Written Communications (Updated 09/05/2024) — Cupertino City Council, September 4, 2024

CC 9-04-2024
Oral
Communications
Written Comments
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; David Stillman; Chad Mosley Subject: Oral comments: 09/04/24 city council meeting. Cancel the DeAnza Blvd lane removals.

Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 4:07:57 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 Clerk,
Please include the below in written communications for 09/04/24 council meeting. Thank you.

Dear Mayor Sheila, Cupertino City Council members, Manager Wu, David and Chad, I wish to bring to your attention feedback from the San Jose residents of changes made on Saratoga Ave by way of the experiences shared on Nextdoor. Many council members monitor nextdoor and several even respond there. As our council does not I am sharing this for your benefit to learn from the experience of Saratoga Ave lane changes that have been a source of great anguish to residents of that area.

Please do not repeat the same with DeAnza. Please cancel or halt the lane elimination on DeAnza Blvd immediately. At a minimum please halt the project until this is put on agenda as an explicit item to be voted on.

Please see the neighborhood feedback below on Saratoga Ave.

Thank you.

From: Liana Crabtree
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: written communication: 9/4/2024 City Council meeting Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 3:21:11 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.

Honorable Mayor Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, Council Members Chao, Moore, and Wei:

Please include this letter as part of written communication (oral communication) for the 9/4/2024 City Council meeting.

I respect and appreciate the dedication and work of current and recent past resident-focused Council Members Kitty Moore, Liang Chao, Steven Scharf, Darcy Paul, and Jon Willey. All have centered listening and responding to all residents and their concerns in their public service.

It seems financial interests blame prior resident-focused Councils for the State’s decision to delay its certification of Cupertino’s sixth cycle Housing Element (2023-2031), which is ridiculous.

According to Cupertino’s own timeline, the 6th Cycle Housing Element submissions that were rejected happened during the term of today’s Council majority (2023-2024), where Kitty Moore opposed changes introduced by Council majority members because they deviated from staff recommendations.

Engage Cupertino: https://engagecupertino.org/public-documents Redevelopment will happen throughout existing communities, but must move forward incrementally. Some forced upzoning by the State through construction-mandate legislation was probably necessary to relax local rules about adding ADUs and modest height (3-4 stories) multi-family homes in and adjacent to existing neighborhoods. But, there must be a plan to pay for infrastructure improvements and maintenance beyond saddling significant costs on current residents. And, punitive measures, such as the State-mandated “Builder’s Remedy”, to force disproportionate, high-density redevelopment islands in neighborhoods with insufficient infrastructure just serves to anger and distract residents.

I support the re-election of Council Member Kitty Moore and the election of former Planning Commissioner Ray Wang to the Cupertino City Council in November 2024. I believe both will prioritize Cupertino residents’ needs and concerns in their work as council members.

Sincerely,
Liana Crabtree
Cupertino resident
From: Ram Namita Sripathi
To: City Clerk
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 2:33:56 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.
lDear City Clerk, Please include in written communications for oral comments for 09/04/24 city council meeting. This is for the de anza bike lane project Thank you.

From: Santosh Rao
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fw: Please postpone or suspend DeAnza Blvd lane reductions.

Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 2:01:38 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 Coty Clerk,
Please include in written communications for oral comments for 09/04/24 city council meeting. Thank you.

Begin forwarded message:

On Thursday, August 29, 2024, 7:26 PM, Santosh Rao <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor Sheila Mohan, City Council Members, Manager Wu, Chad, and David,
I recently learned of the plan to eliminate one lane in each direction on DeAnza Boulevard, and I am deeply concerned about both the decision and the process by which it was reached.

As someone who regularly attends City Council meetings, I was surprised that such a significant change was not explicitly brought before the Council or the broader public. This project stands to impact every resident and commuter in Cupertino, and yet it seems to have moved forward without the transparency and public input that a decision of this magnitude warrants.

I urge you to immediately halt this project and reassess the plan in light of the following concerns:

1. Lack of Explicit Agendization: The lane reductions were not clearly listed as an agenda item in any City Council meeting, depriving residents of a direct opportunity to engage with and understand the implications of this
decision.

2. Inadequate Public Input: The decision was not subjected to the robust public consultation that it deserves. The Bike Pedestrian Commission, while important, does not
sufficiently represent the views of the majority of road users, and its meetings are not widely attended or accessible.

3. Insufficient Traffic Studies: It appears that a
comprehensive traffic study was either not conducted or not shared publicly. Without a full analysis of the potential impacts, this decision lacks a solid foundation.

4. Lack of Council Oversight: The City Council was not
given the opportunity to weigh in on this critical change, nor were council members presented with the findings of any studies or analyses that may have been conducted.

5. Failure to Inform Residents: Both Cupertino residents and those in neighboring cities were not adequately informed about this project. A change of this scale should have been communicated clearly and openly to all who would be
affected.

6. No Collaboration with Neighboring Cities: There was no effort to collaborate or communicate with adjacent cities like Sunnyvale, Saratoga, and San Jose, whose residents and
commuters will also feel the impact of these lane reductions.

7. Lack of Regional Consideration: This decision was not agendized or discussed in the city councils of neighboring jurisdictions, effectively excluding input from the wider community of commuters who rely on DeAnza Boulevard
daily.

8. Absence of Broader Public Engagement: The broader
public, including commuters from other cities, was not given a chance to provide input on this change, despite the fact that it will significantly affect their daily lives.

9. Overreliance on the Bike Pedestrian Commission: The
sole reliance on the Bike Pedestrian Commission for input is concerning. This commission, while valuable, does not
represent the broader spectrum of roadway users and its meetings do not facilitate wide public engagement.

10. Lack of Transparency on lane reductions
during Funding Approval: When seeking funding
approval for this project, the lane reductions were not disclosed to the City Council or the public, undermining trust in the decision-making process.

Given these serious stakeholder engagement gaps and the potential negative impacts on our community, I strongly urge you to halt this project immediately. It is crucial that decisions of such significance are made transparently, with comprehensive analysis and meaningful public involvement. DeAnza Boulevard is a vital thoroughfare, and any modifications to it must be carefully considered with input from all stakeholders.

I trust that you will take swift action to correct this situation and ensure that future decisions are made with the transparency and public engagement that the residents of Cupertino deserve.

Sincerely,
Santosh Rao
Cupertino resident
Driving on DeAnza Blvd daily and often multiple times a day since 1998
From: Connie Cunningham
To: City Clerk; City Council; Pamela Wu
Subject: 2024 Sep 4, City Council, Oral Communications, Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 1:03:45 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 Mohan, Vice Mayor Fruen, Councilmembers, City Manager and City Staff:

I am Connie Cunningham, Chair, Housing Commission, speaking for myself only.

I want to thank the City Council and City Manager and Staff for having created and passed a remarkable Housing Element that has been approved by the state. Thank you, too, for the excellent rezoning effort that will allow homes to be built on the housing element sites.

I am disappointed that the City Council votes were not unanimous. I am disappointed that two of the Councilmembers, Kitty Moore and Liang Chao, are not serious about working together with the region to combat scarcity of housing for all incomes and abilities.

Because these two Councilmembers have not been serious about the Housing Element, many residents remain confused about why there are builders remedy projects within our city limits. Residents need to know that the previous city council, including these two Councilmembers, delayed the housing element for so long, that our city lost its local control. If residents understand that simple point, they will know who let them down.

It is easy to divide us residents, because of the fear that people have of change. The fear that new neighbors will be different, that new neighbors will not want the same things that the existing residents want. Things like safety, clean air and water, and good schools.

We are, in fact, all of us residents, wanting those things. The fears are in how we will maintain those things while growing the number of residents. Fear is caused by avoiding the facts and thinking new neighbors will be different from us.

I ask that the City Council and all residents take pride in the accomplishment of the housing element with its rezoning . By inviting new neighbors into our city, we will increase all the things that we would like to have, and together will solve any issues with parking or traffic that may happen.

Let us seriously approach the lack of housing in our region. I urge Councilmember Moore and Councilmember Chao , to reconsider their approach. I ask them to become serious about helping people of all incomes and abilities to have a chance at housing within our city borders. We are not expected to solve all the problems of the region. We are asked to do our fair share. Please be serious.

Sincerely,
Connie Cunningham
From Connie's iPhone
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: City Council 9/4 Oral Communications
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:00:41 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,
In mid-February I reported the mis-allocation of funds from our below market rate housing fund toward other uses.

We have yet to be informed as to whether or how this has been rectified.

I ask that you provide a full accounting for the last five years of this fund and also explain the staff hours that were allocated to it – because it seems so high.

Today you have before you a potential affordable housing project that could benefit from these funds – let us make sure that we have money to give to it when that time comes.

Related to the Housing Element and Builder Remedy and SB330 projects, can the City please provide a study session?
There has been an inordinate amount of misinformation floating around and I hope that the city can set it straight.

Thanks,
Rhoda
Virus-free.www.avg.com
From: Santosh Rao
To: Sheila Mohan; City Council; Pamela Wu; Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Request to move oral comments to after ceremonial items and before presentations.

Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 7:23:41 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.

Hello Mayor Sheila,
I request you to please move oral comments to after ceremonial items and before presentations for the 09/04/24 city council meeting.

Oral comments allows for comments for items not on the agenda. As council has not met in a while a large number of comments may be pending. I request you to be considerate to residents and not keep them waiting for presentations items to complete.

Thank you.

Thanks,
Santosh Rao
From: Neil Park-McClintick
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: Re: Council owes the community honest around BR projects and the HE Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 7:19:56 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.

Apologies—this was meant for oral communications
On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 7:03 PM Neil Park-McClintick <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Mayor and Members of the City Council,
My name is Neil Park-McClintick, and I am writing as a member of the community with deep roots in Cupertino, having lived, worked, and gone to school for over 15 years combined.

Thank you staff and Council for bringing our city into compliance around the housing element, which is more than just meeting some kind of legal mandate. This is a contract that can and will bring us together as a community, around issues of planning which have long divided our neighborhoods and led to hate, bullying, harrassment, and a degradation of our values.

We have a real opportunity to heal deep wounds in our politics, but it starts with ALL members of the City Council being honest with the public by setting the record straight when it comes to the Housing Element update and the resulting builder's remedy discoure that threatens to bring back that toxicity and division.

Honesty in this case means being willing to tell the numerous residents—who presently feel caught off guard and agitatted around the builders' remedy—the truth: that we lost our local control because of the last City Council's poor governance around the housing element and the repeated obstructionism of Councilmembers presently still on the dais, like Councilmember Moore, who had the privilege of getting to use the rest of Council as a protective buffer as she repeatedly abstained or voted no throughout the housing element process.

Cupertino was subject to the Builder’s Remedy because the city did not have a state- certified Housing Element providing for 4,588 homes by the state deadline of January 31, 2023 because leaders like CM Moore and former Commissioner Ray Wang failed to take meaningful action around housing.

But beyond this too, we need to continue to be honest with our community that we have to build homes at all income levels, even when it might feel unnatural at certain densities or in certain neighborhoods, and even if it's not politically opportunistic to do so.

We deserve leaders who prioritize the rule of law and housing community members above their own personal political agendas.

From: Sherman Wang
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Please Postpone Lane Reductions on De Anza Blvd Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 5:34:37 PM
Attachments: A. Project Area De Anza Blvd.pdf
B. Project Plans De Anza Blv.pdf
D. July 16, 2023 Minutes.pdf
C. Dec 22, 2022 Minutes.pdf
E. June 6, 2023 Staff Report.pdf
F. April 16, 2024 Staff Report.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.

Dear City Clerk,
Please include the email below in written communications for oral comments for today's (9/4/24) City Council meeting.

Thank you,
Sherman
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sherman Wang <[email protected]
>
Date: Tue, Aug 6, 2024 at 11:52 PM
Subject: Please Postpone Lane Reductions on De Anza Blvd To: <[email protected]
>
Dear Mayor Mohan,
I am a 35-year resident of Cupertino living on Rodrigues Ave. A recent news article on San
Jose Spotlight brought to my attention a very concerning change to De Anza Blvd slated for construction later this month. I am asking that you please postpone this project until City Council has had a chance to further study its impact on all residents and local businesses.

Details of the De Anza Blvd buffered bike lane project are attached and below:

City website describing the project
Attachment A: the project on De Anza Blvd spans from Homestead to Bollinger Attachment B: the project plans to:

Reduce traffic lanes from 4 lanes down to 3 lanes going northbound between Stevens Creek and Lazaneo (see pages 8-10 of the pdf);
Reduce traffic lanes from 4 lanes down to 3 lanes going southbound between Stevens Creek and Bollinger (see pages 11-17 of the pdf). The news article incorrectly states that lane reduction will only happen between Stevens Creek and McClellan.

Narrow existing lanes in 3-lane traffic areas on De Anza Blvd City's 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan from the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission that describes the origins of the project
Reasons to postpone this project for further study:

Traffic Effect: De Anza Blvd is the major corridor in Cupertino serving residents going northbound towards 280/Sunnyvale and southbound towards 85/Saratoga. De Anza Blvd is severely jammed during morning and afternoon rush hours and weekends. What effect would narrowing existing lanes and removing one lane altogether have on our traffic? In my conversation with the City's Transportation Manager David Stillman, David said (paraphrased):
"No recent traffic study has been done to calculate the effect of this project." David pointed me to the 2016 Bike Plan
. However, the 2016 Bike Plan does not
have or reference any traffic simulations performed or data collected. In fact, the meeting minutes from the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission meeting on December 22, 2022 and July 19, 2023 (Attachment C & D, highlighted on Page 4 for both pdfs) confirms that no simulation or data collection was performed for this project even though it was planned to be done.
"Reducing lanes does not affect traffic flow. Timing of lights will be done so that no meaningful impact on traffic will occur." Respectfully, and anecdotally, I disagree. There are a number of retail, office and after-school care businesses along De Anza Blvd in which entering cars back up onto the street or slow down traffic significantly. Reducing a lane on De Anza Blvd is undoubtedly going to cause further congestion. Also, if lights will be better timed to help traffic flow, why isn't that already being done?
Outreach to Residents: According to Suyesh Shrestha, the Public Works project manager on this project, he is not aware of any notification or solicitation of input from residents or businesses for this project. When I asked David, he stated that the 2016 Bike Plan received input from the public during Bicycle Pedestrian Commission meetings. This seems to me, at its best, an oversight. Imagine if the Teen Commission decided to make Memorial Park only available for Teens and no other residents during the weekends, stating that they received input from the public during Teen Commission meetings. Understandably, the wider public is not expecting a commission's decision to have such far-reaching effects, and they should have a chance to voice their support or opposition.

