Written Communications (updated 12/17/2025) — Cupertino City Council, December 16, 2025

CC 12-16-2025
Oral
Com
munications
Written
Comments
From: Rhoda Fry
To: Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; City Council; City Attorney"s Office; Public Comments Subject: Please ensure that ACTIONS are not taken at STUDY SESSIONS in the future Date: Wednesday, December 10, 2025 8:24:22 AM
Attachments: CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2022.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2021.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2020.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2019.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2018.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2017.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2016.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2015.pdf
CITY OF CUPERTINO - 2014.pdf
Agenda - 2025-12-10T075756.655.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 Manager,
On the December 2, 2025 Agenda (last attachment), an ACTION was listed under a STUDY SESSION ITEM #12. Agenda items with ACTIONS should be on the ACTION CALENDAR, not STUDY SESSIONS.

Please ensure that ACTIONS are not taken at STUDY SESSIONS in the future.

A similar error was made in January 2023 and you can see below an email that I wrote to the City about this along with a number of attachments illustrating that ACTIONS had NEVER been taken at prior STUDY SESSIONS.

Furthermore, I googled, “city government can actions be taken at study sessions” and got the following response (I’ll leave it to the experts to study the issue in greater depth):

No, generally, city governments
cannot take formal action (like voting or passing
ordinances) at

study sessions; these are for in-depth discussion, information gathering, and providing

staff direction, with official votes reserved for regular meetings, though some "direction" can be given to staff to prepare items for a formal vote later. The key is that study sessions are for

deliberation, not

decision-making, and must still follow open meeting laws (like the
Brown Act in California) by being public, noticed, and having agendas, ensuring transparency even without votes.

I don’t know whether it is allowed to have an action on a study session (it doesn’t look like it), but it just isn’t good practice. Please also consider that an action tied to a Study Session could alter the nature of the discourse during the Study Session as it risks shifting discussion toward the specified action. Moving forward, please let’s keep STUDY SESSIONS action-free.

Thanks Much!
: ) Rhoda Fry
From: Rhoda Fry <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, January 24, 2023 4:27 PM
To: 'City Clerk' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: For Item #1 and #2 Study Session January 25 Final Actions are not made at Study Sessions

Hi City Clerk,
Just to clarify, please include this for public comment on Item #1 and #2 Study Session January 25 Final Actions are not made at Study Session
Thanks Much,
Rhoda Fry
From: Rhoda Fry [mailto:[email protected]
]
Sent: Sunday, January 22, 2023 5:41 PM
To: 'City Clerk' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]>; '[email protected]' <[email protected]> Subject: Final Actions are not made at Study Sessions

Dear City Manager and City Council,

Final Actions are not made at Study Sessions.

Items are studied at Study Sessions, discussed at subsequent Regular Sessions, and subsequently decided.

This has been the case as far as I can remember in my 40 years as a Cupertino resident.

Attached you will find the facts to back up this assertion going back 9 years of Study Sessions (this was the maximum I was able to extract from the database).

In 9 years, Final Actions have never taken place on the same day as Study Session Items.

To continue transparency and public participation, at the next City Council meeting and moving forward, please

1. Do not take Final Action (vote on resolution) on Study Session items

2. Discuss the outcome of a Study Session and open public comment at a subsequent City Council meeting and then take action

Respectfully,
Rhoda Fry

Tuesday, December 2, 2025
6:00 PM

CITY OF CUPERTINO
Televised Special Meeting (6:00) and Televised Regular City Council Meeting (6:45)
10350 Torre Avenue, Council Chamber and via Teleconference; and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2): Wynn Resort, 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S, Las Vegas, NV 89109.

City Council

LIANG CHAO, MAYOR

KITTY MOORE, VICE MAYOR
J.R. FRUEN, COUNCILMEMBER

SHEILA MOHAN, COUNCILMEMBER
R "RAY" WANG, COUNCILMEMBER

IN PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE MEETING
AGENDA

CONDUCT OF BUSINESS
The Mayor is the presiding officer of the City Council. Any member of the public may speak on any item on the agenda for up to three minutes. All statements and questions must be addressed to the Mayor.

City Council hearings serve as a venue for the discussion of sometimes divergent points of view. Please re spect the opinions of others and refrain from cheering or clapping. That may delay the meeting or intimidate other persons wishing to express alternate views. Actions that disrupt the meeting will result in a warning, followed by removal if disruption continues.

Oral public comments will be accepted during the meeting. Comments may be made during “oral communications” for matters not on the agenda, and during the public comment period for each agenda item.

Identifying yourself is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments.

FLOWCHART FOR HEARING ITEMS:

Mayor introduces
agenda item
Councilmembers report any site
visits or outside communications.

Speakers submit a Request to Speak
card, and are allowed up to 3 minutes
per individual. Council members may
ask questions of speakers.

Mayor invites members of
the public to speak about
the agenda item
For appeals of approvals, the
applicant may respond to
appellants presentation.

The Mayor may request a motion and
a second after the close of the public
hearing. Council then deliberates and
votes.

Mayor closes the public hearing
Councilmembers ask clarifying
questions.

PUBLIC HEARINGS
The City Council is required by law to
hold public hearings on certain matters
prior to making its decision. Notice to
interested parties is given by legal
advertisement in the local newspaper of
general circulation at least 10 calendar
days preceding the hearing date.

Applications requiring public hearings
include change of zoning, variances, use
permits, and tentative maps.

COUNCIL MEETINGS
The City Council regularly meets the first
and third Tuesdays of each month. These
meetings are held at 6:45 p.m. Closed
sessions, when needed, are normally held
at 6:00 p.m. Closed sessions cover items
such as personnel, litigation, or the sale ,
purchase, or lease of property. The law
requires certain actions taken in closed
session to be reported in open session.

Urgent business, holidays, or election
days may trigger special or adjourned
meetings. These meetings will be noticed
beforehand.

AGENDAS, MINUTES, AND PACKETS

AVAILABLE ON THE WEB
Agendas, minutes, and packets for
current and prior City Council and
Planning Commission meetings are
available at www.cupertino.org, or you
can purchase the items on CD.

CITY COUNCIL DECISION IS FINAL
Prior to seeking judicial review of any
adjudicatory (quasi ‐judicial) decision,
interested persons must file a petition for
reconsideration within ten calendar days
of the date the City Clerk mails notice of
the City’s decision. Reconsideration
petitions must comply with the
requirements of Cupertino Municipal
Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk’s
office for more information or go to
www.http://www.cupertino.org/index.as
px?page=125 for a reconsideration
petition form.

Mayor invites
applicant/appellant to
respond to public
comments (2 min)
City Council votes on
the agenda item
Staff reports and makes
recommendation
Applicant or Appellant
makes presentation
(up to 8 min)
Councilmembers ask
questions of staff or
applicant/appellant
Mayor opens the public hearing
City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

IN-PERSON AND TELECONFERENCE / PUBLIC PARTICIPATION INFORMATION OPTIONS TO OBSERVE:

Members of the public wishing to observe the meeting may do so in one of the following ways:
1) Attend in person at Cupertino Community Hall, 10350 Torre Avenue. 2) Tune to Comcast Channel 26 and AT&T U-Verse Channel 99 on your TV. 3) Watch a live stream online at www.Cupertino.gov/youtube and www.Cupertino.org/webcast
OPTIONS TO PARTICIPATE AND COMMENT:

Members of the public wishing to address the City Council may do so in the following ways:
1) Appear in person for Open Session at Cupertino Community Hall.

