Written Communications (updated 10/14/25) — Cupertino City Council, October 7, 2025

CC 10-07-2025
Oral
Comm
unications
Written C
omments

From: Jean Bedord
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk Subject: Oral Communications - Email Abuse, City Council, Oct. 7, 2025 Date: Sunday, October 5, 2025 7:27:46 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.

A Public Records Act (PRA) identified the time sink –councilmembers, particularly Mayor Liang Chao, have usurped staff time for extensive, often intrusive, and personalized demands. PRA-195
provides a log of all
councilmember email requests from January to July, 2025, totaling 3,524 emails to the city manager and other city staff, including the contract city attorney. Mayor Liang Chao is by far the biggest offender, with 66% of total emails, many of which tread deep into the realm of operational micromanagement at odds with the council- manager form of government.

Total
emails Chao Moore Fruen Mohan Wang
January 362 292 13 10 27 20
February 314 230 24 10 30 20
March 402 282 51 12 37 20
April 559 381 82 15 30 51
May 766 561 66 27 53 59
June 578 306 129 12 30 101
July 543 269 185 9 47 33
7 months 3,524 2,321 550 95 254 304
Percentage 66% 16% 3% 7% 9%
Why is this abuse important? A report by the city’s own internal auditor Moss Adams, Enterprise Leadership Assessment Report, specifically addresses abuse of email beginning bottom of pg.12, extending to pg. 13 (ppg. 14-15 in PDF format).:
“In terms of communication, one of the most frequently cited ongoing challenges is related to email requests from Council members. As documented in the 2023 Internal Review and reported by interviewed staff, several Council members have continued the practice of sending a high volume of emails, averaging 50-70 initial emails per week, not counting any follow-up emails. This practice is ineffective for communication purposes, creates significant workload for staff, and is widely perceived to be an obstruction tactic. Council members at times request responses to questions posed by the public as if they were the Council members’ own. This pass- through of information requests without vetting creates work efforts where it may not be effective or even considered in the decision-making process.

The City’s Municipal Code provision § 2.17.043 clarifies that the City Manager may determine when individual council member requests are overly onerous (and thus should be directed to staff through a collective instruction from the entire City Council). The code states that the following guidelines should be considered when making this judgement:

A. Is the request specific and limited in scope so that staff can respond without altering other priorities and with only minimal delay to other assignments? B. Is the request a "one time" work requirement, as opposed to an on-going work requirement?
C. Does the response to a request require a significant allocation of staff resources (generally defined as consisting of more than one staff person, or a single staff person working on the request in excess of two hours)? However, staff report that it has been challenging to exercise these guidelines in a practical, consistent, and productive way. Several interviewed staff noted that it has been extremely challenging to accomplish operational work given the number of staff hours required to respond to these requests, in addition to preparing staff reports and materials for regular Council meetings. As noted in the Meeting Cadence and Processes section, the City management team has expanded the practice of offering 1:1 preparation meetings to City Council members as an option for more efficient and direct communication.“
Based on this PRA response, Councilmembers appear to have returned to the habit of intruding into the City Manager’s domain in violation of the Municipal Code. I urge Mayor Chao to set up regular one-on-one meetings with the City Manager instead of bombarding her and staff with a deluge of demanding emails This practice of “governance by email” was specifically called out in the Civil Grand Jury Report (pg. 7)and the follow-on Independent Investigator’s Fact Finding Report. (pg.14-15).

I urge the council to significantly reduce the number of emails using one-on-one meetings to communicate, and let our very competent city staff do their jobs. Isn't it time to be responsible?
Good governance advocate,
Jean Bedord
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Benjamin Fu
Subject: Future agenda item to permit mobile food operators (food trucks).

Date: Sunday, October 5, 2025 7:38:09 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 upcoming council meeting. [Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Dear Mayor Chao and Council Members,
I respectfully urge you to please add a future council agenda item to modify the Cupertino Municipal Code to explicitly establish a permitting process for mobile food operators (food trucks). Nearby cities such as Sunnyvale, Santa Clara, Milpitas, and San Jose already provide such opportunities, but Cupertino does not.

While food trucks may appear to compete with existing restaurants, they can in fact complement them by drawing additional foot traffic to Cupertino. Visitors who come for food trucks often stay longer, explore our restaurants, and shop at nearby businesses.

Food trucks expand dining options, offer more affordable choices, and increase culinary diversity—benefits that strengthen the overall local economy.

As Cupertino loses retail centers such as the erstwhile Oaks, the upcoming loss of Panera, and United Furniture sites, we also lose restaurants that once served those areas. Many of these businesses will not return, and it is important to plan ahead to ensure residents and visitors continue to have diverse and accessible dining options. Allowing food trucks is a practical and flexible way to address this need.

I respectfully request that the City Council agendaize this item or, if feasible, refer it to the Planning Commission to draft the necessary Municipal Code updates enabling food trucks in Cupertino.

Thank you for your consideration.

Thanks,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) From: Susan
To: Tina Kapoor; Public Comments; Kitty Moore; Sheila Mohan; R "Ray" Wang; Liang Chao; J.R. Fruen Subject: Mary Avenue Villa,
Date: Thursday, October 2, 2025 5:25:05 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 Ms. Kapoor, and City Council members,
Although recently I have been learning about the Mary Avenue Villas (MAV), I am still confused …. why there? It is very concerning to hear disabled individuals, or any person, would want to live at the MVA. They would open their door and be right on the street. There is no grass, bushes, nor trees, just the street with traffic in front of them, and a retaining wall in the back. What happens if someone needs assistance to live there? Can they live there? And parking will be limited, so how do family, friends, and caregivers visit? Secondly, millions of dollars were spent by the city for the bicycle bridge. At the time it was built, the council stated Mary Ave was safer than having a route on Stelling Road. Now apparently with neighborhood traffic, and trucks from the city yard on the street, you consider Mary safe? Apparently, no one has seen how busy the street can be at times.