City Council Review: As far as I can tell, the only discussions that City Council has had regarding this project occured on June 6, 2023 and April 16, 2024 (Attachment E & F) related to funding. The staff reports do not provide an accurate description of the lane reductions and only describe the effect as "narrowing existing vehicle traffic lanes." The project description on the city website
similarly only states that the project will result in
"narrower vehicle lanes." If it hasn't already, City Council (I imagine) would want to perform further diligence on the effects of permanently narrowing its major corridor.

Timing is of the essence
.

While City Council is currently on summer hiatus, David Stillman said that the contractor for this project has already been hired and will likely start in a few weeks at the end of August. I respectfully ask that you consider postponing this project until City Council, residents and local businesses can further study and provide input on its lasting effect.

Thank you,
Sherman Wang
*I find it important here to note that I am not opposed to the spirit of this project, which is to provide further means of safe bike transportation in our city. I support that goal but am concerned that the project as currently designed will be detrimental in ways that should be studied more thoroughly.

CITY OF CUPERTINO
CITY OF CUPERTINODE ANZA BLVD BUFFERED BIKE LANESSTRIPING PLANS FOR THE CORRIDOR OF DE ANZA BLVDCITY PROJECT NO. 2023-01VICINITY MAPCALTRANS STANDARD PLANS & STANDARDSPECIFICATIONS (DATED 2023) AND THE CITY OFCUPERTINO STANDARD DETAILS ANDSPECIFICATIONS 6/11/2024
© 2023 Microsoft Corporation © 2023 Maxar ©CNES (2023) Distribution Airbus DS CITY OF CUPERTINO

CITY OF CUPERTINO

CITY OF CUPERTINOBIKE BUFFER DETAIL (TYP)DETAIL 39DETAIL 39A12" DIAGONAL WHITE@24' O.C. TYPDETAIL 27B

1 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
FINAL MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
December 21, 2022
Final Minutes
The meeting was called to order at 7:00 p.m.

ROLL CALL:

Present: Jack Carter (VC), Gerhard Eschelbeck, Ilango Ganga (C), Grace John, Erik Lindskog

Absent: None
Staff: David Stillman, Staff Liaison
Others Present: Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer
APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. November 16, 2022 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Minutes MOTION: Commissioner Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Vice Chair Carter to approve the minutes as presented.

MOTION PASSED: 5‐0

POSTPONEMENTS
No Postponements
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
Jennifer Shearin, public speaker sent the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission a letter with proposed locations for new bike racks. It was important that bike racks be placed in locations that were useful. She also mentioned debris found in bike lanes, and the bike lanes did not seem to ever be cleaned.

Chair Ganga mentioned that the comments were received and there was a plan to bring this item on the agenda in January 2023.
2 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
OLD BUSINESS

2. Future Agenda Items (Ganga)
Carmen Road Bridge
Education on How to Use Two‐Stage Left Turn Boxes
Path between Lincoln Elementary and Monta Vista High School The Impact of Semi‐Rural Designation on Bike and Ped Projects/Priorities Reassess the Intersection at Bubb Road/McClellan Road
Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phases 1‐3
Vision Zero (Workplan Item)
Lead Pedestrian Walk Interval (LPI) (start the pedestrian green before vehicles) Lawson Middle School Bike Path
Input from Seniors on the Bicycle Pedestrian Improvements Bollinger Road Safety Corridor Project
AB 43 – Summary and how Commission can support implementation (to what extent we can reduce speed lim
its)
Bicycle Licensing (to prevent bike theft)
Bicycle Facilities (Workplan Item)
Land Donation from Richard Lowenthal (Carter)
Review Progress toward BPC Objectives (Six months to annually) BPC Input at the VTA BPAC Meeting Regarding Adult Bicycle Education (Lindskog/Ganga)
League of American Bicyclists Application – Due 2/2023
Review Bicycle/Pedestrian Improvements and Provide In
put from the Public
Pedestrian Safety around Shopping Centers
Update from Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
Examine Pedestrian Walkways for Safety
Chair Ganga wanted a link of the future agenda items posted on the website. David Stillman, Transportation Manager said that could be done.

3. Cristo Rey Drive Bicycle Striping Improvements (Stillman) David Stillman, Transportation Manager gave a presentation on Cristo Rey Drive Bicycle Striping Improvements.

Jennifer Shearin, public speaker said the road was extremely curvy and that made it a safety risk. A hybrid option was the most confusing, and most expensive; Class 2 lanes were the best for cyclists.
3 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
Matt W, public speaker relied on Cristo Rey Drive to access to the City of Cupertino. He echoed Ms. Shearin’s comments and said there should be some physical separation, but of the options presented, Class 2 bike lanes were the best.

Commission Lindskog inquired if a Class 2 bike lane were installed, were there places that the bike lane would be along where cars were parked. Mr. Stillman said there was no parking on the section of Cristo Rey Drive within the City limits and the City had no jurisdiction over the portion of Cristo Rey within the City of Los Altos city limits. Commissioner Lindskog thought Class 2 bike lanes would be the best solution.

Vice Chair Carter recalled there was about 30 feet of pavement, which left five feet on either side for bicyclists. Bicyclists were going at speed when going downhill and having to ride on five feet of road was tight.

Commission John felt it was hard to maneuver around cars when going downhill. Cristo Rey Drive was like Bollinger Road. She did notice cars parked on the street. She was not convinced about staff’s proposal but did not have answers either.

Commissioner Eschelbeck repeated that there were constraints and agreed that the Class 2 bike lane was the best option. Chair Ganga thought, ideally, it was good to have Class 2 bike lanes on both sides and it was confusing to divide the road into segments where some parts were Class 2, and some parts were sharrows. There was a lot of traffic on the weekends, and he wanted to make sure the roads were safe for bicyclists.

Chair Ganga inquired if it was possible to widen the road to add a Class 2 bike lane on both sides, and secondarily, would the other jurisdictions be able to share the cost. Mr. Stillman clarified that Class 2 bike lanes could exist with the existing road width. It was not practical to widen the roads currently due to substantial grade changes, and it would be an expensive project. That option was a possibility but that would be a much longer‐term solution.

Vice Chair Carter preferred a Class 2 bike lane going uphill and sharrows going downhill. That allowed for more room in the road. Chair Ganga preferred to do Class 2 on both sides.

Commissioner Eschelbeck inquired if it was possible to further reduce the speed for vehicles.

Mr. Stillman said a speed survey would need to be done to determine what the speed was, and he needed to follow the California Vehicle Code recommendations. Commissioner Eschelbeck asked, assuming the Commission settled on a Class 2 bike lane tonight if the speed reduction survey could be done independently. He did not want to delay the one for the other. Mr.

Stillman said the striping of the bike lanes would help in reducing the speed limits because it provided a visually narrower lane for vehicles to drive in, which forced drivers to slow down.

Chair Ganga asked about the parking issue. Commissioner John did see cars parked. Mr.

Stillman said it was illegal to park along the Cupertino section of Cristo Rey Drive. He saw them parked outside the City’s boundary and there were no parking signs as well. 4 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
Chair Ganga wanted to know if there was any data about vehicle counts and bicycle usage. Mr.

Stillman said there were some counts done back in 2018 and 2019 but he did not have any data at hand. There were not bike counts on Cristo Rey Drive.

Commissioner Lindskog commented that if a Class 2 lane was made on the downhill side, the bicyclists could take the vehicle lane. If there were problems with the parking, the installation of a Class 2 bike lane discouraged that. He suggested a buffered bike lane along where there were parked cars.

Chair Ganga was concerned about hazards in relation to the vehicle shoulder because there was only five feet on either side. Mr. Stillman understood there was a standard curb and gutter on both sides. A thorough look into the area was to be done before striping started. If the Commission wanted additional studies, this could be done, and then this item could be brought back to the Commission.

MOTION: Commissioner Eschelbeck moved, seconded by Commissioner Lindskog to recommend that:

1. Staff survey the street for unsafe conditions prior to installation of Class II bike lanes; and

2. Recommend to the City Council to:
a. Install Class II bike lanes in both directions on Cristo Rey Drive in Cupertino; and
b. Survey and adjust, if appropriate, the speed limit following Class II striping installation.

MOTION PASSED: 3‐2, Carter and John No

NEW BUSINESS

4. De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lane Project
Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer gave a presentation on the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lane project.

Vice Chair Carter wanted to know what happened to the bicycles going north, after the lane reduction, understanding some cars needed to do a lane change to get onto the freeway. Mr.

Aumentado replied there was still a bike lane there and it was easy to put a two‐foot buffer.

Chair Ganga wanted to know if any traffic studies were done. Mr. Aumentado said not lately.

Seema Lindskog, public speaker wanted to know why there were separated bike lanes being proposed, as opposed to protected bike lanes; separated bike lanes were worse. Given that striping the road did not work, why would separated bike lanes be pursued.

Jennifer Shearin, public speaker agreed with Ms. Lindskog. The bolt down barriers were cheaper than what was done on McClellan Road. The buffered bike lanes were going to be a 5 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
vast area of conflict between cars merging on the freeway and bicyclists going straight. She wanted to know if there was going to be a change in signals.

Commissioner Lindskog pointed out that the City of San Jose made buffered bike lanes on De Anza Boulevard and reduced their lanes, so he did not see why the City could not do the same.

He wanted the vehicle lanes as narrow as possible to make room for bicyclists, as well as removing a lane on the road. Vice Chair Carter agreed and said taking a lane away right before Home Depot eliminated the bottle neck in that area. He was more concerned about the area by the freeway.

Commissioner Eschelbeck wondered why bollards would not be placed on De Anza Boulevard in this phase. Mr. Aumentado commented that the budget was the main constraint and agreed to look at the cost. Commissioner Eschelbeck asked if one side could have a separated bike lane installed and then have the other side installed later. Mr. Aumentado said that was not in the Work Plan. Mr. Stillman remarked that the intent of the project was to fulfill the objective of the Bike Plan, which was vetted through the Commission. There were some other reasons why the buffered bike lanes were moving forward, as opposed to the protected bike lanes. These included higher speeds on De Anza Boulevard, which introduced other potential safety problems, additional cost, and ongoing maintenance and upkeep of the protected bike lanes. He recommended continuing with the buffered bike land and said it provided an extra layer of protection beyond what was there now. This did not preclude installing a protected bike lane in the future. Chair Ganga agreed with Mr. Stillman and said this project was already approved by the Council.

Vice Chair Carter asked about bus stops and wanted to know if the proposed work was going to make it harder to install bus stops later. Mr. Aumentado said no.

Commissioner Lindskog remarked that if there was a concern for high speeds on De Anza Boulevard, was it not better to install the concrete barriers. If more aggressive planning was made, was there a possibility for grants. Mr. Stillman reiterated that the project that was approved was the buffered bike lane.

Chair Ganga asked about studies and remarked that it was always good to have data on hand.

Mr. Aumentado said traffic collection data was to be done.

NO ACTION TAKEN

5. Bicycle Safety Aspects Including Stop Sign Behavior, Lights and Helmet Use, Education and Enforcement (Ganga)
David Stillman, Transportation Manager gave a presentation on bicycle safety aspects in the City of Cupertino.

Seema Lindskog, public speaker suggested using data to guide decisions. The best way to make things safer was to build safer cycling infrastructure. 6 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
Jennifer Shearin, public speaker thought improving safety was good but giving away items such as bike lights or helmets worked. Education was needed for motorists as well as bicyclists.

Commissioner Lindskog remarked that both cars and bicyclists did not follow the rules but the impact for vehicles not following the rules had a much bigger impact. It was difficult to enforce bicyclists stopping at stop signs. He suggested having the police encourage bicycle safety rather than enforce it. He suggested focusing on vehicle safety first, then bicycle safety.

Commissioner Eschelbeck thought enforcement needed to be equal to both parties. He commented about the hours of darkness, especially in the winter, and the lack of lighting for bicyclists. This was a problem.

Vice Chair Carter felt rules did not seem to apply to bicyclists. He found that because so many bicyclists did not follow the rules that it confused drivers when bicyclists did follow the rules.

Both groups needed to follow the rules. Since bicycle tests were not required like vehicle tests were required, people did not know how to ride on the roads.

Commissioner John thought bike safety was everyone’s responsibility. There needed to be some type of program to encourage bike safety and the resources needed to be easily available.

Proactive education programs needed to be encouraged more. She suggested having the rules posted on the website.

Chair Ganga remarked that the discussion was not about motorists verses the bicyclists. While pedestrian infrastructure was being made safer, it also needed to be ensured that bicyclists followed the right guidelines so accidents were avoided. Preventative measures were the subject at hand, it was better to be defensive, so collisions did not happen. He saw people not following the correct guidelines for bicyclists, which could cause harm. He discussed resources available and referenced Valley Transportation Authority, Silicon Valley Bicycle Coalition, and others in San Francisco. He encouraged continued partnership with Safe Routes to School.

Regarding enforcement that was established, he wanted to have an open discussion and ensure things were done safely.

Commissioner Lindskog pointed out that there were violations for vehicles, which needed to be enforced better, such as speeding and many others. Education was needed for drivers, but it was clear they did not know what rules to follow.