A. During “Oral Communications”, the public may comment on matters not on the agenda, and for agendized matters, the public may comment during the public comment period for each agendized item.

B. Speakers are requested to complete a Speaker Card. While completion of Speaker Cards is voluntary and not required to attend the meeting or provide comments, it is helpful for the purposes of ensuring that all speakers are called upon.

C. Speakers must wait to be called, then proceed to the lectern/podium and speak into the microphone when recognized by the Mayor.

D. Speakers are limited to three ( 3) minutes each. However, the Mayor may reduce the speaking time depending on the number of people who wish to speak on an item. A speaker representing a group between 2 and 5 members of the public in attendance may have up to 2 minutes per group member to speak, up to 10 minutes maximum.

E. Please note that due to cyber security concerns, speakers are not allowed to connect any personal devices at the lectern/podium. However, speakers that wish to share a document (e.g. presentations, photographs or other documents) during oral comments may do so in one of the following ways:
a) At the overhead projector at the podium, or
b) E-mail the document to cityclerk@cupertino .gov by 3:00 p.m. and staff will advance the slides/share the documents during your oral comment.

Page 2 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
2) Written Communications as follows:

A. E-mail comments to the City Council for Open Session at [email protected] as follows:
a. E-mail comments must be received by 4:00 p.m. on the day of the meeting in order to be forwarded to the City Council before the meeting.
b. Emailed comments received following agenda publication but prior to, or during, the meeting, will be posted to the City’s website after the meeting. c. These e-mail comments will also be received by each City Councilmember, the City Manager, and the City Clerk ’s Office. Comments on non-agenda items sent to any other email address will be included upon the sender's request.

B. Regular mail or hand delivered addressed to the: City Council, City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014
3) Open Session Teleconference in one of the following ways:

A. Online via Zoom on an electronic device (Audio and Video): Speakers must register in advance by clicking on the link below to access the meeting:
https://cityofcupertino.zoom.us/webinar/register/WN_X3Bt2qbzQEWH3SGnKGqkNQ a) Registrants will receive a confirmation email containing information about joining the webinar.
b) Speakers will be recognized by the name they use for registration. Once recognized, speakers must click ‘unmute’ when prompted to speak.
c) Please read the following instructions about technical compatibility carefully: One can directly download the teleconference (Zoom) software or connect to the meeting in their internet browser. If a browser is used, make sure the most current and up-to-date browser, such as the following, is used: Chrome 30+, Firefox 27+, Microsoft Edge 12+, Safari 7+.

Certain functionality may be disabled in older browsers, including Internet Explorer.

B. By Phone (Audio only): No registration is required in advance and speakers may join the meeting as follows:
a) Dial 669-900-6833 and enter WEBINAR ID: 847 8092 2262 b) To “raise hand” to speak: Dial *9; When asked to unmute: Dial *6 c) Speakers will be recognized to speak by the last four digits of their phone number.

C. Via an H.323/SIP room system:

Join from an H.323/SIP room system:

H.323:
144.195.19.161 (US West)
206.247.11.121 (US East)
Meeting ID: 847 8092 2262

Page 3 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
SIP: [email protected]

NOTICE AND CALL FOR A SPECIAL MEETING OF THE CUPERTINO CITY COUNCIL NOTICE IS HEREBY GIVEN that a special meeting of the Cupertino City Council is hereby called for Tuesday, December 02, 2025, commencing at 6:00 p.m. in Community Hall Council Chamber, 10350 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014 and via teleconference; and Teleconference Location Pursuant to Gov. Code 54953(b)(2): Wynn Resort, 3131 Las Vegas Blvd S, Las Vegas, NV 89109. Said special meeting shall be for the purpose of conducting business on the subject matters listed below under the heading, “Special Meeting."

SPECIAL MEETING

ROLL CALL

ACTION CALENDAR

1. Subject: Submit comments for Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ and the Draft EIR; Adopt a resolution authorizing the Mayor to sign and transmit the comment letter to MTC and ABAG
Recommended Action : 1. Submit comments for Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ and the Draft EIR; and

2. Adopt Resolution No. 25-100 authorizing the submittal of a comment letter on the Draft Plan Bay Area 2050+ and the associated Draft Environmental Impact Report and authorizing the Mayor to sign and transmit the letter to the Metropolitan Transportation Commission (MTC) and the Association of Bay Area Governments (ABAG)
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B - Draft Letter

ADJOURNMENT

REGULAR MEETING

CALL TO ORDER

PLEDGE OF ALLEGIANCE

ROLL CALL

CLOSED SESSION REPORT

CEREMONIAL ITEMS

Page 4 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

1. Subject: Proclamation recognizing the work of the City Manager’s Office Recommended Action : Present proclamation recognizing the work of the City Manager’s Office
A - Proclamation

2. Subject: Proclamation recognizing Dr. Darrel Lum for His Exemplary Contributions to Grassroots Democracy and Civic Engagement
Recommended Action : Present proclamation recognizing Dr. Darrel Lum for His Exemplary Contributions to Grassroots Democracy and Civic Engagement A - Proclamation

PRESENTATIONS

3. Subject: Presentation from Solving Fun on the First Cupertino Puzzle Hunt Month-Long Event
Recommended Action: Receive presentation from Solving Fun on the First Cupertino Puzzle Hunt Month-Long Event

POSTPONEMENTS AND ORDERS OF THE DAY

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS
This portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the Council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the Council and not on the agenda for discussion. The total time for Oral Communications will ordinarily be limited to one hour. Individual speakers are limited to three ( 3) minutes. As necessary, the Chair may further limit the time allowed to individual speakers, or reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come first heard basis, with priority given to students. In most cases, State law will prohibit the Council from discussing or making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. A councilmember may, however, briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers. A councilmember may also ask a question for clarification, provide a reference for factual information, request staff to report back concerning a matter, or request that an item be added to a future City Council agenda in response to public comment.

CONSENT CALENDAR (Items 4-9)
Items appearing on the Consent Calendar are considered routine City business and may be approved by one motion. Typical items may include meeting minutes, awards of contracts, the ratification of accounts payable, and second readings of ordinances. Any member of the Council may request to have an item removed from the Consent Calendar based on the rules set forth in the City Council Procedures Manual. Members of the public may provide input on one or more consent calendar items when the Mayor asks for public comments on the Consent Calendar.