The contractor has made changes to the corner of Stevens Creek and Mary. A 5 or 6 story building housing more people is slated to be built there, which should only add to the congestion in the area. The city has decided to change the original plans thus eliminating the underground parking, and reduce retail space by more than half. And where are the occupants supposed to park? Don’t forget the city has decided to take away 89 parking spaces for the Villas. My understanding is people who are to occupy the MAV are supposed to have shopping near them, was that also forgotten?
Oh, and what about Memorial Park, the purpose of the city park is to bring our citizens together? There won’t be nearby parking for the events. Living near the Park, any event there brings in lots of people, and they park on both sides of the street from Memorial to the dog park. Do our citizens not matter? The council seems to think we can do away with cars. Well, we can’t. Living and working here requires a car. I know the parking lot for City Hall and the library is always full. Which means I’ve had to park on the side street when visiting there.

I really believe in the need for such a project, but please consider the consequences. This is the wrong location, and it will adversely affect so many people. I’m asking you to reconsider.

Sue Hauser
Resident for ~ 50 years
Sent from my iPad
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Luke Connolly; Benjamin Fu Subject: Fw: Questions on city obligations due to Mary Ave Villas.

Date: Thursday, October 2, 2025 12:00:35 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 the upcoming city council meeting.

Dear Mayor Chao, Council Members,
Writing as a resident only on my own behalf.

I implore you to please agendaize Mary Ave Villas for one or more study sessions to study the below previously sent questions and related issues along these lines.

The Mary Ave Villas project is a financial and legal boondoggle for the city. These financial and legal risks must be fully studied and assessed. Past legal precedent must be carefully studied albeit in closed session if necessary.

This project cannot move to a ministerial hearing until the financial and legal boondoggle aspects of it are fully studied and the public hears the responses and can participate with input.

City council may be negligent of your duty to protect the city from financial and legal risks if you do not fully evaluate the financial and legal liabilities this project and ground lease will create and the precedent it sets.

Please urgently agendaize study sessions for this. Further please consider sending this to planning commission for study sessions and recommendations before sending it back to council for study sessions.

Finally a new council in November 2026 may decide to undo any hurried passing of this right now. Please consider the consequences of that and ensure that if you do proceed that any ground lease contract is written so that it could be terminated at any time and funding clawed back at any time with the recipient of the funding expected to be able to only drawdown on funding in stages and with ability to retract and claw back funding provided.

You can be fully 00% assured this will be a November 2026 election campaign issue. While some who have completed their re-election may feel this does not impact them it is assured those still up for re-election will have to hear from residents that have long memories. In 2024 the Linda Vista, Scofeld and McClellan neighborhoods proved that with their turnout against incumbent and past office bearers who ran. In 2026 they will be joined by Garden Gate neighborhood as well as all the neighborhoods and residents impacted by the bike lane projects to ensure that incumbent office bearers hear clearly from them via their written communications which will be their ballots.

Please do not rush through approvals on Mary Ave Villas. Please send this first to planning commission for study sessions. Please allow the proceedings of planning commission study sessions to feed into further council study sessions. Please hold additional community meetings that are conducted by the city. I believe the city as ground lease owner needs to hold these meetings and not Charities who are not owners of the land.

Thank you for paying careful attention to the financial and legal liabilities of this project to the city.

Thanks,
San Rao (representing myself only as a Cupertino resident) Begin forwarded message:

On Saturday, July 19, 2025, 6:57 AM, Santosh Rao <[email protected]> wrote:
[Writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident] Dear Mayor Chao, Acting Manager Kapoor, CAO and Director Fu, Deputy Director Connolly, Director Mosley,
I asked a number of questions during public comment on Mary Ave Villas. How does the community get answers to these questions.

The council voted to move ahead with a number of topics that were not deliberated on. You owe it to residents and taxpayers to thoroughly debate and deliberate on those questions and protect the city from any issues both fiscally and legally.

My public comment is here again for your recap:

Cupertino City Council Meeting - July 15, 2025 (Part 2)

Cupertino City Council Meeting - July
15, 2025 (Part 2)
A number of questions:

1. There is case precedent on Article 34 applying to projects involving a city ground lease that was run by a third party operator with city financial support, either with BMR funds or bond money. There are multiple case precedents in fact.

Why do these not apply. Please be very thoughtful and deliberate on this so as to protect the city from liabilities.

2. Will the city hold title on the ground lease and in documents with debt and equity providers. If so is the city partly liable for issues arising from operator insolvency, operator non-compliance to financial or state/federal/county law obligations.

3. Is the project operations funded from cash from operations. Or does it depend on ongoing city BMR funds in part. What financial ongoing obligations may the city potentially incur in an unforeseen manner due to this project.

4. What happens if Charities goes insolvent / declared bankruptcy on this project.

5. What happens if the Rotary cannot meet its obligations in any form including financially for the project including ongoing operations.

6. Can the city be sued by occupants, vendors, residents or anyone else or someone representing them as the city is the land owner. Please investigate this thoroughly as there is precedent here.

6. What prevents Charities from selling this property to another commercial party that will no longer operate the intended use but convert to regular multifamily.

How will you mandate this parcel remain 100% affordable and for IDD in proposed form.

7. Will the city have to takeover operations if no operator can be found.

8. Will the city have to handle move out of occupants if Charities files for bankruptcy on this project and no operator can be found.

9. Will the city need to subsidize this project for operations or for future operators to continue should Charities be unable to.

10. What is the history of any past project like this. What is the longest tenure of a third party operator successfully operating such a project in a public agency ground lease without a sale, change of use, bankruptcy, or needing ongoing public agency support from the land owner.

By City of Cupertino

11. What are the covenant clauses that place obligations on the city from debt and from any state and federal laws involving this type of housing.

12. You have set a precedent where any buffered bike lane with side walk or parking could be converted into a parcel and handed over by-right to an operator in the name of affordable housing only to be sold in a few years for regular commercial use. Is that your understanding as well. If not what prevents this. You just reduced a road lane on DeAnza. By the precedent set you could have set any number of parcels could be created from that DeAnza Blvd road lane you reclaimed. What would prevent that.

13. Please share contact information for Charities so residents may separately ask these and other questions to them
Please ensure questions are thoroughly deliberated and thoughtfully addressed rather than prematurely dismissed.

Thank you.