Vice Chair Carter felt that if there were classes for drivers that got ticketed, then there should be classes for bicyclists. The same was the case for pedestrians needing to follow traffic laws.

Enforcement was needed for all groups.

MOTION: Commissioner Lindskog moved, seconded by Vice Chair Carter to recommend that staff consider the following action plan:
1) Bicycle and pedestrian safety education resource availability 2) Encourage third‐party education classes to come to the City of Cupertino 7 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
December 21, 2022
3) Driver safety education with respect to bicyclists and pedestrians, for example flyers 4) Programs related to bicycle lights

MOTION PASSED: 5‐0

STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS

6. Staff Update and Commission Activity Report (All)
David Stillman, Transportation Manager relayed that there was a kick‐off meting with the Vision Zero consultant. The first public meeting and an update to the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission was coming soon. A survey was to be open from January 6‐30, 2023, for the naming of the I‐280 trail. The pedestrian scramble at Bubb Road/McClellan Road was expected to be activated
January 23, 2023.

Commissioner Lindskog gave a presentation on the VTA BPAC Meeting on December 7.

Vice Chair Carter reported that the Mayor’s meeting was cancelled and the Safe Routes to School meeting did not happen for December. Vice Chair Carter volunteered to attend these meetings in January 2023.

ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:40 p.m.

SUBMITTED BY:

____________________________
David Stillman, Staff Liaison

Note: Any attachments can be found on the Cupertino Website https://www.cupertino.org/our‐city/agendas‐minutes

1 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2023
FINAL MINUTES
MINUTES OF THE REGULAR MEETING OF THE
BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION
July 19, 2023
Final Minutes
The meeting was called to order at 7:02 p.m.

ROLL CALL:

Present: Ilango Ganga, Hervé Marcy (VC), Joel Wolf (C), John Zhao

Absent: Grace John
Staff: Marlon Aumentado, Staff Liaison
Others Present: Timothy Weisburg, Deputy Director, Marketing APPROVAL OF MINUTES

1. June 21, 2023 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission Minutes
MOTION: Commissioner Zhao moved, seconded by Vice Chair Marcy to approve the minutes as presented.

MOTION PASSED: 3‐0, Ganga, John Absent

POSTPONEMENTS
No Postponements
ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
None
WRITTEN COMMUNICATIONS
None
OLD BUSINESS

2. Future Agenda Items (Wolf)
Work Plan
 Vision Zero – In Progress
 Bicycle Facilities – In Progress
2 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2023
 Lawson Middle School Bikeway – Completed
 New Bicycle Pedestrian Plan (FY 24‐25)
Grants
 Know/Understand Fed Grant Funding with Caltrans on updated bike ped planning
 Understand/Educate on what funding standards are (Fed/State) Studies / Plans
 Staff update ‐ Rodrigues Ave Speed Study and Street Crossing Behavior  Staff update ‐ Stevens Creek Corridor Vision Study
 Path between Lincoln Elem and Monta Vista HS
 Examine Pedestrian Walkways for Safety
Projects
 Staff update ‐ Stevens Creek Boulevard, Phases 2‐3
 Staff update ‐ Safe Routes to School (SR2S)
 Carmen Road Bridge
 Homestead Bike Lane Study (City of Sunnyvale Project) Education
 Impact of Semi‐Rural Designation on Bike and Ped Projects/Priorities – more information required
 Leading Pedestrian Walk Interval (LPI) – Start pedestrian green before vehicles  AB 43 – Summary: How commission can support implementation to reduce speed limits – more information required
 Adult Bicycle Education
Miscellaneous
 Status – VTA BPAC Adult Bicycle Education (Lindskog)
 Bicycle Licensing (Theft Prevention)
 Review Progress toward BPC Objectives & Grant Applications (6mo)  Review Bike Ped Improvements and Gather Public Input / Senior Input  VTA Pedestrian Access to Transit Plan – Focus Area J: Cupertino (SCB & Stelling)

Commissioner Ganga joined the meeting at 7:14 p.m.

NO ACTION TAKEN

NEW BUSINESS
3 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2023

3. Go Safely, California – Education Program Presentation from the California Office of Traffic Safety (Weisburg)
Timothy Weisberg, Deputy Director Marketing, California Office of Traffic Safety gave a presentation on Go Safely, California, an education program from the California Office of Traffic Safety.

Vice Chair Marcy asked about a graphic on the PowerPoint that was greyed out. Mr. Weisberg replied that represented the total fatalities since 1980.

Commissioner Ganga noticed a steep rise in crashes. There were three main causes, driving under the influence, distracted driving and speeding but he wanted to know who the most affected were. Mr. Weisberg said pedestrians because they did not have the protection a person would have in a vehicle, such as seatbelts and airbags. There was a drastic increase involving pedestrians since 2010. Before 2010 fatalities in California were below 3,500, after 2010, they increased between 4,200 and 4,300; impairment and speeding made things dangerous.

Commissioner Ganga wanted to know how COVID‐19 effected this data. Mr. Weisberg said there was a plateau in 2019, then there was an increase in vehicle speeds because people were not facing the traffic they had before the pandemic. It’s speculated that during the pandemic, alcohol played a part in reckless driving. When the pandemic was over, reckless driving continued. There were a lot more people walking and biking during the pandemic as well.

Commissioner Ganga wanted to know if there was anything specific the City of Cupertino could do, such as partnering with other programs through Go Safely. Mr. Weisberg proposed bike rodeos, bike programs, outreach, and said Go Safely was promoting their survey; he suggested having City staff fill out their survey. This December, Go Safely was able to fund some grants for education programs but the money was only to support events related to safety awareness, no capital improvements.

Commission Zhao suggested sharing the survey at the Bike Fest in September 2023. Mr.

Weisberg agreed to table an event. Vice Chair Marcy asked if it was possible to promote the survey in the Cupertino Scene. Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer agreed to check that.

Chair Wolf heard that the Office of Traffic Safety (OTS) gave out grants for large amounts of money. Mr. Weisberg commented that the Federal government was heavily invested in pedestrian and bicycle safety and there were a lot of funds being given out. Go Safely worked with over 100 agencies and processed over 450 grant applications.

Commissioner Ganga wondered if the grant funds were able to be used for the development of Cupertino’s Vision Zero program. Mr. Weisberg said it depended on what the money was specifically used for; if it was used to educate, inform, or develop some type of plan that had an objective for Vision Zero, such as an education campaign, then yes. Go Safely was pushing education on new infrastructure, such as the two‐way bike boxes Cupertino has. 4 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2023
Commissioner Ganga suggested adding an item on Future Agenda Items regarding education programs and grants the City could apply for.

NO ACTION TAKEN

4. Cupertino Transportation Division Presentation (Aumentado) Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer, gave an overview of the Transportation Division, who the team is and what projects were being worked on.

Commissioner Zhao asked about McClellan Road Ph. 3 and wanted to know the scope. Mr.

Aumentado said it was an intersection modification where the effort was to connect the two Class 4 bike lanes on McClellan Road and Pacifica Drive. The intersection needed to be realigned, vehicle movements reconfigured, new mast arm poles were installed, the road was widened, amongst other things. Commissioner Ganga asked if the plan was on the website. Mr.

Aumentado was in the process of building a webpage.

Chair Wolf inquired about the simulation (sim) project on Bollinger Road. Mr. Aumentado explained there was going to be a micro‐sim of the corridor, which was a small model of the roadway used to understand what would happen to the traffic with proposed changes, in this case a road diet. For Bollinger Road, the simulation showed traffic impacts if the road was reduced from two lanes to one.

Commissioner Ganga inquired if the sim took real data and projected ‘what if’ scenarios. Mr.

Aumentado replied that the sim would be fit into the scope of work for the project. The sim was able to use existing traffic data. He explained a Request for Proposals would be initiated for traffic consultants, then staff would choose which company had the best approach to simulate the corridor.

Chair Wolf wanted to know if a demonstration could be done where lanes were narrowed to one, temporarily. Mr. Aumentado did not think that was advisable.

Commissioner Ganga wanted to know if a micro‐sim was put in place on De Anza Boulevard for the De Anza Buffered Bike Lane Project. Mr. Aumentado said a sim was not performed for that project, and the information for that project was based off existing traffic data and traffic observations.

Vice Chair Marcy asked if the Transportation Planner was working part‐time on the Via Cupertino Shuttle (now Silicon Valley (SV) Hopper). Mr. Aumentado replied that the Transportation Planner mainly worked on the SV Hopper amongst a number of other things.

Vice Chair Marcy wanted to know if the recent grant of $8.6 million covered the entire cost of SV Hopper. Mr. Aumentado said yes and commented that the City of Santa Cara was also participating in an expansion phase. Vice Chair Marcy wanted to know how big the fleet was for SV Hopper. Mr. Aumentado did not have that information at this time. 5 Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Regular Meeting
July 19, 2023
NO ACTION TAKEN
STAFF AND COMMISSION REPORTS

5. Staff Update and Commissioner Activity Report (All)
Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Engineer relayed that the Pavement Maintenance Project was finishing, there were new buffered bike lanes as part of that on Prospect Road. The City Council approved the Cristo Rey Bike Lanes project and work for that was going to start in the fall. Last night the City Council a pproved the Highway Safety Improvement Project (HSIP) grant.

Commissioner John was supposed to attend the Mayor’s meeting. Commissioner Zhao wanted to know if there was an update from the Subcommittee on the Bike Fest. Vice Chair Marcy said there was communication to have the Public Works Director set up a meeting with a representati
ve of the Rotary Club and Chamber of Commerce for installation of the bike racks on private property. When racks were installed on private property, the City still had input because they contributed money toward the racks. The Rotary Club was looking at artistic bike racks.

Chair Wolf announced the thirtee nth annual Bike Summit on August 24. There was a $40 registration fee. They were going to discuss various bike issues in Santa Clara County.

Vice Chair Marcy planned to attend next month’s Mayor’s meeting and Safe Routes to School (SR2S) meeting.

Mr. Aumentado reported that Erik Lindskog, VTA BPAC representative, said there wa s no VTA
BPAC report.

ADJOURNMENT
Meeting adjourned at 9:01 p.m.

SUBMITTED BY:

____________________________
Marlon Aumentado, Staff Liaison

Note: Any attachments can be found on the Cupertino Website https://www.cupertino.org/our‐city/agendas‐minutes

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 6, 2023

Subject
Consider adoption of a Resolution to request the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) allocate Fiscal Year (FY) 2023/2024 Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA 3) Pedestrian/Bicycle Project funding for the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Project.

Recommended Action
Adopt Resolution No. 23-XXXX (Attachment A) requesting the MTC allocate $166,259 from FY 2023/2024 TDA 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project funding to the City of Cupertino’s De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Capital Improvement Programs (CIP) Project.

Reasons for Recommendation
The Transportation Development Act (TDA) has long been a cornerstone of California State (State) transit funding. The State TDA funding allows counties to establish a quarter-cent sales tax to finance a wide variety of transportation projects. Specifically, TDA 3 provides funding annually for bicycle and pedestrian projects.

Santa Clara County’s (County) “Guarantee” is a share of MTC’s TDA 3 funds, which are distributed to jurisdictions based on 2022 California Department of Finance population figures. These funds may be saved for up to four years, plus one year for the programing of funds. The City has accumulated a total of $414,955, which includes saved funds and rescinded funding requests from prior years.

Proposed TDA 3 projects must be ready to implement within one year of their submittal in the application cycle. The following project types are eligible for TDA 3 funding:

1. Construction and/or engineering of bicycle or pedestrian projects.

2. Maintenance of a Class I shared-use path and Class IV separated bikeways.

3. Bicycle safety education programs (no more than 5% of County total).

4. Development of comprehensive bicycle or pedestrian facilities plans (allocations to a claimant for this purpose may not be made more than once every five years).

5. Restriping of Class II bicycle lanes and buffered bicycle lanes.

In 2019, the Public Works Department requested $166,259 to help fund a Bike Boulevards Project but rescinded the funding request in February 2022 because the scope of the project had changed. Since TDA 3 funds may only be saved for up to four years, the City must program the rescinded funds, at the latest, in FY 2023/2024 to avoid having the funds revert to the Countywide pool in the next cycle.

The Department of Public Works recommends $166,259 of FY 2023/2024 TDA 3 Pedestrian/Bicycle Project funding be allocated to the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Project. The project was initiated in FY 2022/2023 as part of the approved CIP project fund and is currently funded by the City at $525,000.

The TDA program requires each participating jurisdiction to have a Bicycle and Pedestrian Advisory Committee review and prioritize TDA 3 bicycle and pedestrian projects and plans. On April 19, 2023, Cupertino’s Bicycle Pedestrian Commission recommended that the City Council approve Cupertino’s TDA 3 allocation request for use on the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Project.

In accordance with MTC Resolution 875, all claimants that have received an allocation of TDA 3 funds are required to submit an annual fiscal and compliance audit to MTC and to the Secretary of the Business and Transportation Agency within 180 days after the close of each fiscal year. All TDA audits are due to MTC by December 31 of each year.

Sustainability Impact
The recommended improvements are intended to encourage bicycle use, which will reduce single occupancy vehicle trips and lead to reduced vehicle emissions. This will help the City achieve air quality and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals.

Fiscal Impact
The approval of this Resolution satisfies the MTC/TDA requirement, resulting in the City receiving TDA 3 funds in the amount of $166,259. These funds will be appropriated to the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes CIP Project (420-99-262 440-438). The project’s current City-funded appropriation ($525,000, explained above) can be offset by the amount of the grant funds received. The balance of the TDA 3 funds are targeted to complete an update and consolidation of the City’s Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plans.

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
This project was found to be categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section number 15301, existing facilities, as bicycle lanes previously existed within the same right-of-way of the project.