4. Subject: Approval of November 18, 2025 City Council minutes

Page 5 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
Recommended Action: Approve the November 18, 2025 City Council minutes A - Draft Minutes

5. Subject: Second reading and enactment of amendments to the Municipal Code, Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations) to Establish Chapter 5.51 to Regulate Film Production
Recommended Action: Conduct the second reading and enact Ordinance No. 25-2279:
“An Ordinance of the City Council of the City of Cupertino Amending City Code Title 5 (Business Licenses and Regulations) to Establish Chapter 5.51 to Regulate Film Production.”
Staff Report
A - Draft Ordinance (Clean)
B - Draft Ordinance (Redline)
C - Feedback from California Film Commission

6. Subject: Declare properties as having potential fire hazards from weeds or other potential nuisances for the Cupertino Weed Abatement Program; set hearing on March 3, 2026 to declare a public nuisance and to consider objections for proposed removal Recommended Action : Adopt Resolution No. 25-101 declaring properties as having potential fire hazards from weeds or other potential nuisances (Attachment A) and set hearing on March 3, 2026 to declare a public nuisance and to consider objections for proposed removal
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution and Exhibit A
B – Cupertino Commencement Report (Exhibit A)

7. Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for October 2025 Recommended Action: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Report for October 2025 Staff Report
A – Report of City-wide Receipts, Disbursements, and Cash Balances October 2025 B – Report of City-wide Fund BalancesNet Position October 2025

8. Subject: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for October 2025 Recommended Action: Receive the Monthly Treasurer's Investment Report for October 2025
Staff Report
A - Chandler Investment Report Oct 2025

9. Subject: Establishment of New Friendship City Relationships with Xuhui District, Shanghai, People ’s Republic of China and Danzhou, Hainan Province, People ’s Republic of China

Page 6 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
Recommended Action : Approve the establishment of new Friendship City relationships with:

1. Xuhui District, Shanghai, People’s Republic of China; and

2. Danzhou, Hainan Province, People’s Republic of China Staff Report
A - Friendship City Application - Xuhui District, Shanghai, People's Republic of China B - Friendship City Application - Danzhou, Hainan Province, People’s Republic of China C - Sister and Friendship City Policy
D - Letter of Intent - Xuhui District
E - Letter of Intent - Danzhou

PUBLIC HEARINGS
Government Code Section 65103.5 limits the distribution of copyrighted material associated with the review of development projects. Members of the public wishing to view plans that cannot otherwise be distributed under Govt. Code Section 65103.5 may make an appointment with the Planning Division to view them at City Hall by sending an email to planning@cupertino .gov. Plans will also be made available digitally during the hearing to consider the proposal.

10. Subject: Amendments to the Fiscal Year (FY) 2025-26 Fee Schedule to establish a new fee for Film Permit Applications and Film Production
Recommended Action: Adopt Resolution No. 25-102 to amend the City ’s Master Fee Schedule - Schedule A - to establish a new fee for Film Permit Applications and Film Production
Staff Report
A - Draft Resolution
B - Exhibit A - FY 2025-26 Fee Schedule A - General Fees (Redline) C - Exhibit A - FY 2025-26 Fee Schedule A - General Fees (Clean)

ACTION CALENDAR

11. Subject: OpenGov Budget Format Review Presentation and Finalize Recommendations Recommended Action: a. Receive Budget Format Review presentation as outlined in the Budget Format Implementation Action Plan (IAP) recommendation numbers 15, 17, 18, 19, and 30
b. Approve OpenGov budget format recommendations
Staff Report
A – Sample Current Budget Council & Commissions Department Overview through budget financials page
B – Budget Format Implementation Action Plan

STUDY SESSION

Page 7 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025

12. Subject: Conduct Study Session on the Mary Avenue Project ( “Project”), including project history, project siting, the conditional transfer of City-owned property rights, affordability restrictions, and remaining steps prior to entitlement and closing on the Project; and 2) Consider Appointing Negotiator(s) for the possible transfer of certain rights to City-owned property (APN: 326-27-053), in the form of a ground lease or a sale with the City’s future right to repurchase
Recommended Action : Consider Mary Ave. project and provide direction on next steps including appointing the City Manager and Interim City Attorney as Negotiators with the Nonprofit Public Benefit Corporations Cupertino Rotary Housing Corporation, Housing Choices Coalition for Persons with Developmental Disabilities, Inc., and Charities Housing Development Corporation of Santa Clara County (collectively, the “Developer”), regarding the possible transfer of property rights in the form of a ground lease or sale with the City ’s future right to repurchase on terms established by the City Council
Staff Report
A - Staff Report dated March 15, 2022
B - Parcel Map recorded on May 2, 2023
C - Staff Report dated February 6, 2024
D – Exclusive Negotiating Agreement executed on April 9, 2024 E - Staff Report dated September 4, 2024
F - Staff Report dated April 15, 2025
G - Staff Report dated July 15, 2025
H - Existing Conditions and Demolition Plan
I - Mary Avenue Project FAQ

ITEMS REMOVED FROM THE CONSENT CALENDAR

CITY MANAGER REPORT

13. Subject: City Manager Report
A - City Manager Report

ORAL COMMUNICATIONS - CONTINUED

COUNCILMEMBER REPORTS

14. Subject: Councilmember Reports
A - Councilmember Report, Chao
B - Councilmember Report, Fruen
C - Councilmember Report, Mohan
D - Councilmember Report, Moore

FUTURE AGENDA ITEMS
The Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report is a tentative council meeting agenda calendar that lists

Page 8 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
upcoming City Council meeting dates and tentative agenda items, all of which are subject to change.

15. Subject: Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
A - Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report

ADJOURNMENT
Lobbyist Registration and Reporting Requirements: Individuals who influence or attempt to influence legislative or administrative action may be required by the City of Cupertino ’s lobbying ordinance (Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 2.100) to register and report lobbying activity. Persons whose communications regarding any legislative or administrative are solely limited to appearing at or submitting testimony for any public meeting held by the City are not required to register as lobbyists .

For more information about the lobbying ordinance, please contact the City Clerk ’s Office at 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, CA 95014; telephone ( 408) 777-3223; email cityclerk@cupertino .org; and website: www.cupertino.org/lobbyist.

The City of Cupertino has adopted the provisions of Code of Civil Procedure §1094.6; litigation challenging a final decision of the City Council must be brought within 90 days after a decision is announced unless a shorter time is required by State or Federal law.

Prior to seeking judicial review of any adjudicatory (quasi-judicial) decision, interested persons must file a petition for reconsideration within ten calendar days of the date the City Clerk mails notice of the City’s decision. Reconsideration petitions must comply with the requirements of Cupertino Municipal Code §2.08.096. Contact the City Clerk ’s office for more information or go to http://www.cupertino.org/cityclerk for a reconsideration petition form.

In compliance with the Americans with Disabilities Act ( ADA), anyone who is planning to attend this meeting who is visually or hearing impaired or has any disability that needs special assistance should call the City Clerk's Office at 408-777-3223, at least 48 hours in advance of the meeting to arrange for assistance. In addition, upon request in advance by a person with a disability, meeting agendas and writings distributed for the meeting that are public records will be made available in the appropriate alternative format.

Any writings or documents provided to a majority of the Cupertino City Council after publication of the packet will be made available for public inspection in the City Clerk ’s Office located at City Hall, 10300 Torre Avenue, Cupertino, California 95014, during normal business hours; and in Council packet archives linked from the agenda/minutes page on the City web site.