Thanks,
San Rao (writing in behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident) From: Vidya Gurikar
To: City Clerk; City Council; Chad Mosley; Matt Schroeder; Tina Kapoor; David Stillman Subject: ATP
Date: Monday, September 29, 2025 1:20:40 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
> Dear City Clerk,
>
> Please include in written communications for upcoming council meeting. Please include as feedback for ATP. >
> Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
>
> ATP is focussed on active transportation such as bike lanes, walking etc. It does not do anything for roadways, traffic management etc.
>
> Majority of the Cupertino residents rely on cars for their transportation. As such the city should keep these residents needs in all transportation planning.
>
> Please scale back on continued bike lane projects, removal of street parking, removal of right turns on red, removal of right turn roadway space and capability due to concrete cinder block bike lanes etc. >
> Please defund and cancel ATP and focus instead on road safety with technology such as speeding cameras, red light cameras, cross walk sensors and in-crosswalk LEDs, traffic management, retention of street parking, retention of right turn capability on roads, increased traffic patrolling. >
> Thank you,
>
> Shrividya Gurikar
>
>
From: Mahesh Gurikar
To: City Clerk; City Council; David Stillman; Matt Schroeder; Tina Kapoor; Chad Mosley Subject: ATP
Date: Monday, September 29, 2025 1:06:55 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 in written communications for upcoming council meeting. Please include as feedback for ATP.

Dear Mayor and City Council Members,
ATP is focussed on active transportation such as bike lanes, walking etc. It does not do anything for roadways, traffic management etc.

Majority of the Cupertino residents rely on cars for their transportation. As such the city should keep these residents needs in all transportation planning.

Please scale back on continued bike lane projects, removal of street parking, removal of right turns on red, removal of right turn roadway space and capability due to concrete cinder block bike lanes etc.

Please defund and cancel ATP and focus instead on road safety with technology such as speeding cameras, red light cameras, cross walk sensors and in-crosswalk LEDs, traffic management, retention of street parking, retention of right turn capability on roads, increased traffic patrolling.

Thank you,
Mahesh Gurikar
From: Yvonne Strom
To: City Council
Cc: City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject: Public comment - not on the agenda
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 3:08:15 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

For Oral Communications on Oct 7
Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, and City Councilmembers, I am bewildered by the agenda for today's city council meeting (Oct 7). How are the priorities being set? None of these items appear to be essential for running the City or planning for the future. I'm concerned that much more important business is being ignored or severely delayed.

For example, there are nine housing projects with formal applications on the City website that appear to be stuck in the pipeline. Why are these projects not moving forward? Furthermore, what is the status of an ordinance to prevent people being displaced from existing affordable housing?
Please get back on track,
Yvonne Thorstenson
From: j w
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; City Attorney"s Office Subject: Re: urgent! request meeting--confidential
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 1:56:03 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 respected Council,
We look forward to hearing from you/your team member soon so that this matter can be resolved as quickly as possible( we have requested it for the last few years). No city should impose unlawful or false labels under the guise of legality, especially when it causes such undue and significant hardship. The retaliations is still on going. Thank you!
Huang family
*note:we need the direction; we hope to hear rom you, if not, please publish this one. -------- Original message --------
From: jzw97 <[email protected]>
Date: 8/8/25 9:26 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: [email protected]
Subject: FW: Re: urgent! request meeting--confidential
Continue..inf might help
We attempted to reopen the insurance case several times with farmer, but the attorneys then continued to retaliate, refused to take any responsibility, and ultimately denied our requests before forcing us out of the insurance, did request one afterwards, similar responses from city attorneys then, you could contact them to neutralize city's retaliation.

These retaliatory actions have severely impacted our personal finances, safety, well being and to this day, which are unrelated to the city. This matter is time-sensitive and requires immediate attention.

Ps: insurance claims no.is attached
Sent from my Device
-------- Original message --------
From: j w <[email protected]>
Date: 8/1/25 [email protected]@cupertino.org> Subject: Re: urgent! request meeting--confidential
Hope you had a good week. Am loo!king forward to hearing from you. 'Jenny from Huang family On Friday, July 18, 2025 at 04:58:24 PM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:
continue...

I would like to request a meeting with you to discuss this matter in person. Please remember that in a previous case, the former City Mayor, Paul, independently initiated action that resulted in a $250,000 settlement. In our case, we have suffered even lot greater harm, but merely wanted our material belongings compensated.

Jensen and his law firm not only blocked us from obtaining home insurance—which at the time could have covered the damages—but the city’s retaliatory actions also led to our forced removal, causing significant personal and financial loss. Much of this could have been mitigated or compensated.

Unfortunately, the retaliation continued under the guise of legal authority, creating an environment where criminals were able to take advantage and harm us further. The list of damages and violations continues to grow. We want that stopped at the earliest.

If you believe it’s appropriate, I am willing to bring this matter before the City Council directly. Thank you! On Thursday, July 17, 2025 at 05:52:28 PM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

Subject: Follow-up on Meeting Request and Settlement Draft Dear mayor Chao,
I am following up regarding my request for a meeting with the interim, which I initially submitted months ago.

Unfortunately, health-related delays have postponed this, but I have since forwarded the original settlement draft through the third-party mediator to Ray. This addresses one of the oral items and confirms the interim's awareness of the request, as outlined below. The retaliation by former officials has left us unable to even protect our families from other matters, which is a violation of our constitutional rights.

We are eager to move forward as soon as possible and kindly request that the meeting be scheduled at your earliest convenience.

Thank you for your attention to this matter. I look forward to your prompt response.

Best regards,
Huang family 6731820
>>
Originally, the request for a meet-and-greet was forwarded to you. After my oral presentation, you acknowledged it and expressed appreciation. At that time, I mentioned I would forward the settlement proposal with only minor changes.

However, since early on, Jensen has underhandedly removed property belongings without any notice and has actively prevented a meeting from taking place. Despite these setbacks, I would still like to meet in good faith to settle this matter directly.

We supported you with our vote and genuinely hoped we could move forward together. We're not asking for much — just a fair resolution.

Thank you for your time and consideration.

Sincerely,
Huang family
4086731820
The attached file was originally drafted by third party mediator On Tuesday, May 6, 2025 at 03:27:31 PM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

Council member Ray,
I was wondering if we decided to have resident oversight legal committee or not which I said in the meeting that we would like to volunteer when it's possible.