_____________________________________

Prepared by: Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Civil Engineer Reviewed by: David Stillman, Transportation Manager

Reviewed by: Susan Michael, Capital Improvement Programs Manager Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Interim Director of Public Works Reviewed by: Matt Morley, Assistant City Manager
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Resolution and Application

CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: April 16, 2024

Subject
Award a construction contract for the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Project in the amount of $529,680 and approve a budget modification in the amount of $5,533.

Recommended Action

1. Award a construction contract for the De Anza Boulevard Buffered Bike Lanes Project (Budget Unit 420-99-262) in the amount of $529,680 to Chrisp Company;

2. Authorize the City Manager to execute the contract when all conditions have been met; and

3. Adopt Resolution No. 24-XXX approving budget modification #2324-237, approving an appropriation of $5,533 in the Capital Improvement Fund (420) and a transfer of $5,533 from the Capital Reserve Fund (429) to the project (budget unit 420-99-262 900-905) for a total authorized project expenditure of $529,680.

Reasons for Recommendation
In June 2016, the City Council adopted the Bicycle Transportation Plan (BTP).

The BTP is a long-range planning document designed to address the present and future needs of bicycling within the City of Cupertino. Infrastructure projects are identified in the BTP and organized into three tiers. Tier 1 projects have the highest priority with expected implementation within five years. Tier’s 2 and 3 projects score lower than Tier 1 projects with respect to priority, however, implementation of these tiers can be initiated sooner to take advantage of funding or other opportunities, or to complement the development of other transportation improvements.

The construction of Class II buffered bike lanes on De Anza Boulevard between Homestead Road and Bollinger Road (Project) is identified in the BTP as the highest- ranking Tier 2 project. De Anza Boulevard is a major north-south principal arterial across Cupertino, a designated truck route along most of its length, and has a posted speed limit of 35 mph. Currently, standard Class II bike lanes exist along both directions of De Anza Boulevard within Cupertino, and no buffer zone exists to increase the separation between bicycle and vehicle traffic.

The project will enhance the safety of existing Class II bikeway facilities on De Anza Boulevard between Homestead Road and Bollinger Road by narrowing existing vehicle travel lanes and installing a painted buffer zone to create separation between the bicycle lanes from the vehicle lanes. Recently the City of San Jose completed the installation of a painted buffer zone separating the Class II bike lanes from vehicle traffic lanes along De Anza Boulevard within their City limits south of Bollinger Road. The improvements from the project will enhance safety for cyclists by providing a continuation of buffered bike lanes into the City’s jurisdiction in addition to calming vehicular traffic speeds.

The Project was included in the approved Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-2023 Capital Improvement Program (CIP) budget, with a total funding amount of $525,000. The project funding was supplemented by $166,259 in funding from the Transportation Development Act Article 3 (TDA 3), administered by the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC). The TDA 3 funding does not increase the overall CIP project budget but does decrease the amount of City funds required to construct the project.

The City advertised the Project for bid on February 16. On March 12, the City received one responsive bid (detailed in the table below).

Bidder Total Bid Amount
Chrisp Company $529,680.00

The Department of Public Works reviewed the Chrisp Company bid documents for completeness, confirmed the contractor’s experience and qualifications, and determined the bid to be responsible, per the Instructions to Bidders, and the Cupertino Municipal Code. Therefore, staff recommends awarding a construction contract to Chrisp Company for a total contract amount of $529,680. Since this contract amount exceeds the project funding by approximately $5,000, a budget modification will be required if this contract is awarded.

A construction contingency allows for unforeseen conditions and is a typical contracting practice. Due to the nature of the project and scope of work, staff is not recommending a construction contingency for this project.

A draft construction contract is included as Attachment A, while the full project specifications can be found on the City’s “Business Opportunities” webpage and https://apps.cupertino.org/bidmanagement/index.aspx. Construction is expected to begin in May 2024 and be completed in June 2024 in tandem with CIP Project 2020-12, De Anza Boulevard and McClellan Road/Pacifica Drive Intersection Modifications.

Sustainability Impact
The recommended improvements are intended to encourage bicycle use, which will reduce single-occupancy vehicle trips and lead to reduced vehicle emissions. This will help the City achieve air quality and greenhouse gas emission reduction goals.

Fiscal Impact
The FY 2022/2023 budget allocated $525,000 for the Project, which is partially offset by grant funds received ($166,259).

Awarding a construction contract to Chrisp Company for a total contract amount of $529,680 exceeds the project funding by $5,533. A budget modification and transfer of $5,533 from the Capital Reserve Fund (429) to the Capital Improvement Fund (420) is required to address the funding shortfall.

Current Fiscal Summary:

Current Funding Status Amount
Budgeted Funds for De Anza Boulevard
Buffered Bike Lanes $525,000
TDA 3 funding allocated $166,259
Reduction of City Funding required for the
project ($166,259)
Traffic Data Collection ($800)
CEQA Filing Fee ($53)
Design (In-house) ($0)
Remaining Budget: Funding available after
Expenses/Expenditures to date $524,147

Estimated Funding Impact Amount
Estimated Construction Total (this agreement) ($529,680) Proposed Budget Modification: transfer from
Capital Reserve $5,533
Remaining Budget: projected Funding available
after Construction Contract award $0

California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA)
This project is categorically exempt from CEQA pursuant to CEQA Guidelines section 15301 (maintenance of existing facilities), as bicycle lanes previously existed within the same right-of-way of the project.

_____________________________________

Prepared by: Marlon Aumentado, Assistant Civil Engineer Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Reviewed by: Matt Morley, Assistant City Manager
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:

A – Draft Contract
B – Draft Resolution
From: Sherman Wang
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Inappropriately approved CIP Project
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 5:32:18 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 Clerk,
Please include the email below in written communications for oral comments for today's (9/4/24) City Council meeting.

Thank you,
Sherman
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Sherman Wang <[email protected]
>
Date: Mon, Aug 19, 2024 at 12:27 AM
Subject: Inappropriately approved CIP Project
To: <[email protected]
>, <[email protected]>
Cc: <[email protected]>, <[email protected]>
Hi Pamela and Christopher,
I am a Cupertino resident concerned about the inappropriately approved De Anza Buffered Bike Lane Project. This CIP was originally approved by City Council in the FY2022- 2023 budget on June 9, 2022, with a budget modification and contract awarded on April 16, 2024.

In both instances, when Staff presented this project to City Council for budget approval, there was specifically no mention of lane reductions that would occur on De Anza Blvd to accommodate the buffered bike lanes. This was a blatant omission of a key element to this project that would have likely changed or garnished additional discussion from City Council on the project's merits. In fact, I have confirmed with at least one Councilmember present for both meetings that they were unaware of the lane reductions associated with the project.

I would ask that you:

1. Postpone any scheduled work on lane reductions on De Anza Blvd. According to the City Transportation Manager, work is likely to start in the next week or so.

2. Add this to the next City Council agenda for discussion. Councilmembers must be apprised of the full scope of the project and vote on whether to keep it in the CIP budget.

Please see below regarding the historical communications that were provided to City Council regarding this project:

On June 7, 2022, the supplemental staff report
described the project as:
"The scope of this project includes adjustment of current lanes along DeAnza Boulevard, which will provide the space for the addition of a buffer to separate the bike lanes from the vehicle travel lanes, as recommended in the bike plan and by the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. The project does not include physical delineators or barriers in the buffer area." On April 16, 2024, the staff report described the project as:
"The project will enhance the safety of existing Class II bikeway facilities on De Anza Boulevard between Homestead Road and Bollinger Road by narrowing existing vehicle travel lanes and installing a painted buffer zone to create separation between the bicycle lanes from the vehicle lanes."
The 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan
that is referenced in both staff reports does not actually describe the scope of the project. On Page 3-13, the notes on the project state:
"Study reconstruction of medians and/or lane reduction in both directions to accommodate buffered bike lanes; coordinate with City of San Jose & VTA. See Studies section" Thank you, and I look forward to your reply.

Sherman Wang

From: Yoshio Chou
To: City Clerk
Subject: Fwd: Object to Summer-hill home (on Linda vista Dr) and Vista Heights Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 1:51:37 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:

Please include in written communications for the next city council meeting.

Much appreciated,
Tom Chou
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Yoshio Chou <[email protected]
>
Date: Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 11:00 PM
Subject: Object to Summer-hill home (on Linda vista Dr) and Vista Heights To: <[email protected]
>, <[email protected]>
Dear Cupertino City Council members,
I am a Cupertino resident living in Linda Vista Dr for more than 15 years. All of my neighbors and I are worrying about potential fire hazards and irreversible environmental impact. We would like to further emphasize a few points demonstrating the infeasibility of, and therefore strong objection, to these plans.

My family and neighbors could see wild deer walk down from the ridge near Linda Vista Park to the neighborhood from time to time. The ridge adjacent to Linda Vista Park is the safe passage for wild deer to access the park and roads around Monta Vista. This open-space, low- elevation habitat is rare for wildlife animals in the Bay Area, in our human-crowded South Bay - when was the last time you got to see wildlife roaming in low-elevation close to human habitat these days in Bay Area cities? It is simply rare and precious.

Second, this development proposal would bring many more people into the neighborhood.

They would have to access Bubb and McClellan road for daily commute. Every day, there are numerous students that need to use these two roads to get in and out of Abraham Lincoln Elementary School, John F. Kennedy Middle School and Monta Vista High School. The traffic congestion around schools is already a severe problem, with a student getting killed just a few years ago in front of 7-11 because of heavy traffic on McClellan. We can't worsen traffic conditions on these main artilleries of the neighborhood any further. Allowing such plans next to this neighborhood design where existing traffic infrastructure already cannot sustain and has led to student death is simply irresponsible.

We ask council members to change the zone back to R1 and remain the original residential density.

Sincerely yours,
Tom Y.H. Chou
Linda Vista Dr. Cupertino
From: WILL
To: City Clerk
Subject: Re: Opposition to Proposed 20-Unit Condominium Development at 20739 Scofield Drive Date: Thursday, September 5, 2024 12:21:00 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,
Please include my previous email in written communications for the next city council meeting.

Thank you.

On Wed, Sep 4, 2024 at 10:41 PM WILL <[email protected]> wrote:

Dear Officer,
I hope this email finds you well. My name is Bohan Ren, a homeowner at 20671 Rodrigues Ave in Cupertino, and I am writing to express my strong opposition to the proposed development at 20739 Scofield Drive. The recent proposal to replace a single-family home with a five-story, 20-unit condominium in an R1-10 zoning district raises significant concerns for me and many of my neighbors.

First and foremost, the safety of our community is a critical issue. The proposed site is just two blocks away from William Faria Elementary School, an area already congested during the morning and afternoon school rush. The introduction of a multi-family building of this scale will inevitably lead to increased traffic, further exacerbating these congestion issues and posing serious risks to children and families. Additionally, the narrow residential streets will not be able to accommodate the increased volume of vehicles, and there will likely be insufficient parking for 20+ cars, leading to further strain on the neighborhood’s infrastructure.

Moreover, this project would dramatically change the character of our neighborhood.

Cupertino’s R1-10 zoning districts are intended for single-family homes, which contribute to the quiet, suburban atmosphere that residents cherish. A five-story multi-family building is completely out of scale with the surrounding properties and would create a precedent for further high-density developments in areas where they are not suitable. I strongly believe that this site should remain dedicated to single-family homes, as altering it to a multi-family development would fundamentally change the character of our community.

Additionally, I am concerned about the environmental impact of this project. The removal of trees and the construction of a large building will alter the landscape significantly, potentially disrupting local ecosystems. The loss of green space and mature trees, which provide essential shade and contribute to air quality, is not something to be taken lightly.

The long-term effects on the environment must be carefully considered before proceeding with such a development.

While I understand the need for housing, I believe that developments should be thoughtful and considerate of the existing community. This proposal, however, is not in harmony with our neighborhood’s character and would introduce a host of safety, environmental, and aesthetic issues that could degrade the quality of life for current residents.

I respectfully urge the city to reconsider this proposal and work towards a solution that better aligns with the needs and values of our community. I would be grateful for the opportunity to discuss this matter further and to share the concerns of my fellow neighbors.

Thank you for your time, consideration, and respect for our neighbors' opinions and interests.

Sincerely,
Bohan Ren
--
Cheers,
Bohan Ren
From: Nancy Chang
To: City Clerk; Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly; Piu Ghosh (she/her); Pamela Wu; City Council Subject: Oppose Summer-Hill Homes and Vista Heights Project Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 11:47:37 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 Clerk and Members of the Cupertino City Council, Please include in written communications for the next city council meeting. Thank you.

We are writing to express my deep concerns regarding the proposed redevelopment of 10857 Linda Vista Drive and Linda Vista Park (Summer-Hill Homes and Vista Heights) area into a higher-density residential neighborhood. While we understand the need for housing, we strongly believe that this project would significantly harm the quality of life in our community, which has long been cherished for its quiet and peaceful environment.

Traffic and Safety Concerns
Linda Vista Drive and its surrounding streets are small, residential roads that are not designed to handle the increased traffic that hundreds of additional housing units/cars would bring. The influx of cars would create significant congestion, particularly during school drop-off and pick-up times. Our community is home to three schools where young children walk and bike to school every day. The safety of these children should be our top priority.

In addition to the daily traffic, the construction phase of this project would introduce heavy machinery and trucks to our streets for several years. This not only endangers pedestrians, particularly young students, but also poses a serious risk of accidents. We must not forget the tragic death of Ethan Wong, a Monta Vista High School student on October 27, 2014, who lost his life after being struck by a construction truck while biking to school. The proposed development increases the likelihood of such heartbreaking incidents, bringing to light the serious safety risks that arise when construction and increased traffic intersect with areas heavily used by students.

This incident underscores the dangers that come with increased vehicle presence, particularly large construction trucks, in residential and school zones. The tragic loss of a young life is a stark reminder that safety must be prioritized when planning any developments in our community.