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code section

2.08.100 written communications sent to the City Council, Commissioners or staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written

Page 9 ends

City Council Agenda December 2, 2025
communications are accessible to the public through the City website and kept in packet archives. Do not include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public, as written communications are considered public records and will be made publicly available on the City website.

Page 10 ends

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.100 written communications sent to the CupertinoCity Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. Thesewritten communications are accessible to the public through the City's website and kept in packet archives. You are hereby admonished not toinclude any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public; doing so shall constitutea waiver of any privacy rights you may have on the information provided to the City.

Search: study session 2022 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
22-11369 StudySession AgendaReady 8/16/2022 9/20/2022 Subject: Study Session to consider potential Municipal Code Amendments to allow properties inSingle Family Residential Districts to subdivide properties into two and/or develop properties withup to two units ministerially pursuant to CA Senate Bill 9 22-10837 StudySession Conducted 4/27/2022 6/21/2022 Subject: Public Review Draft Climate Action Plan 2.0 Study Session 22-10947 StudySession AgendaReady 5/12/2022 6/7/2022 Subject: Study Session and Consideration of Design Professional Services Agreement betweenthe City of Cupertino and Dialog Design LLP for the City Hall Annex at 10455 Torre Ave 22-10973 StudySession AgendaReady 5/18/2022 Subject: The fourth study session on the Housing Element Update focusing on the establishmentof a housing sites selection inventory and strategies to promote the development of newhousing. 22-10963 StudySession Conducted 5/18/2022 5/19/2022 Subject: Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Proposed Budget (Continued from May17, 2022) 22-10945 StudySession AgendaReady 5/11/2022 5/17/2022 Subject: Consider a Study Session on the Capital Improvements Program (CIP,) including reviewof the five-year CIP (Fiscal Year (FY) 22-27) and new proposed projects for FY 22-23; Considerthe supplemental information for Capital Improvements Program (CIP) Study Session (Continuedfrom May 3, 2022) 22-10458 StudySession Continued 2/7/2022 5/17/2022 Subject: Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 2022-23 Proposed Budget 22-10583 StudySession AgendaReady 3/8/2022 5/3/2022 Subject: Consider a Study Session on the Capital Improvements Program (CIP,) including reviewof the five-year CIP (Fiscal Year (FY) 22-27) and new proposed projects for FY 22-23 22-10725 NewBusiness AgendaReady 4/7/2022 Subject: Third study session on the Housing Element update focusing on the establishment of ahousing sites selection inventory and strategies to promote the development of new housing. 21-10165 StudySession Conducted 11/17/2021 3/1/2022 Subject: Consider a Study Session on the proposed ordinance language and phasing for a Single-Use Plastics Ordinance 22-10474 StudySession AgendaReady 2/8/2022 Subject: Housing Element Update study session focusing on the establishment of a housing sitesinventory (Continued from January 25th Planning Commission meeting) 22-10325 StudySession AgendaReady 1/5/2022 2/1/2022 Subject: Study session to discuss the awarded PDA Planning Grant funds from the Association ofBay Area Governments/Metropolitan Transportation Commission (ABAG/MTC) for the Heart of theCity Specific Plan Update in conjunction with the Housing Element Update 21-10292 StudySession AgendaReady 12/15/2021 Subject: Housing Element Update study session focusing on the establishment of a housing sitesinventory Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 13 recordsShowGroupExport

Search: study session 2021 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
21-10210 NewBusiness AgendaReady 12/3/2021 Subject: Receive Budget Format Review and Opengov Study Session 21-10084 NewBusiness AgendaReady 10/29/2021 Subject: Budget Form Review and OpenGov Study Session 21-9873 NewBusiness AgendaReady 9/15/2021 Subject: Budget Format Review Summary and OpenGov Study Session 21-9544 StudySession AgendaReady 6/25/2021 9/21/2021 Subject: Study Session to provide an update on the Pre-Approved Accessory Dwelling UnitProgram and Accessory Dwelling Unit implementation 21-9761 StudySession AgendaReady 8/19/2021 Subject: Study Session to provide an update on the Pre-Approved Accessory Dwelling UnitProgram and Accessory Dwelling Unit implementation. 21-9382 StudySession AgendaReady 5/19/2021 6/4/2021 Subject: Study Session II on Fiscal Year (FY) 21-22 Proposed Budget 21-9142 StudySession AgendaReady 4/19/2021 5/18/2021 Subject: Initial Study Session on Fiscal Year (FY) 21-22 Proposed Budget. 21-9233 StudySession AgendaReady 5/5/2021 5/11/2021 Subject: Special joint study session meeting with City Council, Planning Commission, and HousingCommission on the Housing Element update. 21-9033 StudySession AgendaReady 3/16/2021 5/4/2021 Subject: Study Session on the Capital Improvement Programs (CIP): Review of Projects Proposedfor Fiscal Year (FY) 21/22. 21-9144 StudySession AgendaReady 4/19/2021 4/27/2021 Subject: Special joint study session meeting with City Council, Planning Commission, and HousingCommission on the Housing Element update. 21-8728 StudySession AgendaReady 1/21/2021 4/20/2021 Subject: Study Session on the City of Cupertino's Permitting Guidelines for Small Cell Facilitieswithin the Public Right-of-Way. 21-8747 StudySession AgendaReady 1/27/2021 2/16/2021 Subject: Study Session to compare standards for mixed-use developments and high densityresidential guidelines with other cities. 20-6960 StudySession AgendaReady 1/29/2020 1/26/2021 Subject: Study Session to compare standards for mixed-use developments and high densityresidential guidelines with other cities 20-8322 StudySession AgendaReady 10/21/2020 1/19/2021 Subject: Study Session on Lehigh Southwest Cement Company/Permanente Quarry and StevensCreek Quarry regarding Reclamation Plan Amendment and Use Permit Applications to County ofSanta Clara.

Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 14 recordsShowGroupExport

Search: study session 2020 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
20-8307 StudySession AgendaReady 10/14/2020 12/1/2020 Subject: Study Session on Climate Action Plan 2.0 initial draft goals and vision statement 20-8179 StudySession AgendaReady 9/9/2020 10/6/2020 Subject: Study session to receive input on services to be provided in a new 10-year franchiseagreement 20-8046 StudySession AgendaReady 8/3/2020 9/22/2020 Subject: Study Session and presentation on the transition from Level of Service (LOS) to VehicleMiles Traveled (VMT) for determination of transportation impacts under CEQA, a change requiredby Senate Bill (SB) 743. 20-7438 StudySession Conducted 8/10/2020 9/15/2020 Subject: Study Session on Proposed Revisions to the Permitting Guidelines for Small Cell Facilitieswithin the Public Right-of-Way 20-7898 StudySession Conducted 7/20/2020 9/15/2020 Subject: Study session regarding policy options to reduce secondhand smoke exposure inCupertino 20-7102 StudySession Conducted 2/23/2020 7/7/2020 Subject: Study Session regarding General Plan Amendment Authorization Procedure adopted bythe City Council in September 2015 by Resolution No. 15-078 (see Attachment A) (“GPAAuthorization Procedure”). 20-7716 StudySession AgendaReady 6/15/2020 6/23/2020 Subject: Study Session to provide an update on the Accessory Dwelling Unit implementation 19-6648 StudySession AgendaReady 11/25/2019 6/2/2020 Subject: Study Session on the Capital Improvement Program (CIP): Review of Funded FY19-20Projects Recommended to Defer One-Year and Projects Proposed for FY20-21 20-7311 StudySession Conducted 4/13/2020 5/19/2020 Subject: Study Session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2010 - 2021 Budget 19-5039 StudySession AgendaReady 2/20/2019 5/19/2020 Subject: Study Session regarding Plan Bay Area 2050 and Regional Housing Needs Allocations(RHNA) (including impact of Jobs-Housing Balance and Jobs-Housing Fit to RHNA) 20-7092 StudySession AgendaReady 2/20/2020 5/5/2020 Subject: Study Session on Small Cell Facilities within the Public Right of Way 20-7093 StudySession Conducted 2/20/2020 4/7/2020 Subject: Joint study session with the City Council and Planning Commission on state housing law:Housing Accountability Act, SB 330, and Density Bonus Law. 20-7127 StudySession AgendaReady 2/26/2020 3/10/2020 Subject: Study Session regarding common terms and documents related to the CEQA process 19-6304 OldBusiness AgendaReady 10/8/2019 1/28/2020 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan and to considerGeneral Plan Policies and Strategies that could benefit from clarification. 19-6303 OldBusiness AgendaReady 10/8/2019 1/14/2020 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan and considerGeneral Plan policies and strategies that could benefit from clarification Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 15 recordsShowGroupExport

Main Grid

Search: study session 2019 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
19-6707 Study Session AgendaReady 12/4/2019 12/10/2019 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan andconsider General Plan Policies and Strategies that could benefit from clarification.Postponed from the November 12, 2019 meeting. 19-6504 Study Session AgendaReady 11/7/2019 12/2/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding the proposed policy document for the City ofCupertino Code of Ethics/Ethics Protocol 19-6592 New Business AgendaReady 11/19/2019 11/25/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding the proposed policy document for the City ofCupertino Ethics Protocol for Elected and Appointed Officials 19-6553 Old Business AgendaReady 11/18/2019 Subject: Discuss November 19th City Council Study Session on building electrificationpolicy and reach codes adoption process 19-6525 Postponementsand Orders of theDay
AgendaReady 11/13/2019 11/19/2019 Subject: Continue Item No. 15 Adoption of the 2019 California Energy and GreenBuilding Standards Codes with local amendments to a future meeting date and item willbe renoticed. These topics will be discussed in the study session. 19-6524 Public Hearings Postponed 11/13/2019 11/19/2019 Subject: Adoption of the 2019 California Energy and Green Building Standards Codeswith local amendments has been continued to a future meeting date and item will berenoticed. These topics will be discussed in the study session. 19-6276 Study Session Conducted 10/3/2019 11/19/2019 Subject: Study session regarding policy options to reduce the use of natural gas andincrease electrification of Cupertino’s building stock via local amendments to the 2019California Energy & Green Building Standards Codes (Reach Codes). 19-6507 Study Session AgendaReady 11/7/2019 11/12/2019 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan andconsider General Plan Policies and Strategies that could benefit from clarification. 19-6404 Study Session AgendaReady 10/29/2019 11/12/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding amendments being proposed to City standards forparkland dedication and fees (Chapter 13.08 - Park Land Dedication Fee, Chapter 14.05- Park Maintenance Fee, and Chapter 18.24 - Dedications and Reservations) and the2014 Certified General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and AssociatedRezoning Draft EIR 19-6502 Postponementsand Orders of theDay
AgendaReady 11/7/2019 11/14/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding the proposed policy document for the City ofCupertino Ethics Protocol for Elected and Appointed Officials 19-6342 Study Session AgendaReady 10/15/2019 Subject: Study Session related to Bird-Safe Development policies and guidelines.Application No(s): MCA-2019-004; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: citywide 19-6341 Study Session AgendaReady 10/15/2019 Subject: Study Session related to Dark Sky policies and/or standards. Application No(s):MCA-2019-003; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: citywide 19-6300 Study Session AgendaReady 10/8/2019 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan 19-6259 Study Session Postponed 9/30/2019 10/17/2019 Subject: Study Session and presentation of proposed Municipal Code Amendments toChapter 19 to incorporate "Bird Safe" policies or guidelines. Application No(s): MCA-2019-00X; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: citywide 19-6258 Study Session Postponed 9/30/2019 10/17/2019 Subject: Study session related to Dark Sky policies and/or standards. Application No(s):MCA-2019-003; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: citywide 19-6207 Study Session Continued 9/19/2019 10/1/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding status of the Objective Standards Update to GeneralPlan and Zoning Ordinance FY-2019-2020 Work Program Item (Application No.: CP- Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 40 recordsShowGroupExport
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
2019-03; Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: City-wide), provide direction to staff(continued from 9/18/19). 19-5995 Ordinances andAction Items AgendaReady 8/8/2019 9/18/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding status of the Objective Standards Update to GeneralPlan and Zoning Ordinance FY-2019-2020 Work Program Item (Application No.: CP-2019-03; Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: City-wide), provide direction to staff. 19-6143 Study Session AgendaReady 9/5/2019 9/10/2019 Subject: Study Session on the General Plan Annual Review/Implementation Plan 19-5231 Study Session Conducted 3/25/2019 9/3/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Below Market Rate (BMR) Residential HousingMitigation and Commercial Linkage Fees for the Cupertino BMR Housing Program.Application No(s).: CP-2019-01; Applicant(s): City of Cupertino; Location: Citywide 19-5822 Study Session Conducted 7/18/2019 8/20/2019 Subject: Study session to discuss how the 2016 Bicycle Transportation Plan and 2018Pedestrian Transportation Plan Projects have been brought to Council for consideration,how currently funded projects are being scheduled for completion, andrecommendation of project information and impacts staff is to consider and describe forfuture funding requests 19-5820 Study Session Conducted 7/17/2019 8/6/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Application and Review Procedures for ProjectsProposed Pursuant to Senate Bill 35. (Application No(s): CP-2019-04; Applicant(s): Cityof Cupertino; Location: Citywide) 19-5701 Study Session Conducted 6/24/2019 8/6/2019 Subject: Study session regarding policy options to prevent youth access to tobaccoproducts, including flavored tobacco products, and to reduce the density of tobaccoretailers. 19-5838 Old Business AgendaReady 7/23/2019 7/30/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Application and Review Procedures for ProjectsProposed Pursuant to Senate Bill 35. (Application No(s): CP-2019-04; Applicant(s): Cityof Cupertino; Location: citywide) Continued from the July 23rd cancelled PlanningCommission meeting. 19-5692 Old Business Continued 6/20/2019 7/23/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Application and Review Procedures for ProjectsProposed Pursuant to Senate Bill 35. (Application No(s): CP-2019-04; Applicant(s): Cityof Cupertino; Location: citywide) 18-4769 Study Session Conducted 12/20/2018 7/16/2019 Subject: Study session regarding improving communications with and effectiveness ofadvisory commissions and committees 19-5705 Study Session Conducted 6/24/2019 7/16/2019 Subject: Study session and demonstration regarding options for unofficial transcriptionof City Council and commission/committee minutes 19-5639 Ceremonial Matters& Presentations AgendaReady 6/10/2019 7/16/2019 Subject: Study Session on Small Cell Facilities within the Public Right of Way 19-5731 Public Hearings AgendaReady 7/1/2019 7/9/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding status of Objective Standards Update to General Planand Zoning Ordinance. FY-2019-2020 Work Program Item (Application No.: CP-2019-03;Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: City-wide) Continuation of discussion from theJune 25, 2019 study session 19-5631 Study Session AgendaReady 6/5/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding status of Objective Standards Update to General Planand Zoning Ordinance. FY-2019-2020 Work Program Item (Application No.: CP-2019-03;Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: City-wide) 19-5580 Study Session Conducted 5/23/2019 6/18/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Vallco Shopping District Special Area Initial GeneralPlan Amendments. Application No(s).:CP-2019-02; Apploicant(s): City of Cupertino;Location: Vallco Shopping District Area 19-5402 Old Business AgendaReady 4/30/2019 5/14/2019 Subject: Study session to create a list of objective standards topics as suggested by thePlanning Commission and the public. 19-5464 Study Session Conducted 5/6/2019 5/13/2019 Subject: Study Session on the FY 2019 - 2024 Proposed Capital Improvement Programwith Funding Options 18-4307 Study Session Conducted 8/28/2018 5/13/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2019 - 2020 Budget 19-5154 Study Session Conducted 3/12/2019 5/7/2019 Subject: Study Session for an application by AT&T to locate a personal wireless servicefacility consisting of 16 panel antennas mounted on an 80 foot tall treepole, a baseequipment station, and an emergency power generator at the Cupertino Sports Centerlocated at 21111 Stevens Creek Boulevard. 19-5047 Study Session Continued 2/21/2019 4/30/2019 Subject: Study Session on the FY 2019 - 2029 Proposed Capital Improvement Programwith Funding Options 19-5005 Study Session Conducted 2/12/2019 4/16/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) Reviewand Implementation Action Items related to possible amendments to the MunicipalCode related to Mobile Vendors, allowing Incubator/Co-working uses in GeneralCommercial zoning districts, and an Innovation District Vision Plan in the Bubb RoadSpecial Area 19-4911 Study Session Conducted 1/23/2019 4/2/2019 Subject: Study Session regarding short-term rental (e.g. Airbnb) regulations 19-5261 Study Session AgendaReady 3/27/2019 4/2/2019 Subject: Presentation and study session on City’s updated financial forecast and capitalfinancing options. 19-5227 New Business AgendaReady 3/22/2019 Subject: Presentation and study session on City’s updated financial forecast and capitalfinancing options. 19-5004 Study Session Conducted 2/12/2019 2/19/2019 Subject: Study Session on new budget process