Thank you!
ps: to deal with legal over reach while support family is very dreadful; thanks for understanding On Friday, April 11, 2025 at 08:09:32 PM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you! I’ve been in and out of the emergency room recently.

We would like to request a meeting with the City, as mentioned in the email below. The City should have a draft of the agreement we previously discussed. I will send over an updated version shortly—it's written in fairly simple language. We can have same 3rd party. Thank you1
On Wednesday, April 2, 2025 at 08:04:16 PM PDT, R "Ray" Wang <[email protected]> wrote:

JW,
Thank you for your input. I appreciate you taking the time to write and your group coming to speak today.

R "Ray" Wang
Councilmember
City Council
[email protected]
From: j w <[email protected]>
Sent: Wednesday, April 2, 2025 4:11 PM
To: City Council <[email protected]>
Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: urgent! request meeting--confidential

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.

On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 08:18:38 PM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

Due to technical issue during the oral session
continue
I updated it last night and resent it, but I'm unsure if the update was reflected in the communication. The key point I want to highlight is that the deprivation of property and belonging rights in these cases hasn't been seen in over 100 years. Historical instances, such as those involving the Tucson Black community, the Midwest, and the Southern California Chinese American community, serve as significant examples. In these cases, the issues often stemmed from decisions made by individuals outside the building profession, leading to ongoing retaliation against the vulnerable party. While the pattern may seem similar, none of those cases further deprived individuals of their basic rights under guise of the law. What we're dealing with now is on an entirely different level in the modern era, driven by biased individuals against the weaker party, named few earlier, now is the time to stop the deprivation and grant the request. Thank you!
On Tuesday, March 18, 2025 at 01:48:11 AM PDT, j w <[email protected]> wrote:
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: jzw97 <[email protected]>
To: "[email protected]" <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, March 11, 2025 at 09:23:25 AM PDT
Subject: Fw: urgent! request meeting
Please update, publish, and confirm. Stand up against the underhanded confiscation of property and belongings resulting from the unprofessional errors of former biased city personnel. This unjust action continues to be falsely labeled, depriving individuals of their rights, even those who are unrelated. Is that correct? Please put a stop to this at the earliest.

Sent from my 4G LTE Android Device
-------- Original message --------
From: j w <[email protected]>
Date: 3/4/25 6:52 PM (GMT-08:00)
To: Cupertino City Manager's Office <[email protected]> Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: Fw: urgent! request meeting
We haven't received a response from you yet, and we will be forwarding this to the council next. Thank you! ----- Forwarded Message -----
From: j w <[email protected]>
To: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Cc: Cupertino City Manager's Office <[email protected]> Sent: Thursday, February 27, 2025 at 04:14:17 PM PST
Subject: Re: urgent! request meeting
Dear City clerk,
Could you arrange a meeting for us with the City Manager, or should we contact the manager directly? Thank you.

On Thursday, February 27, 2025 at 02:58:42 PM PST, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

It seems that Chris Jensen, one of them decided to step away after weaker party's enduring years of relentless persecution and prosecution. Their final, underhanded attack appears to have completely fooled the entire U.S. judicial system, exploiting the victim to the fullest and ultimately enjoying the spoils of their actions.

Please, help
us.

On Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 10:00:29 PM PST, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

Please confirm with us. Thank you!
On Wednesday, February 19, 2025 at 05:10:44 PM PST, j w <[email protected]> wrote:
please publish...

In a world dominated by power and wealth, we find ourselves in an unyielding struggle, where the vulnerable are continuously deprived of their rights under the guise of law. We’ve sought help from those in positions of influence, but time and again, they choose to align with the powerful. Yet, we persist in our search, even when hope seems distant. Please, we need your support.
>>>
Dear City manager,
We would like to reiterate that these three individuals, along with the associated SMW firm, have asked to not work on these cases, which were requested months ago. Despite this, they continue to prosecute and persecute us based on false pretenses underhandedly(just found out again after more adversaries). Our sole intention, small portion of their pay from us, has always been to have the retaliatory fine waived, recover our belongings, and address and remove those who are misusing their power against the softer, more vulnerable party under the guise of the law. To date, our hardworking belongings properties have been taken twice without notice.

If we do not hear from you, we will escalate this matter to the council within the next hour.

Thank you.

Sent from my Metro By T-Mobile 4G LTE Android Device
-------- Original message --------
From: j w <[email protected]>
Date: 12/7/24 9:10 AM (GMT-08:00)
To: [email protected]
Subject: fw: urgent! request meeting
On Wednesday, December 4, 2024 at 11:46:41 AM PST, j w <[email protected]> wrote:

>>>
Dear City Manager,
We respectfully request the immediate removal of (Marlene) Dillinger and Araceli , Jensen, who are under investigation from this case. They have demonstrated a persistent pattern of misrepresentation, abuse of power under color of law, and bias against the weak soft spoken party. Their actions have included the underhanded taking of property belonging that rightfully belongs to us. We are only seeking the return of our belongings/property. The ongoing non-stop sanctions and deprivation of our rights are not only unjust but also undermine fundamental freedoms such as freedom of speech and democratic principles. This situation is harmful and unfair. Additionally, the refusal to grant meetings for years to long-term residents is an authoritarian practice that deprives individuals of their basic human rights and resembles totalitarian control. ps: we intend to send this to council within hours. Thank you! ----- Forwarded Message -----
From: j w <[email protected]>
To: city
Cc: City Clerk
Sent: Friday, October 25, 2024 at 10:30:56 AM PDT
Subject: Fw: urgent! request meeting--legal property belonings taken away without notice Dear all,

Under the guise of the law, various scenarios illustrate how community consent can sometimes legitimize harmful actions that undermine individual rights. For example, legislation enacted based on majority opinion—often swayed by misleading narratives—can infringe upon the rights of minorities. Such circumstances can lead to the erosion of fundamental freedoms, including the freedom of speech. In these cases, the purported consent of the community does not provide a legitimate justification for restricting individual expression.

Dear Council Shila,

I hope this message finds you well.