Environmental and Fire Safety Hazards
Cupertino is a community that values its natural environment, and the current low-density neighborhoods contribute to our city’s green spaces and tranquility. Increasing the density of housing in this area would put a strain on local infrastructure, including emergency services. Higher density inevitably brings more people, more vehicles, and potentially more fires. In the event of an emergency, evacuation could become chaotic and life-threatening, particularly given the narrow streets that could easily become gridlocked. Increased congestion, both from residents and construction vehicles, can slow down emergency response times. In an emergency, even a few minutes can make the difference between a small emergency and a catastrophic one.

Moreover, higher density housing means more combustible materials in a smaller area, leading to a greater fire load. In the event of a fire, this could cause the fire to spread more quickly and intensely, making it harder for firefighters to control. The very nature of townhomes, often being built close together, increases the risk of a fire spreading from one unit to another. This close proximity reduces the effectiveness of firebreaks and makes it easier for flames to leap from roof to roof.

Moreover, the added pressure on our water supply, sewage systems, and other utilities could lead to long-term environmental degradation, reducing the livability of our community.

This development could also disturb the local wildlife and increase pollution levels, further detracting from the peaceful and healthy living conditions we currently enjoy.

Impact on Community Character
The character of Cupertino has always been defined by its quiet, suburban feel—a refuge from the hustle and bustle of the surrounding urban areas. Transforming the Linda Vista area into a high-density neighborhood would fundamentally alter this character. We would lose the very essence of what makes Cupertino special: a safe, family-friendly environment where neighbors know each other and where children can play outside without fear.

We urge the City Council to reconsider this proposal. While we recognize the need for additional housing, we believe that there are more appropriate areas in Cupertino for such developments—areas that would not compromise the safety of our children, the peace of our neighborhoods, or the environmental integrity of our city.

Thank you for considering our concerns. We look forward to your response and hope that you will prioritize the well-being of our community in your decision-making process.

Regards,
Nancy Wu
Resident at Castleton St.,Cupertino
CC 9-04-2024
#1
Closed Session - City
Manager Evaluation
Written Comments
From: Eric Schaefer
To: City Clerk
Cc: City Council
Subject: City Council Meeting Sept. 4, 2024
Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 8:25:06 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.

City Clerk,
Please add my comments to the public record.

Thank you.

Re: Agenda #1, PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF THE CITY MANAGER If we measured how much power the City Manager has accumulated, she would get a high rating. However, the City Manager's role is to serve the Council and ultimately the residents.

The residents and Council have been sidelined as many significant decisions are removed from public debate by placement in the Consent Calendar. The direct democratic process that involves the community is diminished.

Council members are held at arms length from Staff and cannot get the information they need to make informed decisions. The process of representative democracy is diminished.

My city government has become less responsive to it's constituents through the concentrated power of the City Manager.
--
Eric Schaefer
Cupertino Resident
“Diversity jolts us into cognitive action in ways that homogeneity simply does not.” ― Katherine Phillips
From: Anne Ezzat
To: City Council; City Clerk
Subject: City Manager"s Eva;uation
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:04:08 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 understand that Ms. Wu's performance is being evaluated today and as a resident I felt compelled to weigh in on her performance. I had high hopes that Ms. Wu would do a good job when she began her employment with the City of Cupertino, but no more. She interrupts and corrects staff while on the dias. She treats residents curtly and dismissively, promising to get back to them regarding their issue, but comes across as trying to silence discussion in a public forum. She has taken over the council member's office--don't council members deserve working space in city hall?
Please encourage Ms. Wu to act in a fashion that brings credit to her employer, not in a fashion that makes residents cringe when they need to interact with her.

Best regards,
Brooke Ezzat.

From: Peggy Griffin
To: City Council; Kristina Alfaro; City Clerk
Subject: 2024-09-04 City Council Meeting ITEM1 - City Manager Evaluation Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:00:57 PM
Attachments: image001.png
2024-06-18 CC Mtg-Supplemental Reports.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.

Dear City Council, City Clerk and Director Alfaro,

REQUESTS:

1. Please include this email and the attachment as part of Written Communications for the 2024-09-04 City Council Closed Session Item #1 City Manager Wu’s Evaluation.

2. Please also include this in her personnel file.

City Manager Wu has not followed the powers and duties of her position as City Manager.

1. She has created new positions without approval. (2.28.040 D)

2. She has not kept the City Council fully informed regarding the financial conditions/needs of the City. (2.28.040 G)

3. She has not followed City Council directions. (2.28.040 O)

The following are details in support of the above statements.

2.28.040 D. “The power to appoint…does not include the power to create a new position…”
Yet, City Manager Wu created the Economic Development Manager position without approval!

2.28.040 G. “To keep the City Council at all times fully advised as to the financial conditions and needs of the City;”
Not only has this not been done, but the information has been late, delayed and misleading.

The Council and public has been told we are in a financial crisis then she continues to authorize non-essential studies, projects and consultants spending millions of dollars while cutting services to residents.

Contracts are “approved” by Council then 1-2 months later appended to add more! She continues to mislead the Council and the public.

EXAMPLE: Recently, she described the 19400 Stevens Creek Blvd building as a “turnkey” building. This implies it is ready to move in without alterations which is no where near the truth! This is an old building requiring significant seismic and other upgrades! She has already hired an architect yet the building has not been purchased, nor should it.

EXAMPLE: City Hall…the actual plans and needs have not been discussed in public. The “wisdom of the purchase” must be discussed in public before any purchase is considered. The Council and the public has no idea what has been decided behind closed doors spending money we don’t have.

EXAMPLE: She stopped the progress of the Torre Ave Annex without notifying or discussing it with Council! It just quietly was stopped and only disclosed when it came up in some other discussion.

EXAMPLE: Continually dodges direct questions regarding the plans for City Hall, the EOC and the Sherriff’s Office. These are key financial, health and safety issues that need to be addressed in public and the Council and the public should have a right to know how our tax dollars will be spent on these items yet she continually evades and refuses to put them on the agenda to be discussed!

2.28.040 O. To make reports and initiate recommendations as may be desirable or as requested by the City Council.

City Manager Reports continue to be video ads for the city rather than actual informative reports to Council. We used to get CM reports that were of substance rather than fluff pieces produced by someone else.

When City Manager Wu spoke at a recent Cupertino Rotary meeting, she presented information on the state of the city that one would expect to be presented to Council and the public but never was presented to Council.
https://vimeo.com/915834364?share=copy

In addition, at that same Cupertino Rotary meeting, City Manager Wu divulged Closed Session information of the name of the Cupertino business that was being audited in the CDTFA audit!

City Manager Wu has NOT followed Council direction regarding what to do about City Hall renovation. She was directed to look into but NOT execute! She has yet to present the options, the costs, what is and is not available to the Council. This would allow them to make a decision yet she has decided for them! She is attempting to purchasing a building without a “plan” approved by Council and discussed in public.

I have attached her 2024-06-18 City Council Supplemental Report for reference so you can go back and listen to the meetings for yourself to see what was directed.

Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin

CC 06-18-2024

#12

Consider acquisition of
property located at 19400
Stevens Creek Blvd

Supplemental Report
Lead Negotiator for a
Property Transaction

CITY COUNCIL MEETING
June 18, 2024
• Aging infrastructure,
seismic deficiencies,
inadequate space
• Subcommittee and
Council discussions
about this topic since
2022
• Cost of renovation
estimated at $27.5 M,
cost of a new City Hall
estimated at $80 M
Background

Prior Council Direction
• November 15, 2022: include a City Hall retrofit
project in the CIP
• February 21, 2023: suspend work on renovation plan
and explore options for a new City Hall
• October 17, 2023: pursue conceptual development
with financing strategies for new or renovated City
Hall; bring back examples of public private
partnership projects and pursue potential
partnerships
• Turnkey office space located at 19400
Stevens Creek Boulevard
• 1.2-acre lot, 20,700 square feet of office
• Accessible location for the community
• Could serve as an interim City Hall while
potential partnership and funding options
are explored for current site
Key Elements and Opportunities
Authorize the City Manager to act as the
lead negotiator for purchase of the property
located at 19400 Stevens Creek Boulevard
Recommendation
Lead Negotiator for a
Property Transaction
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: City Council 9/4/24 Agenda 1 City Manager Eval Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 11:43:42 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 Council,
My opinions pertaining to the city manager have not changed since the previous eval.

I find that troubling because our public funds have gone toward training her in order for her to improve her performance
We have lost transparency. So many council meetings and planning commission meetings canceled.

Excuses made for $50M sitting in a zero-interest checking account and then quietly investing it instead of thanking councilmember Moore for finding the problem publicly and fixing it publicly and explaining what happened.

And, way back in mid-February, I found that our precious BMR funds were mis-allocated and there has been no resolution. Why?
I am so very disappointed.

Please also refer to previous comments made.

Sincerely,
Rhoda Fry, 40-year resident

CC 9-04-2024
#10
Amendments to the City
of Cupertino Conflict of
Interest Code of officials
and designated
employees
Written Comments
From: Kitty Moore
To: City Clerk; Pamela Wu; Kirsten Squarcia
Subject: Item 10 Pull Written Communications Question
Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 10:44:57 AM
Attachments: A - Draft Resolution and Conflict of Interest Code (redline).pdf RES80672 San Jose.pdf
Resolution Sunnyvale.pdf
Dear City Clerk and City Manager,

Please pull item 10 from Consent.

Attached please find the proposed Cupertino, and current San Jose and Sunnyvale reporting disclosure resolutions to include in the written comments for this item.

Thank you,

Kitty Moore
Kitty Moore
Councilmember
City Council
[email protected]
(408) 777-1389

RESOLUTION NO. 24‐___

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO RESCINDING RESOLUTION NO. 22‐120 AND AMENDING THE
CITY OF CUPERTINO CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
FOR OFFICIALS AND DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES

WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act of 1974, Government Code section 81000 et seq. (the “Act” or “Political Reform Act”) governs the disclosure of political campaign contributions and spending by candidates and ballot measure committees, and sets ethics rules for state and local government officials that impose strict limits on decisions or votes that affect the officialʹs financial interests; and

WHEREAS, the City Clerk is the local filing officer for all filings and statements required by the Political Reform Act including campaign contribution and expenditure reports from candidates for City Council, controlled committees and independent expenditure committees, as well as Statements of Economic Interest from current City officials, officers and designated employees, per the Cityʹs Conflict of Interest Code; and

WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires every state or local government agency to adopt and promulgate a Conflict of Interest Code; and

WHEREAS, the City Council last updated the City’s Conflict of Interest Code on September 20, 2022 by adoption of Resolution No. 22‐120; and

WHEREAS, the City
Council now desires to amend the City’s Conflict of Interest Code to update the list of designated positions.

NOW, THEREFORE, THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF CUPERTINO DOES HEREBY RESOLVE AS FOLLOWS:

1. That Resolution No. 22‐120 is hereby rescinded; and

2. That the terms of Title 2
California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and
any amendments to it duly adopted by the FPPC shall, along with the Code entitled, “City of Cupertino Conflict of Interest Code for Officials and Designated Employees” as set forth in Exhibit A along with attached appendices A and B, in which members, consultants, and employees are Resolution No. 24‐___

Page 2 ends

designated and disclosure categories are set forth, constitute the Conflict of Interest Code of the City of Cupertino; and

3. That all Statements of Economic Interest shall be filed electronically with the City Clerk.

PASSED AND ADOPTED at a special meeting of the City Council of the City of
Cupertino this 4th day of September 2024, by the following vote.

Members of the City Council

AYES:

NOES:

ABSENT:

ABSTAIN:

SIGNED:

_________________________________
Sheila Mohan, Mayor
City of Cupertino

_________________________
Date
ATTEST:

_________________________________
Kirsten Squarcia, City Clerk

_________________________
Date

EXHIBIT A

CITY OF CUPERTINO CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE
FOR OFFICIALS AND DESIGNATED EMPLOYEES

The Political Reform Act, Government Code section 81000 et seq. requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes. The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation, 2 Cal. Code Regs. section 18730, which contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code. It can be incorporated by reference and may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission after public notice and hearings to conform to amendments to the Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 Cal. Code Regs. section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference and, along with the attached Appendices A and B in which members, consultants, and employees are designated and disclosure categories are set forth shall constitute the conflict of interest code of the City of Cupertino.

Officials and designated employees under Government Code section 87200 shall file electronic statements of economic interests (Form 700) with the City Clerk who will make the statements available for public inspection and reproduction. (Gov.

Code, § 81008,)

Upon receipt of the statements (Form 700) of
the City of Cupertino City Council,
City Manager, City Attorney, City Treasurer, and Planning Commissioners, the agency shall electronically forward the original of these statements to the Fair Political Practices Commission. The City Clerk will electronically retain original statements for all other designated employees.