Search: study session 2018 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
18-4663 Ordinances andAction Items Approved 11/29/2018 12/18/2018 Subject: Schedule a study session to review, clarify, and discuss the Code of Ethicsand Conduct for Elected and Appointed Officials adopted by Council on November20, 2018 18-4133 Study Session Conducted 6/29/2018 11/5/2018 Subject: Study Session regarding the Citywide Building Condition and UseAssessment 18-3976 Study Session Agenda Ready 5/8/2018 10/16/2018 Subject: Study Session on homelessness 18-4081 Study Session Conducted 6/12/2018 8/21/2018 Subject: Study session regarding the annexation process and options for LehighPermanente Quarry. 18-4240 Study Session Conducted 7/30/2018 8/21/2018 Subject: Study Session on the potential formation of a Santa Clara County RegionalHousing Needs Allocation (RHNA) subregion 18-4253 Old Business Agenda Ready 8/2/2018 Subject: Consolidation of Commissions 18-4236 New Business Agenda Ready 7/30/2018 8/9/2018 Subject: Study Session on the potential formation of a Santa Clara County RegionalHousing Needs Allocation (RHNA) sub-region 18-4084 Study Session Conducted 6/12/2018 7/31/2018 Subject: Study session to explore consolidation of Senior Citizen, Library, and Safetyissues into Parks & Recreation Commission 18-4174 Study Session Agenda Ready 7/12/2018 Subject: Study session to explore consolidation of Senior Citizen, Library, and Safetyissues into Parks & Recreation Commission. 18-4189 Study Session Agenda Ready 7/19/2018 7/24/2018 Subject: Study session to explore consolidation of Senior Citizen, Library, and Safetyissues into Parks & Recreation Commission. 18-4116 Study Session Conducted 6/21/2018 7/3/2018 Subject: Study session on proposed restructuring of Cupertino's business license tax 18-4080 Study Session Conducted 6/12/2018 7/3/2018 Subject: Study Session promoting school safety and preventing gun violence 18-4036 Consent Calendar Approved 5/29/2018 7/3/2018 Subject: Approve the June 11 (Study Session) City Council minutes 18-4035 Consent Calendar Approved asAmended 5/29/2018 6/19/2018 Subject: Approve the June 4 (Study Session) City Council minutes 18-3972 Study Session Conducted 5/8/2018 6/5/2018 Subject: Study session on potential revenue measures related to business licensetax and storm drain fee. 18-4004 Study Session Conducted 5/17/2018 6/4/2018 Subject: Study Session regarding Vallco Specific Plan 17-3364 Study Session Conducted 11/30/2017 5/15/2018 Subject: Budget Study Session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2018-19 Budget,including CIP 18-3895 Study Session Conducted 4/18/2018 5/1/2018 Subject: City of Cupertino Below Market Rate (BMR) Housing Program StudySession 17-3365 Study Session Conducted 11/30/2017 2/20/2018 Subject: Study Session on the fiscal year 2018-2019 City Work Program 17-3428 Study Session Conducted 12/12/2017 2/6/2018 Subject: Study Session regarding short-term rental compliance Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 20 recordsShowGroupExport

Search: study session 2017 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
17-3263 StudySession Conducted 11/13/2017 11/27/2017 Subject: State of California’s 2017 Legislative Housing bills 17-2662 StudySession Continued 5/23/2017 6/6/2017 Subject: Study Session Regarding the Amended Proposed Fiscal Year 2017-2018 CapitalImprovement Program (CIP) Budget 17-2371 StudySession Conducted 2/14/2017 5/16/2017 Subject: Study session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2017-2018 Budget Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 3 recordsShowGroupExport