I wanted to follow up regarding our previous correspondence, as we have not yet received a response for more than a year but nonstop persecution and prosecution. As a reminder, our property and belongings, which were taken away without notice are from the team responsible for the design and build aspects of the project, comprising building professionals, including the original city experts. It’s important to clarify that our expertise does not extend to the criminology field or the city’s legal/enforcement team. We believe there has been a significant misuse of authority in this matter.

Thank you for your attention to this issue. I look forward to your prompt response.

Best regards,
H residence
From: Caroline Gupta
To: Public Comments; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Council Subject: Fwd: Presentations and Written Communications for October 7, 2025 City Council Meeting Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 2:50:28 PM
Attachments: Haley Carter_Cupertino City Council Speech_202510.pdf Margaret Carter_City Council Speech_202510.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.

Hello,
I wanted to share with you the speeches a wonderful Cupertino family from Tessellations will be presenting tonight.

Best,
Caroline
Caroline Gupta
Director of Facility & Operations
Pronouns: she/her/hers
Email: [email protected]
https://www.name-coach.com/caroline-gupta
Curious about what's happening at school this week?
Check out our social media feed!
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: City of Cupertino <[email protected]> Date: Mon, Oct 6, 2025 at 4:34 PM
Subject: Presentations and Written Communications for October 7, 2025 City Council Meeting
To: <[email protected]>
Having trouble viewing this email? View it as a Web page.

Cupertino City Council Speech
Margaret Carter
Tuesday, October 7, 2025
Hi! My name is Margaret Carter. I am grateful for the opportunity to speak to you tonight. I am a 7th grader at Tessellations School, or Tessie as we lovingly call it, and this is my 4th year here. I love Tessie for so many reasons. I have found so many new friends and mentors, and made so many connections that have inspired me to try so many new things. I never thought I would be where I am today.

In English, a few months ago, we wrote essays on topics we cared about. I wrote mine on the negative impacts of logging and deforestation on our environment. The funny thing was, at the end of the unit when we shared our essays with our peers and teachers, my science teacher told me she did her degree on the same topic - conservation! We had a really cool discussion about that. I love how we can always ﬁnd connections between projects and across our classes.

Some of the other classes I really enjoy having are PE (it counts!), Spanish, Math, Speech & Debate and Drama, the last two I am taking as electives. I am also taking an after school computer science class, and despite never liking it before, I am now really curious to do more with Python.

When I am not at Tessie you can ﬁnd me taking art classes, playing AYSO soccer or water polo at the high school (I would like to mention I’m the only girl on my team but I’m the fastest swimmer!). I regularly walk or bike to school, and recently started doing that on my own without my parents or siblings, which has been really nice.

At the end of the day, it’s all really fun. Even the homework! One day, I want to be a book publisher or Olympic Athlete, but for now I am enjoying my classes, friends and teachers, and especially PE on our big ﬁeld. I really love living in Cupertino and going to Tessie, and know that the special time I have here will help me achieve my goals in the future. Thank you! Cupertino City Council Speech
Haley Carter
October 7, 2025
Good evening, Council Members,
Thank you for the opportunity to speak tonight.

My name is Haley Carter, and my husband Doug and I, and our four children, have been residents of Cupertino for the past three years.

We chose to move here from Palo Alto after discovering Tessellations, a school that we knew would serve the special needs of our children. We were drawn not only to the outstanding faculty, but also to the curiosity and community in the curriculum, which in many ways reflect the spirit of Cupertino itself.

Since joining Tessellations, our children have found a home away from home, where they truly belong. Our 7th grader has developed confidence and a deep sense of authenticity in her learning, while our 4th—after attending several schools in as many years—has finally found a place where her learning differences are not just supported, but celebrated. She has blossomed and is constantly engaged and inspired, especially in robotics. Tessellations is recognized worldwide as a magnet school for gifted students, and as a result has put Cupertino on the map. Families have moved to Cupertino from Dubai and Taiwan, creating a diverse and thriving microcosm of educational innovation right here.

Our extended family travel from around the world to come and visit us, staying at local hotels and explore local businesses and shops. Our family regularly supports Cupertino restaurants, shops, and spends Sunday at the farmers market.

Our children participate year-round in Cupertino extracurricular programs—from art at CalColor to water polo, chess, and AYSO soccer. My husband is the Volunteer Head Coach for the AYSO 8-and-Under team at Stevens Creek Elementary, continuing our family’s tradition of community service.

Professionally, both my husband and I host client meetings here, drawing entrepreneurs and startups from San Francisco, Stanford and Palo Alto—into Cupertino’s local venues.

Around the corner from Tessellations, one of our neighbors—who helps decorate the Bubb Road Bear—also sets up a Santa mailbox each December. My kids look forward to it every year, and when we thanked her recently, she shared how much she loves seeing the sense of wonder come alive in children. It’s connections like these that make Cupertino such a special place to live.

Thank you.

From: Lina
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; Public Comments
Subject: Public comments- not on the agenda: Mary Ave Villas removal of 26% of street width diagrams Date: Thursday, September 18, 2025 6:59:42 AM
Attachments: Screenshot 2025-09-18 at 6.12.44 AM.png
image.png
image.png
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Cupertino City Council and City Staff,
Subject: Concerns of Mary Ave Villas housing project street changes The project is estimated to remove 19.5 feet, or 26% of its current width/public-right-of way.

This is in the context of increased traffic and parking usage from adding 40 housing units + their cars, visitors, service providers, deliveries, etc.

Problems with narrowing traffic, buffer, bike, and pedestrian lanes in an area with diverse users Safety risks:

1. Increased risk of roadway accidents!

2. Less buffer between bike and traffic lane. Unsafe for families and kids especially

3. Parked car doors swing into narrow traffic lanes- not safe to exit vehicle

4. No bypass lane or space- stopped cars can clog traffic Especially when trucks and vehicles are double parked or loading

5. Is it functional for City public works trucks and emergency vehicles? Even though the fire marshall “signed off”? Quality of life impact:

1. Narrower pedestrian areas make it difficult and congested for families and Homestead High School cross country runners that use this space daily

2. Narrower bike lanes decrease community enjoyment as many like to ride in groups

3. Worsened access to/from our homes
Please remember the uniqueness of Mary Ave and its diverse users. This area connects families, bikers, school kids, commuters between:

Memorial Park, Senior Center (900 ft)
Garden Gate Elementary School (900 ft)
Don Burnett Bridge (900 ft)
Dog Park (200 ft)
Cupertino Public Works Service Center (900 ft)
De Anza College (1000 ft)
This narrow strip of land is illogical for high density housing.

