek. The bikes will still be in the vicinity of the creek and can enjoy it a little farther away than children and adults who are walking/playing.
3. Eliminate artificial lighting. Lights disrupt wild life passage. Artificial lighting disturbs the natural biological rhythms of birds, insects, animals, and plants. Many studies show that light pollution impacts humans, too, leading to moods changes, difficulty with sleeping, as well as cancer.
Thank you for the time to comment on this exciting new park.
Connie Cunningham
Cupertino Resident and homeowner for 34 years
Audubon Society Member
CC 07-19-2022
Item No. 28
Appointment of Pamela
Wu, City Manager
Written Communication
From: JOHN KOLSKI
To: Darcy Paul; City Council; Kitty Moore; Jean Bedord; Jean Bedord; Lauren Sapudar Cc: Richard Lowenthal
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 5:06:48 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.
DO YOU PEOPLE KNOW HOW TERRIBLE YOU ARE AND HOW
THE RESIDENTS OF THIS CITY FEEL ABOUT YOU?
WORTHLESS IS THE WORD THAT DESCRIBES ALL YOUR
ACTIONS.
YOU ALL SHOULD BE FIRED. EVEN A PAST MAYOR SPEAKS
OF YOUR TERRIBLE LEADERSHIP.
YOU ARE DESTROYING THE CITY.
MAKING THIS CITY LOOK LIKE A JOKE TO EVERYBODY IN
THE VALLEY.
YOU HIRE YOUR FRIENDS ONLY SO THEY GET ANOTHER
RETIREMENT PLAN AFTER THE LEAVE IN TWO OR THREE
YEAR OF DOING NOTHING FOR OUR CITY AND YOU HIRE
PEOPLE HOW KNOW NOTHING ABOUT THEIR JOBS. YOU
DON'T EVEN DO CURRENT SEARCHES WHEN HIRING. YOU
JUST HIRE ANYONE OR AS I SAID FRIENDS!
AGAIN YOU ARE HIRING A CITY MANAGER LIKE THE LAST
THREE WHO HAVE NEVER BEEN A CITY MANAGER LIKE YOU
HIRE EVER POSITION INCLUDING THE CITY ATTORNEY.
IT IS NO WONDER WE ARE IN LAWSUITS COST US
MILLIONS.
Retention of city staff is a major concern well expressed by Richard Lowenthal, former mayor, speaking out in a Letter to the Editor in the July 14, 2022,Mercury News: “Fractious Council costing Cupertino leaders”. Instead of opening a new search, the revolving door continues with Mayor Darcy Paul extending an offer to a candidate previously interviewed a year ago, Pamela Wu, who currently serves as Community and Economic Development Director in San Bruno. Her resume demonstrates a lengthy and consistent background in planning, though it does not appear that she has any experience as a city manager or assistant city manager. Her contract calls for quarterly performance reviews and requires coordination with the city council on a press release if she resigns. She is scheduled to start on August 29, if her contract is approved. The bigger question is timing on this hiring decision, especially with council composition changing in less than four months. Should a new council elected in November have the opportunity to choose a new city manager, or should this lame-duck council?
JOHN KOLSKI
THIS IS A CASUAL COMMUNICATION AND ALL STATEMENTS ARE MY OPINION The information contained in this e-mail message is intended only for the CONFIDENTIAL use of the designated addressee named above. Recipients should not file copies of this email with publicly accessible records. If you are not the designated addressee named above or the authorized agent responsible for delivering it to the designated addressee, you received this document through inadvertent error and any further review, dissemination, distribution or copying of this communication by you or anyone else is strictly prohibited.
CAUTION: . Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
CC 07-19-2022
Item No. 31
Fiscal Policy Inventory
Written Communications
From: Jean Bedord
To: City Clerk
Subject: Agenda Item #31 Fiscal Policy Inventory
Date: Tuesday, July 19, 2022 4:50:03 PM
Attachments: Enterprise Risk Assessment Report 12-9-20-PG-5.pdf 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 put the following 1 page PDF on the screen when I am speaking on this agenda item tonight.
Thank you.
Jean Bedord
Cupertino Resident
Enterprise Risk Assessment Report | 2
FOR INTERNAL USE OF CITY OF CUPERTINO ONLY
The risk assessment evaluates the organization’s risks across the following categories, organized alphabetically for each risk level. The table below presents the summary results of the assessment.
RISK CATEGORY IMPACT LIKELIHOOD PREPAREDNESS TRAJECTORY High Risk
Procurement and
Contracting High Moderate-to-High Low-to-Moderate Increasing Moderate -to-High Risk
Governance Moderate-to-High Moderate-to-High Low-to-Moderate Flat External Environment High Moderate-to-High Moderate Increasing Human Capital and
Resources Moderate-to-High Moderate-to-High Moderate Increasing Information Technology Moderate-to-High Moderate Moderate-to-High Increasing Planning and Strategy Moderate-to-High Moderate-to-High Low-to-Moderate Flat Policies and Procedures Moderate-to-High Moderate-to-High Moderate Flat Moderate Risk
Capital Improvement
Program Moderate-to-High Moderate Low-to-Moderate Flat
Compliance and Financial
Reporting Moderate Low-to-Moderate Moderate Increasing
Ethics and Fraud, Waste,
Abuse Moderate-to-High Low-to-Moderate Low-to-Moderate Flat Internal Controls Moderate Moderate Moderate Flat
Operations and Service
Delivery Moderate Moderate Moderate Flat
Organization and Staffing Moderate Moderate-to-High Moderate Flat Risk Programs Moderate Low-to-Moderate Low-to-Moderate Flat Low -to-Moderate Risk
Accounting and Finance Moderate Low-to-Moderate Moderate Decreasing Asset Management Moderate Moderate Moderate-to-High Decreasing Management and
Leadership Moderate Low-to-Moderate Moderate-to-High Decreasing Public Safety and Security Moderate Low-to-Moderate Moderate-to-High Increasing Reputation and Public
Perception Moderate Moderate Moderate-to-High Flat