Search: study session 2016 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
16-2198 StudySession Conducted 11/28/2016 12/6/2016 Subject: Aircraft Noise Study Session 16-2103 StudySession Conducted 10/17/2016 12/6/2016 Subject: Study Session on Wireless Facilities within the Public Right of Way 15-1163 StudySession Conducted 10/12/2015 10/18/2016 Subject: Study Session regarding Sustainable Strategies for Recycling and Waste Management 15-1171 StudySession Conducted 10/15/2015 5/17/2016 Subject: Study session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2016-2017 Budget 14-0597 StudySession Conducted 12/16/2014 3/15/2016 Subject: Work Program study session 16-1458 StudySession Conducted 2/1/2016 3/1/2016 Subject: Study session on options for increasing business license taxes 15-1270 StudySession Conducted 12/7/2015 1/19/2016 Subject: Study Session to consider entering into a Memorandum of Understanding with the RotaryClub of Cupertino to renovate the Stocklmeir home and surrounding property to utilize as a non-profit center for Cupertino 15-1282 StudySession Conducted 12/15/2015 1/19/2016 Subject: Study session regarding Economic Development Strategic Plan (EDSP) draft backgroundreport Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 8 recordsShowGroupExport

Search: study session 2015 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File CreatedFinal ActionTitle
15-1050 Study Session Conducted 8/20/2015 11/17/2015 Subject: Study Session on the Civic Center Master Plan - Financing Alternatives andAffordability Analysis 15-1096 Study Session Conducted 9/16/2015 10/20/2015 Subject: Study Session on potential Ballot Measures regarding Civic Center Master Planand Vallco Shopping District Special Area 15-0920 Study Session Conducted 6/2/2015 6/30/2015 Subject: Study Session on policy for processing General Plan Amendment applications 15-0833 Study Session Conducted 4/21/2015 6/2/2015 Subject: Study Session on Santa Clara County Potential Transportation Tax Measure for2016 - Envision Silicon Valley 14-0590 Study Session Conducted 12/12/2014 5/12/2015 Subject: Study session regarding the Proposed Fiscal Year 2015-2016 Budget 15-0808 Consent Calendar Approved 3/31/2015 4/21/2015 Subject: Provide formal direction regarding the Stevens Creek Boulevard to McClellanRanch Road Corridor Master Plan in regards to scoping an Environmental Impact Reportin conjunction with new facts associated with camp transportation using the BlackberryFarm swim and picnic facility 14-0596 Study Session Conducted 12/16/2014 3/3/2015 Subject: Work Program study session 14-0598 Study Session Conducted 12/16/2014 2/3/2015 Subject: Study session for the Stevens Creek Boulevard to McClellan Road CreekCorridor Master Plan (SCC Master Plan) and recommend alternatives to proceed with anEnvironmental Impact Analysis. (Re-noticed from January 21, 2015) 14-0607 Postponements andOrders of the Day Authorized 1/7/2015 1/20/2015 Subject: Cancel the Adjourned Special Meeting scheduled for January 21 regardingCouncil deliberation and to provide staff direction on the Study Session for StevensCreek Boulevard to McClellan Road Creek Corridor Master Plan and recommendedalternatives to proceed with an EIR and direct staff to re-notice the meeting forFebruary 3 at 6:45 p.m.

Sign In
Home LegislationCalendarCity CouncilCommissions/CommitteesView City Channel VideosCity Records YouTube Videos 9 recordsShowGroupExport

IMPORTANT NOTICE: Please be advised that pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code 2.08.100 written communications sent to the Cupertino City Council, Commissioners or City staff concerning a matter on the agenda are included as supplemental material to the agendized item. These written communications are accessible to the public through the City's website and kept in packet archives. You are hereby admonished not to include any personal or private information in written communications to the City that you do not wish to make public; doing so shall constitute a waiver of any privacy rights you may have on the information provided to the City.

Search:
study session 2014 All Types file # text attachments other info Advanced search >>> Search Legislation Help
File # Type Status File Created Final Action Title
14-0433 Study
Session
Conducted 9/15/2014 12/16/2014 Subject: Study session for Stevens Creek Boulevard to McClellan Road Creek Corridor Master Plan on recommended alternatives to proceed with an EIR
14-0332 Study
Session
Conducted 7/14/2014 10/7/2014 Subject: Study Session on the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the proposed General Plan Amendment, Housing Element Update, and associated Rezoning 14-0330 Public
Hearings
Item
Heard
7/14/2014 9/10/2014 Subject: Environmental Impact Report for General Plan Amendments, Housing Element Update and Associated Rezoning
14-0260 Study
Session
Conducted 6/12/2014 7/15/2014 Subject: Study Session to provide an update on the Climate Action Plan (CAP) process and review greenhouse gas reduction measures to be considered for analysis in the City’s Initial Study/Negative Declaration. Proposed measures focus on options to reduce community-wide emissions in the energy, transportation, water, and solid waste sectors 14-0259 Public
Hearings
Item
Heard
6/12/2014 7/9/2014 Subject: Climate Action Plan Description: Climate Action Plan Study Session to provide direction on
a preferred project
14-0258 Study
Session
Conducted 6/12/2014 7/7/2014 Subject: Study Session to discuss proposed changes to Municipal Code Chapter 14.18, Protected Trees Description: Application No(s): MCA-213-01 (EA-2013-02) Applicant(s): City of Cupertino Location: Citywide
14-0133 Study
Session
Conducted 5/19/2014 7/7/2014 Subject: Civic Center Master Plan Study Session Sign In
Home Legislation Calendar City Council Commissions/Committees View City Channel Videos City Records YouTube Videos 7 records Show Group Export
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]; City Clerk
Subject: AB 330 Projects at 20085 and 20045 Stevens Creek Blvd Have No CEQA Review Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2025 7:55:37 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 Council:
(Please include the following as public input for the Cupertino City Council meeting on Dec. 16, 2025).

I am shocked to learn that the two SB 330 projects at 20085 Plus and 20045 Plus Stevens Creek Blvd. used AB 130 to circumvent any CEQA review of the two town house projects.

Because of the use of AB 130 neither of these projects have been reviewed for CEQA. That means there Has been No Traffic review at all of these two projects.

This is totally ridiculous. We cannot ignore the traffic problems these SB 330 projects are imposing on Stevens Creek Blvd.

Therefore it is even more imperative to have a moratorium on anymore SB 330 projects on Stevens Creek Blvd. It is even more critical since it has been revealed these two projects have had no CEQA review.

We have some extremely difficult challenges ahead because of unwise housing bills passed by certain politicians (SB 330) and dangerous Anti CEQA bills like AB 130 which our own governor passed so Strangely and oddly with no public input in June and July 2025.

These two bills are making life along Stevens Creek Blvd. very dangerous and unsafe by allowing so Many SB 330s to propagate on Stevens Creek Blvd., especially when there has been no CEQA Review for traffic and schools etc.

Please make a moratorium on SB 330s on Stevens Creek Blvd. until the city and the public can see Adequate analysis of the issues with all of these SB 330 projects.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Pam Hershey
To: City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject: palnning commision meeting 12/9: Agenda 2 and 3 Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2025 4:06:28 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.

City clerk please put in public records for city council meeting Dec 16th. ----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Pam Hershey <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Sent: Tuesday, December 9, 2025, 04:01:21 PM PST
Subject: Agenda 2 and 3
Dear Planning Commission Chair and Commissioners
Council Members
A moratorium on SB 330 projects should be called on Stevens Creek Blvd. because the impacts all the projects will have on main road Stevens Creek Blvd at the same time.