Sincerely,
Lina
CC 10-07-2025
Item No. 3
Closed Session:

Conference with Real
Property Negotiators
Written Communications
From: Lisa Warren
To: City Council; City Clerk
Cc: Tina Kapoor; Floy Andrews; Floy Andrews
Subject: Tonight, Oct 7, 2025 Closed Session Item #3 - Public Comment Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 4:57:44 PM
Attachments: Finch CUSD Public Comment note for Spet 25 2025 board meeting.docx Hyde MS Safe Routes map.pdf
Sedgwick Elementary Safe Routes map.pdf
Cupertino HS Safe Routes map.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.

City Council, City Manager and City Attorney,
I have attached a copy of what I spoke to during public comments during the Sept 25, 2025

CUSD Board meeting.

It is something similar to what I said during your last closed session. But based on you being the 'buyer' and CUSD being the 'seller'.

Please read the attachment to understand what I am referring to.

After years of the idea being discussed in public, via 2x2 discussions (Cupt and CUSD) and City and CUSD agenda item discussions, and more,

I feel
that 'this is the moment' and that the transfer of the parcel should be negotiated in good faith from both sides.

The city and school district could move forward with a 'win/win' transaction and could be partners in doing the best thing for our residents and students.

It is not all about the money.

It is about community and about
safety.

We certainly don't need another 'Scofield' situation.

I have attached 3 maps to this message also.

They are the Safe Routes to
School most recently published maps.

Mayor Chao gave compelling comments and included clear maps to show how badly the city needs this public land.

Parks and Rec, Bike Ped, Safe Routes, Walk Bike Cupt,

and many others
should be cheering you on in your goal to purchase the Finch Property.

Thank you.

Lisa Warren
Public Comment on Thurs Sept 25 regular CUSD Board mtg Zoom

During a Closed Session Cupertino City Council meeting last week, agenda item 1 was: A conference with Real Property Negotiators regarding the possible purchase of what is referred to as the Finch Property. The just under 1.5 acre vacant property is bordered on two sides by Sedgwick Elementary School. The third side of the property borders a number of single family homes in a designated historic neighborhood of Eichler homes. It is also located in a designated and signed Bike Blvd area with Cupertino HS and Hyde MS in very close proximity. Making it in the center of the eastern Tri-School area.

This is a GREAT location for a much needed ‘Nature Park’ for the park starved east side of the city. This is NOT a good location for the development of high rise, high density housing that would have only one entrance/exit - based on its location. And that would be a driveway on Phil Ln with Sedgwick’s current driveway, drop oﬀ and parking lot.. Way too close.

Many residents are hopeful that the City and District will work wisely together so that the city prevails in purchasing Finch for the purpose of creating a ‘nature park’.

I ask that anyone, including all board members, who is concerned about the safety of bicyclists, pedestrians, and other non car travelers – particularly students -- , show support for the District seriously committing to selling the Finch property to the City, regardless of any possible ‘competitive bidders’. It is important to remember that CUSD was given a ‘no competition’ opportunity to purchase the site. It took the district close to 3 years to say ‘yes’ to the purchase, and negotiate the contract. Remember that Mrs. Aida Pestarino’s son, and trustee, gave the opportunity ONLY to the school district. The property was never on the ‘open market’. The purpose of that was to honor what the matriarch and long time property owner , and resident, hoped for the property. That it be used for the beneﬁt of the district, and all of it’s residents. There would likely have been a bidding war for the property had it been marketed on the Multiple Listing Service. That was intentionally not done.

The estate gave only CUSD the opportunity. I believe that CUSD should do the same for the city of Cupertino.

Please consider what could happen if the property was sold to, or traded with, an entity that wants to create an out of place, incompatible development in the center of a ‘tri school’, low density residential area.

And picture months, or more likely years, of construction activities taking place adjacent to an elementary school on an already diﬃcult to navigate ‘T’ intersection.

It is wrong to not consider the impacts of the use of the property. It would be poor judgement to assume ‘the more money the better’.

There is more to add to this argument for working things out with the city of Cupertino. One example is a shared space, and opportunities for the community to work with students and staﬀ for the beneﬁt of all. Please be creative in your thinking, and not focused on perceived proﬁt.

!
!

E V A Y E N A L B S

N BLANEY AVE

BOLLINGER RD

LAZANEO DR

STEVENS CREEK BLVD

VISTA DR

PACIFICA DR

RODRIGUES AVE

BARNHART AVE
M
ILLER
AVE

PRUNERIDGE AVE
FINC
H
AVE

S TANTAU AVE
N
W
O
LFE
RD

VALLCO PKWY

N TANTAU AVE
DO
YLE
RD

APPLE PARK WAY
Library Field
Portal
Park
Wilson Park
Creekside
Park
Sterling
Barnhart
Main
Street
Park
Sedgwick ES
Hyde MS
Lawson MS
Collins ES
1/2
MILE
1/4MILE
1 MILE
Sa
a rt
g oa
Cre
Park
Trail
Cupertino
High School
Eaton ES
0 0.3
MILES
Cupertino High School
Suggested Routes to School

E V A H C N I F

E V A U A T N A T S

CALLE DE BARCELONA

LOREE AVE

TILSON AVE
Sanborn Map Company,
Maxar, Microsoft
This suggested route to school map is intended to encourage adults and students to consider walking or bicycling to school.

Adults are responsible for choosing the most appropriate option based on their knowledge of the diﬀerent routes and the skill level of their child.
!
!
Regnart
Creek Trail

MERRITT DR
Suggested Walking & Biking
Routes
Suggested Routes
Legend
Crosswalk
Pedestrian Flag
Crossing Guard
All Way Stop
Flashing Beacon + Crosswalk

Traffic Signal
Separated Bikeways and Trails
Trail Access
Bike Lanes
Railroad Tracks
School Enrollment Boundary
Pedestrian and Bike Access
Bike Parking

CC 10-07-2025
Item No. 10
Review of future
agenda items
requested by City
Councilmembers
Written Communications
From: Santosh Rao
To: Liang Chao; Tina Kapoor; City Council; City Clerk; City Attorney"s Office Subject: Please pull agenda item 10 from consent calendar.

Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 4:23:28 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.
[Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Dear Mayor Chao and Council Members,
Please kindly

pull Agenda Item 10 (“Future Agenda Items List”) from the consent calendar.

I respectfully request that the Mayor and Council consider adding the following items to the

Future Agenda Items

list:

1. Mary Avenue Villas – Study Session
Schedule a study session to review the financial and legal implications of the Mary Avenue Villas project and the proposed city ground lease. Several specific questions have been submitted that require active discussion and deliberation with public input.

2. Mobile Food Operator Permits
Add an item to update the Cupertino Municipal Code to establish a process for permitting mobile food operators, including annual license fees, operational regulations, and designated locations. As Cupertino continues to lose shopping center sites and their food and beverage establishments, food trucks can help sustain local dining options and community activity.

3. Capital Work Plan (CWP) Process Review
Add an item to review and update the CWP process to ensure that staff present defined project scopes and requirements to Council before work begins, allowing for early Council and public input. Projects should not proceed for extended periods without Council direction. This update should also address community noticing—currently a major resident concern—and require periodic milestone updates to Council for progress review, alignment, and continued public engagement.

4. Homeless Encampment Ordinance
Add an item to consider adopting a homeless encampment ordinance to prohibit encampments within city limits where they pose health, hygiene, or safety risks to surrounding public areas and users.

5. Lifetime Contract Review and assigning courts to private coaches for hourly lease Add an item to review the lifetime contract at Cupertino Sports Center (CSC) and study the feasibility of reducing court allocations to Lifetime Fitness. Explore leasing select courts to private coaches by the hour ($35–$45/hour, comparable to De Anza and West Valley Colleges). This approach could generate an additional $250K–$350K annually, increase competition among local coaches, and reduce the city’s reliance on Lifetime.

6. Non-Resident Subsidy and Senior Center Enrollment Policy Add an item to study general fund subsidies provided to non-residents for Parks & Recreation facilities, particularly the Senior Center. Consider reducing or eliminating such subsidies and granting Cupertino residents early priority enrollment for Senior Center classes and programs. Currently, nearly 50% of Senior Center participants are non-residents who benefit from subsidized services. Explore converting the Senior Center into an enterprise fund with full cost recovery for non-resident services.

Thank you for your consideration and for continuing to prioritize the quality of life of Cupertino residents.

Thanks,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) CC 10-07-2025
Item No. 13
Amendments to
Cupertino Municipal
Code, adding Title 14,
Chapter 14.30
Written Communications
From: Venkat Ranganathan
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Subject: Consent calendar #13 - Subject: Introduce amendments to Cupertino Municipal Code, adding Title 14, Chapter

14.30 Small Wireless Facilities In Public Rights-Of-Way, pertaining to regulation of wireless facilities within City streets
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 4:53:24 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor, and Members of the City Council, I am writing to urge the Council to remove the proposed ordinance (Chapter 14.30 on Small Wireless Facilities in Public Rights-of-Way) and accompanying resolution adopting the Regulations for Construction, Operation, and Maintenance of Small Wireless Facilities from the consent calendar and place them as a regular agenda item for full public hearing and discussion.

This proposed action represents a significant policy decision with long-term consequences for our neighborhoods, public spaces, and streetscapes. It goes far beyond a routine administrative update. The ordinance and regulations establish new standards for siting small wireless facilities, define preferred and less-preferred locations, set separation distances, alter notification and appeal processes, and delegate new decision-making powers to staff.

These are consequential choices that warrant thorough public input and Council deliberation.

Over the past several years, the City has held numerous study sessions and workshops on small cell deployment, reflecting broad community interest in the issue. Residents continue to express concerns about potential impacts on neighborhood character, visual aesthetics, property values, and the adequacy of notice and appeal opportunities.

Many of these concerns persist even within the framework of federal and state law, and public understanding of how this ordinance addresses them is essential.

Adopting the ordinance and resolution without a full hearing would risk undermining public confidence in the process. It is important for residents to have the opportunity to comment on the details of the proposed regulations — including the 1,000-foot separation standard, notification procedures, and the scope of staff authority — and for Council to deliberate openly on these issues before any final action.

For these reasons, I request that the Council remove this item from the consent calendar and schedule it as a regular agenda item for public hearing and discussion. Doing so will ensure transparency, foster public trust, and allow the Council to make a fully informed decision with community input.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
Venkat Ranganathan
CC 10-07-2025
Item No. 17
Request CASCC to
amend the Joint
Powers Agency
Agreement and Bylaws
Written Communications
From: Jean Bedord
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk Subject: Agenda Item #17 Cities Association JPA Amendment, Oct. 7, 2025 City Council Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 10:37:35 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 in the public record for this meeting
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------
Mayor Chao, Vice-Mayor Moore, Councilmembers Fruen, Mohan and Wang, This agenda item baffles me. First of all, "undemocratic practices" makes no sense in the context of a JPA (Joint Powers Authority). It's a regional body of 15 cities who have agreed to organize for the benefit of all. No one city has more authority. The objective is collaboration and information sharing among equals. The fact that all of these cities signed the Agreement is impressive - getting consensus is very hard. The sections were all carefully vetted by the members. So why would Cities Association consider major changes by a single city, and specifically a mayor, which already has a reputation for poor governance?
Secondly, as a JPA, the Cities Association meetings are open meetings governed by the Brown Act and are subject to open meeting rules. Anyone, including individual council members, can attend and speak. It's a similar situation to the library JPA where I personally spoke against another poorly crafted proposal by a previous Cupertino city mayor, which the JPA rejected on a 8-1 vote against Cupertino.

Thirdly, selection of Officers is based on interest and subject matter expertise (SME) - getting a quorum can be challenging. Generally, members know each other and their reputations from interactions in other contexts. They know who are effective collaborators, and those shifted to minor roles due to personality conflicts. Recommendations come from personal interactions, not paper qualifications and committee/commissions/etc. salad.