It has been determined that the
positions listed below manage public
investments and will file a statement of economic interests (Form 700) pursuant to Government Code section 87200:

City Treasurer (Director of Administrative Services)
Deputy City Treasurer (Finance Manager)

APPENDIX A

DESIGNATED POSITIONS AND
APPLICABLE REPORTABLE INTEREST CATEGORIES
Title Assigned Disclosure Category

ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES, FINANCE & HUMAN RESOURCES
Director of Administrative Services
(Treasurer)
1 (Gov. Code § 87200 filer)
Finance Manager (Deputy City
Treasurer)
1 (Gov. Code § 87200 filer)
Human Resources Manager 2
Budget Manager 2
Purchasing Manager 2
Senior Management Analyst 5
Human Resources Analyst I/II 5
Accountant I/II 5
Senior Accountant 5
Account Clerk I/II 5
Accounting Technician 5

APPOINTED OR ELECTED OFFICIALS & COMMISSIONS
City Council 1 (Gov. Code § 87200 filers)
Audit Committee 2
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission 4
Fine Arts and Culture Commission 4
Housing Commission 1
Library Commission 4
Parks and Recreation Commission 4
Planning Commission 1 (Gov. Code § 87200 filers)
Public Safety Commission 4
Sustainability Commission 4
Technology, Information, &
Communications Commission
3 Economic Development Committee 6

CITY ATTORNEY’S OFFICE
City Attorney 1 (Gov. Code § 87200 filer)

Title Assigned Disclosure Category
Deputy City Attorney 1
Senior Assistant City Attorney 1
Assistant City Attorney 1
Legal Services Manager 1

CITY MANAGER’S OFFICE
City Manager 1
Assistant City Manager 1
Deputy City Manager 1

Administration
Assistant to the City Manager 1
Sustainability Manager 6
Management Analyst 6
Senior Management Analyst 6
Emergency Services Coordinator 6
Analyst (Three‐Year Limited‐Term) 6
Executive Assistant to the City Manager 6

City Clerk’s Office
City Clerk 1
Deputy City Clerk 1

Communications & Public Information
Public Affairs Manager 3
Public Information Officer 3
Communications and Marketing
Coordinator

Multimedia Communication Specialist 3

Emergency Management
Assistant to the City Manager 1
Management Analyst 6
Community Relations Coordinator 6

Economic Development
Economic Development Manager 6

COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT
Director of Community Development 1
Assistant Director of Community
Development
1 Planning
Planning Manager 1
Senior Planner 1
Title Assigned Disclosure Category
Associate Planner 6
Senior Housing Coordinator 6
Assistant Planner 6
Management Analyst 6
Permit Technician 6

Building
Building Official 4
Deputy Building Official 4
Senior Building Inspector 4
Building Inspector 4
Permit Center Manager 6
Permit Technician 6
Plan Check Engineer 6

Housing
Housing Manager 1
Senior Planner 1
Assistant Planner 6
Senior Housing Coordinator 6

Code Enforcement
Senior Code Enforcement Officer 4
Code Enforcement Officer 4

Consultants
Consultants (see Appendix B
definitions)
As determined by City Manager

INNOVATION & TECHNOLOGY

Chief Technology Officer 1
Innovation and Technology Manager 5
GIS Program Manager 5
Business Systems Analyst 5
Multimedia Communication Specialist 3
Management Analyst 6

PUBLIC WORKS
Director of Public Works 1
Assistant Director of Public Works 1
Capital Improvement Programs
Manager
1 Transportation Manager 1
Title Assigned Disclosure Category
Senior Public Works Project Manager 1
Public Works Projects Manager 1
Environmental Programs Manager 1
Service Center Superintendent 5
Public Works Supervisor 6
Senior PlannerCity Engineer 1
Public Works Inspector 6
Senior Management Analyst 6
Management Analyst 6

Environmental Services & Environmental Affairs
Environmental Programs Manager 16
Environmental Programs Specialist 56
Environmental Programs Assistant 5
Environmental Compliance Technician 6

Traffic & Engineering
Senior PlannerCity Engineer
(Transit and Transportation)
1 Assistant Engineer 41
Transportation Manager 1
Senior Civil Engineer 14
Title Assigned Disclosure Category
Associate Civil Engineer 4
Senior Engineering Technician 6

Engineering Technician 6
Plan Check Engineer 6
Environmental Programs Assistant (Safe
Routes to School)
5 PARKS AND RECREATION
Director of Parks and Recreation 1
Assistant Director of Parks and
Recreation
1 Park Restoration and Improvement
Manager
6 Recreation Manager 5
Recreation Supervisor 5
Senior Management Analyst 6
Management Analyst 6

Appendix B

DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES AND DEFINITIONS

1. FULL DISCLOSURE
What to report? All investments, positions in business entities, sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments), and interests in real property.

What Form 700 schedules? All Schedules (A through E)

2. ALL INCOME
What to report? All investments, positions in business entities, and sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments).

What Form 700 schedules? A, C, D, E

3. CITY‐RELATED INCOME
What to report? All investments, positions in business entities, and sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments) if the source provides goods or services of the type utilized by or subject to the review or approval of the City.

What Form 700 schedules? A, C, D, E

4. CITY‐RELATED INCOME, REAL PROPERTY
What to report? All investments, positions in business entities, and sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments) if the source provides goods or services, of the type utilized by or subject to the review or approval of the City and all interests in real property.

What Form 700 schedules? All Schedules (A through E)

5. DEPARTMENT‐RELATED INCOME
What to report? All investments, positions, in business entities, and sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments) if the source provides goods or services of the type utilized by or subject to the review or approval of the department in which that person is employed.

What Form 700 schedules? A, C, D, E

6. DEPARTMENT‐RELATED INCOME & REAL PROPERTY
What to report? All investments, positions in business entities, and sources of income (including gifts, loans, and travel payments) if the source provides goods or services of the type utilized by or subject to the review or approval of

the department in which that person is employed, and all interests in real property.

What Form 700 schedules? All Schedules (A through E)

Definitions
For the purposes of these disclosure categories, the definitions and regulations contained in the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000 et seq., and the Fair Political Practices Commission regulations at 2 Cal. Code Regs. Section 18730 shall apply.

NVF:NXN
4-2-22
T-5864.
007 / 1785876_3 1
Council Agenda: 9/13/2022
Item No.: 2.8
RESOLUTION NO. 80672
A RE

SOLUTION OF THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN

JOSE AMENDING THE CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE

FOR THE CITY OF SAN JOSE
W
HEREAS, pursuant to Government Code Sections 87300 and 87302, the City Council of the City of San José (“City Council”) has adopted and incorporated by reference the terms of the standard model conflict of interest code adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission (FPPC) by Title 2, Division 6, California Code of Regulations (the “Regulations”), Section 18730; and
W
HEREAS, the City Council has thereby approved a list setting forth (1) designated positions of officers, employees, temporary employees, members, newly created positions and consultants of the City; and (2) required conflict of interest disclosure categories; and
W
HEREAS, that list should be amended and updated due to changes in organization and authority of City departments, boards, commissions and committees; NO

W, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SAN JOSÉ THAT:

1. I
n accordance with Government Code Sections 87300, 87302 and 87306, the City of San José Conflict of Interest Code is amended in its entirety by this Resolution and the appendices attached hereto.

2. T
he terms of Section 18730 of the Regulations, and any amendments to Section 18730 or to the Regulations, taken with appendices attached to this Resolution and incorporated by reference constitute the Conflict of Interest Code for all City of San José departments, boards, commissions and committees.

NVF:NXN RES. NO. 80672
4-2-22
T-5864.
007 / 1785876_3 2
Council Agenda: 9/13/2022
Item No.: 2.8

3. Persons holding designated positions listed in the attached Appendix I, including temporary employees of the City of San Jose, and consultants and newly created positions who are required to disclose pursuant to Appendix II, must file the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests when required by the California Political Reform Act or notified to do so by the City Clerk or designee or by the terms of an employee or consultant agreement with the City in accordance with the Act.

4. N
othing in this Resolution should be construed to allow any consultant retained by the City to make or participate in making or in any way attempt to influence a governmental decision in which he or she knows or has reason to know he or she has a financial interest. Disqualification in the event of a conflict of interest is governed by the California Political Reform Act in Section 87100 and following of the Government Code and its Regulations.

5. A
ll agreements with consultants, whether or not such a consultant is required to file a disclosure statement in accordance with this Resolution, shall provide that the consultant shall avoid all conflicts of interest or appearances of conflicts of interest in performing the agreement.

6. P
ursuant to the City Auditor’s reports in Audit 08-02 and Audit 11-09, in the event a designated filer does not file his or her Form 700 in a timely manner, and after the City Clerk has sent one reminder to the filer, the City Clerk will notify the Department Director that the filer – whether he or she is an employee, member of a board, commission or committee, temporary employee or consultant – has not complied with the disclosure requirements. If the designated filer is an employee, he or she may be recommended for disciplinary action by the Department.

7. T
his revised Conflict of Interest Code supersedes the Conflict of Interest Code approved on September 29, 2020, under Resolution No. 79731 of the Council of the City of San José.

NVF:NXN RES. NO. 80672
4-2-22
T-5864.
007 / 1785876_3 3
Council Agenda: 9/13/2022
Item No.: 2.8
ADOPTED this 13TH day of September, 2022, by the following vote:

AYES: ARENAS, CARRASCO, COHEN, DAVIS, ESPARZA,
FOLEY, JONES, JIMENEZ, MAHAN, PERALEZ.

NOES: NONE.

ABSENT: LICCARDO.

DISQUALIFIED: NONE.

VACANT: NONE.

SAM LICCARDO
Mayor
ATTEST:

TONI J. TABER, CMC
City Clerk

APPENDIX I
T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-1
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
Designated Positions
Dept: City Council
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Mayor* Yes Yes Yes
Council Members* Yes Yes Yes
Mayor’s Executive Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Aide U PT Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Assistants U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Assistant U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Chief of Staff Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Community Relations Aide
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Community Relations
Coordinator (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Community Relations
Director (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Community Relations
Representative (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Policy & Legislative
Advisor (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Policy & Legislative Aide Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Policy & Legislative
Analyst
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Council Policy & Legislative
Director (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Mayor’s Senior Policy Advisor U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Council Assistant U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)
* I
ndicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200.

I
f no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

R
eportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1
) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doi ng bus
iness in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-2
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Attorney
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
City Attorney U* Yes Yes Yes
Assistant City Attorney U Yes Yes Yes
Associate Deputy City Attorney U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Chief Deputy City Attorney U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Deputy City Attorney I U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Deputy City Attorney II U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Deputy City Attorney III U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Deputy City Attorney IV U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Legal Services Administrator U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Legal Services Manager U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Deputy City Attorney Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Deputy City Attorney I U
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Deputy City Attorney II U
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Deputy City Attorney III U
(Ur) (FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Deputy City Attorney IV U
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

* Indicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200.

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, respo nsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-3
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Auditor
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
City Auditor U Yes Yes Yes
Supervising Auditor (U) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Program Performance
Auditor U
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Performance Auditor I / II
U
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities , and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-4
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Executive Leadership
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
City Manager U* Yes Yes Yes
Assistant City Manager U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy City Manager U Yes Yes Yes

Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Administration, Policy and
Intergovernmental Relations
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Administration, Policy, and
Intergovernmental Relations U
Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the City Manager U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Budget Office
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Budget Director U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U – Budget Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U – Budget Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the City Manager U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

* Indicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200.

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-5
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Communications
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Communications U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the City Manager U Yes (2) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Emergency Management
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Emergency Management U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst Yes (1) Yes Yes
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager –
Office of Employee Relations
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Employee Relations U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U, Employee Relations Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the City Manager Yes Yes Yes
Executive Analyst I U/ II U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-6
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager,
Office of Economic Development
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Economic Development U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director of Economic
Development U
Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Division Manager Yes Yes Yes
Public Information Manager Yes Yes Yes
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Executive Analyst I U/ II U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager,
OED/Office of Cultural Affairs (OCA)
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Deputy Director (OCA) U Yes Yes Yes
Economic Development Manager Yes Yes Yes
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes Yes Yes
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager,
OED/Real Estate & Administration
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Assistant to the City Manager U (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Manager,
OED/Work2Future
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-7
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Office of the City Clerk
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
City Clerk U Yes No Yes
Assistant City Clerk U Yes No Yes
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a design ated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-8
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Airport
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real
Property
Interests
Gifts
Director, Aviation U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the Director Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Air Service Development Manager Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Airport Noise Abatement Manager Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Airport Operations Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Airport Operations Superintendent I/II Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Building Maintenance Superintendent Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Building Management Administrator Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3) Department Information Technology
Manager
Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Environmental Services Program
Manager
Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Maintenance Superintendent Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Planner I/III Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Planner II (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Planner IV Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Principal Accountant Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Principal Property Manager Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Program Manager I, II Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Property Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Senior Accountant Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Senior Architect/Senior Landscape
Architect
Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)

Senior Property Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Supervising Accountant Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Supervisor, Trades Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Temporary Unclassified (4) Yes (4) Yes (4) Yes (4)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in, doing business in or planning to do business in the City.
(2) Interests in real property located in the City, including property located within a two -mile radius of any property owned or used by the City and/or within the Airport Noise Impact Area. (3) Gifts from sources located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City. (4) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-9
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Community Energy
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Community Energy U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Power Resources Specialist I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Power Resources
Specialist
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Accountant Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Environmental Program
Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Power Resources Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-10
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Environmental Services
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Director, Environmental Services U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Engineer (FT/PT) (NE) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Department Information
Technology Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Compliance Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Inspector I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Inspector, Senior Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Laboratory Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Services Program
Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Sustainability
Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Planner IV Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Accountant Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Engineer/Architect Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager I Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Sanitary Engineer (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Environmental Program
Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Public Information
Representative
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Applications Analyst Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Supervising Environmental Services
Specialist
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Wastewater Facility Manager Yes Yes Yes
Water Systems Operations Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant service area (including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, Cupertino and the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County).
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the San Jose/Santa Clara Water Pollution Control Plant service area (including San Jose, Milpitas, Santa Clara, Campbell, Los Gatos, Monte Sereno, Saratoga, Cupertino and the unincorporated areas of Santa Clara County). (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-11
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Finance
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Finance U* Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U * Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the Director Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Deputy Director - Accounting U Yes Yes Yes (2)
Deputy Director - Purchasing &
Risk Management U
Yes Yes Yes (2)
Deputy Director – Revenue
Management
Yes Yes Yes (2)
Deputy Director – Debt & Treasury
Management U*
Yes Yes Yes (2)
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Analyst I/II (PCNs: 16511, 21160,
21163, 22735, 22737)
Yes No Yes (2)
Buyer I/II/III Yes No Yes (2)
Debt Administrator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Department Information
Technology Manager
Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Division Manager (PCN: 22136) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Investment Officer* Yes Yes Yes
Financial Analyst Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Principal Accountant Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Program Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Risk Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Analyst Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Financial Analyst Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Investigator Collector Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Supervising Accountant* (PCN:
22732)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

* Indicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200.

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-12
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
Designated Positions

Dept: Fire Department
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests Gifts
Fire Chief U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Fire Chief U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Fire Chief U Yes Yes Yes
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Arson Investigator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Engineer (FT/FT/PT)
(NE)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Automotive Equipment Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Battalion Chief - Assistant Fire
Marshall
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Battalion Chief - EMS Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Battalion Chief - Facilities Chief Yes (1) No Yes (2) Battalion Chief – Training Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Building Maintenance
Superintendent
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Contract Medical Advisor - EMS
Medical Advistor
Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Fire Captain – EMS Yes (1) No Yes (2)

Fire Captain – Arson Captain Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)

Fire Captain – Bond Projects Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Fire Captain - BFP Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Fire Division Chief Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Fire Equipment Technician Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Fire Prevention Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Hazardous Materials Inspector I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Nurse Practitioner Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Permit Specialist, Senior Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Permit Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Permit Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Hazardous Materials
Inspector
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Public Safety
Dispatcher (FT/PT)
Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-13
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Housing
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Housing U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Assistant to the Director Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Rehabilitation Inspector I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Building Rehabilitation Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Community Programs Administrator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Development Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes Yes Yes (2)
Housing Policy and Planning
Administrator
Yes Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Accountant Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Development Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-14
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Human Resources
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Director, Human Resources U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Division Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Program Manager II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Administrative Officer Yes (1) No Yes (2)

Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-15
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Independent Police
Auditor
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Independent Police Auditor U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Independent Police
Auditor U Yes Yes Yes
Temporary Unclassified (1) Yes (1) Yes (1) Yes (1)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated em ployee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-16
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Information Technology
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Information Technology U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director Yes Yes Yes
Division Manager Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
City Information Security Officer U Yes Yes Yes
Program Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

Designated Positions

Dept: Information Technology –
Office of Civic Innovation
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Civic Innovation U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant to the City Manager U Yes Yes Yes
Senior Executive Analyst U Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-17
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Library
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
City Librarian U Yes Yes Yes
Program Manager Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Applications Analyst Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Community Programs
Administrator
Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes No Yes (2)
Senior Librarian Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a design ated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-18
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Parks, Recreation &
Neighborhood Services
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Parks, Recreation, &
Neighborhood Services U
Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director, Parks, Recreation,
& Neighborhood Services U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Assistant Arborist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Maintenance
Administrator
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Parks Facilities Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Parks Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Planner IV Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager I Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Recreation Superintendent Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Recreation Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Architect/Senior Landscape
Architect
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Environmental Services
Specialist
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity loca ted in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-19
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City. (3) Investments or interests in real property and income received from any person, business entity, or parcel of real property which was the subject of a case assignment during the period covered by the statement. (4) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

Designated Positions

Dept: Planning, Building & Code
Enforcement
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business
Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Planning, Building & Code
Enforcement U
Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director, Planning, Building &
Code Enforcement U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Assistant to the Director Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Inspection Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Inspector Combination (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes (3) Yes (2) Building Inspector Combination Certified I Yes (1) Yes (3) Yes (2) Building Inspector Combination Certified
II/III
Yes (1) Yes (3) Yes (2)
Building Inspector Combination Certified,
Senior
Yes (1) Yes (3) Yes (2)
Building Inspector Supervisor Certified I/II Yes (1) Yes (3) Yes (2) Code Enforcement Inspector I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Code Enforcement Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Environmental Inspector I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Department Information Technology
Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Permit Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Permit Specialist, Senior Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Planner I/II/III Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Planner II (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Planner IV Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Permit Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Planner Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager I Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Analyst Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Applications Analyst Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Environmental Service
Specialist
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (4) Yes (4) Yes (4) Yes (4)

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-20
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Police Department
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments,
Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real
Property
Interests
Gifts
Chief of Police U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Police Chief U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Chief of Police Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Assistant Police Communications Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2) Crime Prevention Supervisor Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Crisis Intervention Training Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2) Department Information Technology Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2) Division Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Latent Fingerprint Examiner Supervisor Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Captain Yes Yes Yes
Police Communications Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Lieutenant Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Officer – Gaming Control (PCN 1179, 1356) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Property Supervisor Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Sergeant – Air Support (PCN 730) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Sergeant – Bomb (PCN 5198) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Sergeant – Canine (PCN 707) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Sergeant – City Attorney’s Office (PCN 821) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Sergeant – Crisis Intervention Training (PCN 712) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Sergeant – Human Trafficking (PCN 8252) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Sergeant – Internet Crimes Against Children (PCN 731)
Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Sergeant – Police Activities League (PCN 683) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Police Sergeant – Range (PCN 715) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Police Sergeant – Training (PCN 13242, 8256) Yes (1) No Yes (2) Program Manager I Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Program Manager II Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Analyst (FT/PT) Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Senior Auditor – Gaming Control Yes No Yes
Supervising Applications Analyst Yes No Yes
Supervising Community Service Officer Yes (1) No Yes (2) Supervising Auditor – Gaming Control Yes No Yes
Temporary Unclassified Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must f ile using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-21
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Public Works
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments,
Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests

Gifts
Director, Public Works U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director, Public Works Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Air Conditioning Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Animal Shelter Veterinarian (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Associate Architect/Landscape Architect
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Construction Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Engineer (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Associate Structure/Landscape Designer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Building Inspector Combination Certified I
(FT/PT)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Inspector Combination Certified II/III Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Building Inspector Combination Certified.

Senior
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Building Inspector Supervisor Certified I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Building Management Administrator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Chief of Surveys Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Contract Compliance Coordinator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Contract Compliance Specialist (FT/PT) Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Construction Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Electrician Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Equipment Maintenance Supervisor I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Fleet Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Land Surveyor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Maintenance Contract Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Mechanical Parts Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Accountant Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Construction Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Engineer/Architect Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Engineering Technician Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Radio Communications Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Security Services Supervisor Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Architect/Senior Landscape Architect Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Senior Automotive Equipment Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Senior Construction Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Events Coordinator Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Transportation Specialist Yes(1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervising Environmental Services Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Supervising Traffic Signal Technician Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Supervisor, Animal Services Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Supervisor, Trades Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-22
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in, doing business in, or planning to do business in the City.
(2) The Department of Public Works’ Gift Policy is meant to more narrowly limit the acceptance of gifts beyond the laws already in place within the San Jose Municipal Code (Chapter 12.08: Prohibition of Gifts, Sections 12.08.010-12.08.050) and the California Fair Political Practices Commission regulations (Section 18945). Although the Department Gift Policy states that no gifts are to be accepted from any person or company subject to the decision-making authority of the City, there are exceptions to this general rule. Please see Department Gift Policy for details. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, respo nsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-23
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Retirement Services
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Chief Executive Officer* Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director U* (Chief
Investment Officer) Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U (Chief
Operations Officer) Yes Yes Yes
Accounting Division Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Benefits Division Manager Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Department Information
Technology Manager Yes Yes Yes
Financial Analyst Yes (1) No Yes (2)
Retirement Investment Officer* Yes Yes Yes
Senior Retirement Investment
Officer U* Yes Yes Yes
Retirement Investment Analyst I Yes Yes Yes
Retirement Investment Analyst II Yes Yes Yes
Retirement Investment Operations
Supervisor U Yes Yes Yes
Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

* Indicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200.

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-24
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Department of
Transportation
Reportable Disclosure Categories
Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income
Real Property
Interests Gifts
Director, Transportation U Yes Yes Yes
Assistant Director Yes Yes Yes
Deputy Director U Yes Yes Yes
Administrative Officer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Arborist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Assistant Arborist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Department Information
Technology Manager
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Division Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Operations Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Parking Manager I/II Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Parking & Traffic Control
Supervisor
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Principal Construction Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Principal Engineer/Architect Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Program Manager I (PCN 17870,
19320)
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Public Information Manager Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Construction Inspector Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Senior Engineer Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Parking & Traffic Control
Officer
Yes (1) Yes Yes (2)
Senior Transportation Specialist Yes (1) Yes Yes (2) Temporary Unclassified (3) Yes (3) Yes (3) Yes (3)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City. (3) Any Temporary Unclassified employee, including a Rehired Retiree, is a designated employee if their assigned duties, responsibilities, and authority are substantially similar to the duties, responsibilities, and authority of a designated employee and the Temporary Unclassified employee must file using the same Reportable Disclosure Categories identified for the similar employee.

APPENDIX I

T-5864.007 / 1785876_3 App I-25
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8

Designated Positions

Dept: Boards & Commissions
Reportable Disclosure Categories

Investments, Business Positions,
Sources of Income

Real Property
Interests
Gifts
Airport Commission Yes (1) Yes (2) Yes (3)
Appeals Hearing Board Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Arts Commission Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Civil Service Commission Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Deferred Compensation Advisory
Committee* Yes Yes Yes
Downtown Parking Board Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Board of Fair Campaign and
Political Practices Yes Yes Yes (3)
Federated City Employees
Retirement System Board of
Administration*
Yes Yes Yes
Historic Landmarks Commission Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Housing & Community
Development Commission Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Planning Commission* Yes Yes Yes
Police & Fire Department
Retirement Plan Board of
Administration*
Yes Yes Yes
Community Energy Department
Risk Oversight Committee Yes Yes Yes
Salary Setting Commission Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
San José Arena Authority Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Voluntary Employee Beneficiary
Association (VEBA) Committee* Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)
Work2Future (SVWIN) Board Yes (1) Yes Yes (3)

* Indicates Officials listed in California Government Code Section 87200 (Added Retirements Boards to 87200)

If no limitation is described, the reportable disclosure categories should follow the instructions to the Form 700 – Statement of Economic Interests provided by the Fair Political Practices Commission.

Reportable economic interests are limited as follows:

(1) Investments (in), business positions (in) and income (from) any business entity located in or doing business in the City.
(2) Interests in real property located in the City, including property located within a two -mile radius of any property owned or used by the City and/or eligible for treatment under the Airport Acoustical Treatment Program (ACT).
(3) Gifts from sources located in or doing business in the City.

T-5864.007 / 1785876 App II-1
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
Appendix II
Conflicts Consultant & Newly Created Positions Appendix

I. Consultant

A. Consultant's Disclosure

(1) Each "consultant" as defined by the Political Reform Act (Government Code 81000, et seq.) and the implementing regulations adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission is required to file disclosure Form 700 with the Agency.

(2) Only those interests which are relevant to the consultant's engagement are required to be disclosed. The appropriate interests to be disclosed shall be determined by the responsible Appointing Authority or designee, such as directors or heads of the various City of San Jose offices or departments. Appointing Authorities are those officers of the City appointed by the City Council pursuant to the City Charter. The interests to be disclosed shall be set forth in the agreement for services between the consultant and the City of San Jose.

(3) Disclosure shall be made as to the interests of each person performing under the agreement, to the extent required by the Political Reform Act.

B. Disqualification

(1) Nothing in this Resolution should be construed to allow any official, employee, or consultant of the City of San Jose to make or participate in making or in any way attempt to influence a governmental decision in which he knows or has reason to know he has a financial interest.

Disqualification in the event of a conflict of interest is governed by Section 87100 and following of the Government Code and the implementing regulations promulgated pursuant to the Political Reform Act.

(2) All agreements with consultants, whether or not such a consultant is required to file a disclosure statement in accordance with this Resolution, shall provide that the consultant shall avoid all conflicts of interest or appearances of conflicts of interest in performing the Agreement.

II. Newly Created Position

A newly created position that makes or participates in the making of decisions that may foreseeably have a material effect on any financial interest of the position-holder, and which specific position title is not yet listed in an agency’s conflict of interest code is included in the list of designated positions and shall disclose pursuant to the broadest disclosure category in the code, subject to the following limitation: The City Clerk may determine in writing that a particular newly created position, although a “designated position,” is hired to perform a range of duties that are limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the broadest disclosure requirements, but instead must comply with more tailored disclosure requirements specific to that newly created

T-5864.007 / 1785876 App II-2
Council Agenda: 9/13/22
Item No.: 2.8
position. Such written determination shall include a description of the newly created position's duties and based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. All such determinations are public records and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this conflict-of-interest code. (Gov. Code § 81008.)

The City Clerk’s office shall promptly enter the actual position title of the newly created position into its electronic Form 700 record management system and ensure that the name of any individual(s) holding the newly created position is entered under that position title in the record management system.

Additionally, within 90 days of the creation of a newly created position that must file statements of economic interests, the City shall update this conflict-of-interest code to add the actual position title in its list of designated positions. (Gov. Code § 87306.)

DRAFT 9/9/2020 RLM
T-OCC-160250/49368 1
Council Agenda:

Item No.:

RESOLUTION NO. ______

A RESOLUTION OF THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY

OF SUNNYVALE AMENDING THE CONFLICT OF

INTEREST CODE FOR DESIGNATED CITY OFFICERS
AND EMPLOYEES (RESOLUTION NO. 905-18) AS

REQUIRED BY THE POLITICAL REFORM ACT AND

REGULATIONS OF THE FAIR POLITICAL PRACTICES

COMMISSION
WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires certain City officials specified in section 87200 of the California Government Code, to file economic disclosure forms (“Form 700”) and abstain from making or participating in governmental decisions which have a reasonably foreseeable material effect on an economic interest; and WHEREAS, the Political Reform Act requires the City to adopt a local conflict of interest code that enumerates specific City positions other than those specified in Government Code section 87200 which involve making or participating in making decisions which have a reasonably foreseeable material effect on an economic interest, and to designate for each position the types of investments, business positions, interests in real property and sources of income which are reportable based on the scope of the decision-making authority of the position; and WHEREAS, on November 13, 2018, the City Council adopted a Conflict of Interest Code in compliance with the provisions of the Political Reform Act, Government Code Sections 81000, et seq., through the adoption of Resolution No. 905-18; and WHEREAS, the City Council has reviewed and considered administratively suggested changes to the listing of designated positions of City officials and employees, along with assigned disclosure categories, in the Conflict of Interest Code.

NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE CITY COUNCIL OF THE CITY OF SUNNYVALE THAT:

1. Adoption of Conflict of Interest Code. The City of Sunnyvale Conflict of Interest Code, attached hereto as Appendix A and incorporated herein by this reference, is hereby adopted and includes the following:
(a) The Political Reform Act (Government Code Section 81000, et seq.) requires state and local government agencies to adopt and promulgate conflict of interest codes. The Fair Political Practices Commission has adopted a regulation (2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730) that contains the terms of a standard conflict of interest code, which can be incorporated by reference in an agency’s code. After public notice and hearing, the standard code may be amended by the Fair Political Practices Commission to conform to amendments in Attachment 1

Page 1 of 8 ends

T-OCC-160250/49368 2
Council Agenda:

Item No.:
the Political Reform Act. Therefore, the terms of 2 California Code of Regulations Section 18730 and any amendments to it duly adopted by the Fair Political Practices Commission are hereby incorporated by reference. This regulation and the attached Appendix, designating positions and establishing disclosure categories, shall constitute the conflict of interest code of the City of Sunnyvale, the Successor Agency to the Former Sunnyvale Redevelopment Agency, and the Oversight Board for the Successor Agency to the Former Redevelopment Agency.

Public officials and employees shall file Statements of Economic Interests (FPPC Form 700) with the City Clerk, who is designated as the Filing Officer. The City Clerk shall administer this Conflict of Interest Code at the local level and shall notify each public official and employee of his or her filing obligation. Public officials and employees are required to file an Assuming Office Statement when they assume a designated position, an Annual Statement each year and a Leaving Office Statement within thirty days of resignation or termination. Once filed the FPPC Form 700 is a public record and the City Clerk shall make all statements available for public inspection and reproduction, pursuant to Government Code Section 81008. Individuals holding designated positions shall file their statements of economic interests with the City, which will make the statements available for public inspection and reproduction (Gov. Code Sec. 81008). All statements will be retained by the City.
(b) As the code reviewing body for the Successor Agency to the Former Redevelopment Agency of the City of Sunnyvale and the Sunnyvale Finance Authority, the City Council has determined that the Successor Agency and Finance Authority (i) are not new agencies for the purposes of the Political Reform Act; (ii) do not require the adoption of separate conflict of interest codes; and (iii) will be covered by the City’s Conflict of Interest Code as amended hereto.
(c) Filing statements. Designated officials and employees shall file Statements of Economic Interests in compliance with the provisions of California Code of Regulations Section 18730(b)(5).

Attachment 1

Page 2 of 8 ends

T-OCC-160250/49368 3
Council Agenda:

Item No.:

Adopted by the City Council at a regular meeting held on ___________, by the following vote:

AYES:

NOES:

ABSTAIN:

ABSENT:

RECUSAL:

ATTEST: APPROVED:
__________________________________ _________________________________ City Clerk Mayor
(SEAL)
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
___________________________________
City Attorney
Attachment 1

Page 3 of 8 ends

1 CITY OF SUNNYVALE – CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE

DESIGNATED CITY POSITIONS REQUIRED TO FILE
Position Disclosure Category
Accountant 1
Administrative Analyst 1
Administrative Librarian 1
Administrative Services Manager 1
Affordable Housing Manager 1
Applications Analyst/Project Coordinator I/II 1
Applications Development Manager 1
Assistant City Attorney 1
Assistant City Engineer 1
Assistant City Manager 1
Assistant Director of Community Development 1
Assistant Director of Finance 1
Assistant Director of Public Works/City Engineer 1
Assistant to the Director of Parks and Recreation 1
Assistant Planner 1
Associate Planner 1
Budget Analyst I/II 1
Building Inspector I/II 1
Buyer I/II 1
Chief Building Official 1
Chief Information Officer 1
City Clerk 1
City Property Administrator 1
Civil Engineer 1
Civilian Assistant Fire Marshal 1
Civilian Fire Marshal 1
Communications Officer 1
Community Resources Manager 1
Community Services Manager 1
Deputy City Attorney 1
Deputy Chief Public Safety 1
Deputy City Clerk 1
Deputy City Manager 1
Director of Community Development 1
Director of Environmental Services 1
Director of Employment Development 1
Director of Human Resources 1
Director of Library and Community RecreationServices 1
Director of NOVA Workforce Services 1
Director of Public Safety 1
Director of Public Works 1
Economic Development Manager 1
Employment Training Manager 1
Environmental Compliance Inspector 3

EXHIBIT A
Attachment 1

Page 4 of 8 ends

2 Environmental Engineering Coordinator 2
Environmental Programs Manager 1
Finance Manager 1
Fire Protection Engineer 3
Fire Protection Inspector 3
Fleet Manager 2
Golf Operations Manager 2
Hazardous Materials Coordinator 3
Hazardous Materials Inspector 3
Housing Programs Analyst 1
Housing Officer 1
Housing Programs Technician 1
Human Resources Analyst 1
Human Resources Manager 1
Information Technology Coordinator 1
Information Technology Services Manager 1
Laboratory/Pretreatment Manager 1
Library Circulation Manager 1
Management Analyst 1
Manager of Business Operations Manager 2
Manager of Job Seeker Services Manager 1
Neighborhood Preservation Manager 1
Operations Manager: Facilities 3
Parks Manager 2
Payroll Supervisor 1
Permit Technician 1
Permit Center Coordinator 1
Permit Center Manager 1
Plan Check Engineer 1
Plan Checker I/II 1
Planning Officer 1
Principal Accountant 1
Principal Buyer 1
Principal Human Resources Analyst 1
Principal Network & Systems Engineer 1
Principal Planner 1
Principal ProgrammerApplications Analyst/Project Manager 1 Principal Storekeeper 1
Principal Transportation Engineer/Planner 1
Programmer Analyst 1
Public Safety Captain 1
Public Safety Communications Manager 1
Public Safety Deputy Chief 1
Public Safety Records Manager 1
Public Works Construction Inspector 3
Public Works Supervisor 2
Purchasing Officer 1
Recreation Manager 1
Regulatory Programs Division Manager 1
Attachment 1

Page 5 of 8 ends

3 Risk Manager 1
Senior Accountant 1
Senior Assistant City Attorney 1
Senior Applications Analyst/Project Coordinator 1
Senior Building Inspector 1
Senior Buyer 1
Senior Construction Inspector/Coordinator 1
Senior Engineer 1
Senior Environmental Compliance Inspector 1
Senior Environmental Engineer 1
Senior Hazardous Materials Inspector 1
Senior Housing Rehabilitation Specialist 1
Senior Human Resources Analyst 1
Senior Environmental Compliance Inspector 1
Senior Environmental Engineer 1
Senior Construction Inspector/Coordinator 1
Senior Management Analyst 1
Senior Plan Check Engineer 1
Senior Planner 1
Senior Traffic Engineer 1
Senior Transportation Engineer 1
Senior Transportation Planner 2
Street Operations Manager 1
Solid Waste Contract Administrator 2
Solid Waste Programs Division Manager 1
Storekeeper/Buyer 1
Storekeeper I/II 1
Superintendent of Facilities Maintenance 1
Superintendent of Libraries 1
Superintendent of Parks and Golf 1
Superintendent of Community Services 1
Superintendent of Public Works Operations 1
Superintendent of Recreation Services 1
Supervising Librarian 1
Transportation and Traffic Manager 1
Urban Landscape Manager 1
Utility Billing Manager 1
Wastewater Operations Manager 1
Water and Sewer Systems Division Manager 1
Water Operations Manager 1
Laboratory/Pretreatment Manager 1
Water Pollution Control Maintenance Manager 1
Water Pollution Control Operations Manager 1
Water Pollution Control Plant Division Manager 1
Youth and Family Resources Manager 1
Newly created positions between conflict code amendments As applicable* Consultants As applicable**
Retired Annuitants As applicable***
Attachment 1

Page 6 of 8 ends

4 Casual Employees performing work similar to a designated position As applicable*** Designated appointees:

Member, Board of Building Code Appeals 1
Member, Heritage Preservation Commission 1
Member, Housing and Human Services Commission 1
Member, Executive Director, Successor Agency Attorney, Secretary and Treasurer to Successor Agency to the Former Sunnyvale Redevelopment Successor Agency
1 Member, Executive Director, Authority Attorney, Secretary and Treasurer to Sunnyvale Financing Authority
1 State Required Filers:

The following positions are NOT covered by the code because they must file under Government Code Section 87200 and are listed forinformationalpurposes only:

Councilmembers 1
City Attorney 1
City Manager 1
Director of Finance 1
Member, Planning Commission 1
An individualholding one of the above listed positions (State Required Filers) may contact the Fair Political Practices Commission for assistance or written advice regarding their filingobligationsif they believe that their position has beencategorizedincorrectly. The Fair Political Practices Commission makes the finaldetermination whether a position is covered by section 87200.

Attachment 1

Page 7 of 8 ends

5 CITY’S CONFLICT OF INTEREST CODE

DISCLOSURE CATEGORIES
Category 1
A designated employee in this category must report all investments, interests in real property owned in the City of Sunnyvale, sources of income including gifts, loans and travel payments, and business entities in which he or she is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any position of management.

Category 2
A designated employee in this category must report sources of income including gifts, loans and travel payments, and business entities in which he or she has an investment or is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any position of management, if the business entity or source of income is of the type which has done business with the City of Sunnyvale within the previous two years.

Category 3
A designated employee in this category must report sources of income including gifts, loans and travel payments, and business entities in which he or she has an investment or is a director, officer, partner, trustee, employee or holds any position of management, if the business entity or source of income is of the type which within the previous two years has provided services, equipment, lease space, materials or supplies to the City. * City Clerk to work with appropriate department and City Attorney to determine appropriate disclosure category for any newly created position.
**Consultants and/or Casual employees are included in the list of designated positions and shall disclose pursuant to Category 1, subject to the following limitation:

The City Manager may determine in writing that a particular consultant, although a "designated position," is hired to perform a range of duties that is limited in scope and thus is not required to fully comply with the disclosure requirements in this section. Such written determination shall include a description of the consultant's duties and, based upon that description, a statement of the extent of disclosure requirements. The City Manager's determination is a public record and shall be retained for public inspection in the same manner and location as this Conflict of Interest Code. (Gov. Code Section 81008.)
***Retired annuitants may be included in the list of designated employees when the City Manager, or his or her designee, determines that they are performing work that is the functional equivalent of a designated position. If such a determination is made, then disclosure shall be pursuant to the disclosure category requir4eed by this Code for the comparable designated staff position.

Attachment 1

Page 8 of 8 ends

CC 9-04-2024
#12
Approve an agreement
with Sweeping Corp of
America for Street
Sweeping Services
Written Comments
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council
Subject: Public Comment City Council 9/4/2024 Agenda item #12 increase in street sweeping costs Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:06:09 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,
The amount of street tree maintenance has been cut back.

What is there anything that we can do to reduce the cost on street sweeping? More importantly, can the City please work hard to not approve useless studies like the $172K study to figure out how to partner with developers and put housing on our sports center, city hall and community hall?
Thanks,
Rhoda
Virus-free.www.avg.com
CC 9-04-2024
#13
Award a construction
contract for the 2024
Concrete
Reconstruction Project
Written Comments
From: Peggy Griffin
To: City Council; Pamela Wu
Cc: City Clerk; Chad Mosley
Subject: 2024-09-04 City Council Meeting ITEM 13 - PULL ITEM 13, $1.6M Contract with no information! Date: Tuesday, September 3, 2024 8:33:29 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.

PLEASE INCLUDE THIS EMAIL AS PART OF WRITTEN COMMUNICATION FOR THE ABOVE ITEM.

Dear City Council and Staff,
Please PULL ITEM #13 regarding the $1.6M contract for curbs, gutters and sidewalks for many reasons:
1-The contract is incomplete. It is missing the “details” of what actual work is being done.

When a street pavement contract is brought for your consideration they actually list which streets are to be re-paved. I expect the same for this contract. 2-The Staff Report does not mention anything regarding details of the work, why these need to be suddenly done when 2 months ago the city was prepared to have the residents take over sidewalks.
3-Provide a list of which curbs, gutters and sidewalks are being repaired. Break it down… -How much of this contract is replacing good ramps with yellow bumps? -How much is sidewalks and where?
-Is there any other work being done and if so what and why? 4-Where is the $1.6M coming from?
-Was it budgeted-if so, is this within budget? If not, why not? -What fund is it being drawn from?
-Is any of this being covered by a grant? If so, is there a deadline, requirements, etc.? Expecting the Council to approve spending $1.6M without any information is poor
management and prevents them from performing the financial oversight they were elected and are expected to do. This is tax payer money!
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From: Rhoda Fry
To: City Clerk; City Council
Cc: Chad Mosley
Subject: Public Comment 9/4/2024 Item #13 sidewalk work Date: Wednesday, September 4, 2024 12:36:09 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,
Thank you for doing the supplemental report although I would have preferred to see a more fleshed out agenda so that residents and council members wouldn’t feel like they needed to ask questions.

The amount of street tree maintenance has been cut back.

Is there anything that we can do to reduce the cost of sidewalk, curb and gutter work?

More importantly, can the City please work hard to not approve useless studies like the $172K study to figure out how to partner with developers and put housing on our sports center, city hall and community hall?
Our projected sales-tax revenue has dipped to between $9M and $11M per year.

This $1.5M expenditure represents about 15% of our projected sales tax revenue. That’s a lot of money!
And some of the money from this project is funded by the General Fund.

I tried to review the link in the staff report but I was unable to do so because I do not have a log-in or password to do so.

If you’re going to link to documents that require an id and password, please provide instructions on how to access them.

In order to make a proper decision, the public and council need to know the necessity of this project.

I suppose that the City Manager will say that what is before you is whether or not to accept the contract.

I’d urge you to say no until we understand the details.

If something is hazardous, then yes, by all means, let’s fix it. I tried to get through to Public Works on this but was unable to do so.

But if it isn’t critical, let’s please wait until we know our financial situation.

Thanks,
Rhoda
Virus-free.www.avg.com

Cupertino City CouncilSeptember 4, 2024

Cupertino City Council
September 4, 2024