Recommendations from respected mayors outside Cupertino carry more weight. The JPA, as a regional body, can authorize non-voting members whose SME provide expertise to the organization, provided they are elected council members. No other jurisdictions seem to have an objection to the current practices.

This is not a City Work Program item - it's a whim of the Cupertino mayor and an embarrassment to our city. I urge the council to reject both resolutions. Why waste time (particularly expensive hourly lawyer time) on a request that is highly unlikely to be approved by the 15 Cities Association members?
Good governance advocate,
Jean Bedord
From: Kirsten Squarcia
To: City Clerk
Subject: FW: Comments on Item 25-18366—Council Policy Change Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 8:20:39 AM
Please include with the written communications. I've already communicated it's not possible to add as an additional attachment since the agenda has already been published.

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

City Manager's Office
[email protected]
(408) 777-3225

From: Sheila Mohan <[email protected]>
Sent: Sunday, October 5, 2025 10:11 PM
To: Tina Kapoor <[email protected]>; Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]> Subject: Fw: Comments on Item 25-18366—Council Policy Change

Tina, Kirsten: Please include Larry Klein's email to Council in Written Communications and as an additional attachment to Item # 17 on the 10/7/25 agenda.

Thanks.

Sheila Mohan
Councilmember

City Council
[email protected]
(408)777-1326
From: Larry Klein <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:08 PM
To: Liang Chao <[email protected]>; Kitty Moore <[email protected]>; Sheila Mohan <[email protected]>; J.R. Fruen <[email protected]>; R "Ray" Wang <[email protected]>
Cc: City Council <[email protected]>
Subject: Comments on Item 25-18366—Council Policy Change

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 Honorable Cupertino Mayor and City Council,
I was informed that tonight you are looking at changing policy concerning ratifying appointments by outside bodies (with tonight’s Item 25-18366; Adding Section 5.3.1 to your Council Policy). In Sunnyvale, we have a similar policy, however, this is a perfunctory approval of a decision that ultimately lies under the power of an outside body that we have no real control over.

Sunnyvale Council has never not automatically approved the decision of an outside body as far as I know in my 20 years of serving the city (and I’m uncertain of the general power that we would have to do so). Even though we have additional powers as a Charter City; this Council Policy is perfunctory and informational at best.

Speaking on my own behalf, I urge you to not approve this specific change to your Council Policy.

Best regards,
-Larry

Larry Klein
Sunnyvale Mayor
From: Anne Ezzat
To: Liang Chao; Kitty Moore; R "Ray" Wang; Sheila Mohan; J.R. Fruen; City Clerk; Kirsten Squarcia Subject: Item #17 on Tonight"s Agenda
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 2:14:36 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Mooore, Council Member Mohan, Council Member Fruen, and Council Member Wang,
I am writing to support the modification for the election procedures of the executive board of the Cities Association of Santa Clara County. In addition, I support Vice Mayor Kitty Morore's appointment to the CASC board and her election to the executive commitee. While I do not always agree with Ms. Moore because we do not share a communal brain, I respect that she acts in the best interest of the community after an extensive amount of research and ruminating.

Thanks for your time and attention. I trust this will be added to the public record., Best regards,
Brooke Ezzat
From: Kitty Moore
To: Kirsten Squarcia; Lauren Sapudar
Subject: Written Communications Item 17
Date: Tuesday, October 7, 2025 4:35:20 PM
Dear City Clerk,
The following is for Item 17 Written Communications:

Since 2016 Saratoga has been represented on the SCCCA 8 years and Sunnyvale has been represented 9 times.

Gilroy, Los Altos Hills, Milpitas, Monte Sereno and Santa Clara do not appear to have ever been represented.

Some individuals have been on the Executive Committee multiple years as you will see in the table below, current President Klein is in his 7th year.

X if a City Representative was Appointed to the SCCCA Exectutive Board Year Campbell Cupertino Gilroy Los Altos Los Altos Hills Los Gatos Milpitas Monte Sereno Morgan Hill Mountain View Palo Alto San Jose Santa Clara Saratoga Sunnyvale
2025 X X X X X
2024 X X X X
2023 X X X X X
2022 X X X X X
2021 X X X X
2020 X X X X X
2019 X X X X X
2018 X X X X X
2017 X X X X X
2016 X X X X X
Total Years 2 6 0 5 0 4 0 0 2 5 3 4 0 8 9
SCCCA Executive Board
Treas/Secretary At-large
Year Pres 1st VP 2nd VP Treas/At-Large Past Pres LAC
2025Klein, SV Walia, SA Fruen, CU Scozzola, CA Fligor, LA Fruen, CU 2024Fligor, LA Klein, SV Walia, SA Wei, CU Abe-Koga Walia, SA 2023Abe-Koga, MV Fligor, LA Klein, SV Walia, SA Wei, CU At-large Klein, SV 2022Jones, SJ Abe-Koga, MV Fligor, LA Constantine, MH Sayoc, LG Fligor, LA 2021 Sayoc, LG Jones, SJ Abe-Koga, MV Fligor, LA Klein, SV Constantine, MH 2020 Klein, SV Sayoc, LG Jones, SJ Constantine, MH Chappello, SA Fligor, LA 2019 Cappello, SA Showalter, MV Klein, SV Sayoc, LG Jones, SJ Sinks, CU 2018 Sinks, CU Cappello, SA Showalter, MV Klein, SV Scharff, PA Sayoc, LG 2017 Scharff, PA Sinks, CU Cappello, SA Pepper, LA Griffith, SV Showalter, MV 2016 Griffith, SV Scharff, PA Sinks, CU Cappello, SA Baker, CA Pepper, LA Exec. Name Number of times on Executive Board since 2018 Klein, SV 7
Fligor, LA 5
Abe-Koga, MV 4
Jones, SJ 4
Sayoc, LG 4
Walia, SA 3
Capello, SA 3
Fruen, CU 1
Wei, CU 2
Showater, MV 2
Constantine, MH 2
Sinks, CU 1
Kitty Moore
Vice Mayor

City Council
[email protected]
(408)

777-1389

Cupertino City CouncilOctober 7, 2025

Cupertino City Council
October 7, 2025