Was there a traffic or school studies done on the Town House Projects on Agenda Item #2 and #3?
10045 Stevens Creek and 10085 Stevens Creek
How many students will be attending the already impacted schools near these two projects? My neighbor has to drive their daughter to Eaton School as Collins does not have any room for her. This will cause more traffic along SCB as the parents will be driving their children to a school that can accommodate them.

Please consider the consequences of the two proposed projects With he impact of the neighbors that live within half of a mile from many building projects at this time.

Regards,
Pamela Hershey
Wheaton Dr.

From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Council
Cc: [email protected]; City Clerk
Subject: SB 330 Moratorium because of Traffic Load Problems on Stevens Creek Blvd.

Date: Tuesday, December 9, 2025 11:47:01 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:
(Please include the following as public input for the Cupertino City Council meeting on Dec. 16, 2025.)
There are an every expanding proliferation of SB 330 Housing Projects on a one mile section of Stevens Creek Blvd. in the Historic Cross Roads Shopping Area of Stevens Creek Blvd.

It has escalated to five large housing projects. SB 330 does not take into account the implications Of large amounts of its successive projects, especially in one area.

This type of future disaster is teetering on the brink in Cupertino in this one busy section Of Stevens Creek Blvd. There are so many housing projects planned along this corridor that the City must think very carefully about the implications to traffic movement on Stevens Creek Blvd. as a whole. We could potentially be shutting down all movement on this section of roadway.

It is becoming apparent that there needs to be some sort of moratorium on any more SB 330 Projects on Stevens Creek Blvd. in Cupertino until adequate traffic studies can be performed to Study this situation. The city cannot afford to adversely affect traffic flow on Stevens Creek Blvd Any more than it already is.

SB 330 is a bill that tries to expedite housing construction, but it has potentially been causing a disaster when it allows too many housing projects to be streamlined in one area.

The city needs to be able to adequately study the ramifications of so many housing projects at one time on one heavily utilized section of roadway in the city.

A moratorium on SB 330 projects should be called until the Stevens Creek Blvd. roadway impacts from these SB 330 projects can be studied and the city can decide the best course of action for everyone Involved.

The city should have town halls and study sessions on the traffic impacts from so many SB 330 projects On Stevens Creek Blvd. in the near future to help mitigate and analyze and remedy the ever-expanding situation.

Thank you for your attention to this matter.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Peggy Griffin
To: City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Cc: Public Comments; Teri Gerhardt, CGCIO
Subject: 2025-12-16 City Council Meeting - Oral Communications - 3 requests Date: Monday, December 8, 2025 9:34:40 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 COMMUNICATIONS FOR THE ABOVE MEETING.

Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, Councilmembers and City Manager Kapoor, I have two requests:

REQUEST #1 - Dec. 16, 2025 Regular Council Meeting
Do not cancel this meeting. Hold it and make committee assignments.

Currently, there is a regular Council meeting scheduled for Tuesday, December 16, 2025. I encourage you to please hold this meeting - do not cancel it. Last year the Council held the meeting and completed the yearly committee assignments so that the Councilmembers could start their new assignments immediately. It seemed to work well and was one less thing appearing on the agenda in January. Please consider making the committee assignments during this December 16th meeting.

REQUEST #2 - Upcoming 2026 Brown Act Changes
Brown Act training…Starting January 1, 2026 there are several changes to multiple sections of the Brown Act. I’m requesting that the Council, commissions and staff be updated on these changes as quickly as possible. It would be helpful if a presentation of these changes be done so the public can attend. This could potentially reduce Brown Act complaints by the public.

IMPORTANT NOTE: The video crews for ALL meetings
need to be trained regarding
requirements or showing remote Council, commission and committee members during meetings.

REQUEST #3 - Continue the 3-Council Meeting agenda look ahead Please continue the 3-Council meeting agenda look ahead that is currently being done to balance agenda items across multiple Council meetings. It seems to be working well! Thank you,
Peggy Griffin
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; City Council
Subject: Fwd: Agreement with San Jose & Cupertino About South De Anza Blvd. Setbacks and Street Trees (Mori Kitchen) Date: Friday, December 5, 2025 2:42:21 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 consider the following as public comment for the Dec. 16, 2025 Cupertino City Council meeting.

Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Agreement with San Jose & Cupertino About South De Anza Blvd. Setbacks and Street Trees (Mori Kitchen)
From: Jennifer Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 5, 2025, 2:39 AM
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected],[email protected]
Dear City Council:
(Please consider this as public comment for the Cupertino City Council meeting on Dec. 16, 2025.)
The Mori Kitchen site on South De Anza Blvd. is being redeveloped as a very tall housing project.

There are Cupertino and San Jose frontages on properties immediately adjacent to this site.

Is there an agreement between Cupertino and San Jose about the amount of setback and street Trees on the frontage of South De Anza Blvd? The area could look inconsistent if one part has no setbacks and no trees and the other part has setbacks and street trees.

If there is no previous agreement between the two cities, it might be a good time to develop one
So any future development in the area will be harmonious.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
Cupertino Resident
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; City Council
Subject: Fwd: Refugee Retail in Cupertino
Date: Friday, December 5, 2025 1:03:01 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 the following as public input for the Cupertino City Council meeting on Dec. 16, 2025.

Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Refugee Retail in Cupertino
From: Jennifer Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 5, 2025, 12:56 AM
To: [email protected]
CC: [email protected],[email protected]
Dear City Council:

How many retail businesses are being displaced by the five active SB 330 projects in Cupertino? Is anything being done to try to help these poor businesses with no homes relocate to other retail locations in Cupertino?
I would think it would be very beneficial and in Cupertino's best interests to try to keep These Refugee businesses in town. I find the loss of Staples to be really upsetting. We will have no Computer Supply Store in Cupertino, home of Apple. We have a lot of empty store fronts with no retail or commercial in them. We have Refugee Restaurants too.

They should be encouraged to try to relocate to other retail locations in Cupertino. Are we helping them in any way?
Thank you for your concentrated efforts to keep our beloved retail and restaurants in town.

We don't have to let them become victims to SB 330. By helping them, we help ourselves.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Jennifer Griffin
To: City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; City Council
Subject: Fwd: Loss of Retail on Stevens Creek Blvd.

Date: Friday, December 5, 2025 12:42:59 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 the following as public comment for the December 26, 2025 City Council meeting.

Thank you.
-------- Original Message --------
Subject: Loss of Retail on Stevens Creek Blvd.

From: Jennifer Griffin <[email protected]>
Sent: Friday, December 5, 2025, 12:29 AM
To: [email protected],[email protected]
CC: [email protected]
Dear City Council:
(Please include the following public comment for the Cupertino City Council Meeting on December
16, 2025. )
I am very concerned with the continued loss of retail along Stevens Creek Blvd. The housing bills do not reflect the continued need for retail in cities. The housing bills do not address the need for residents to have retail. It is a continued deficiency in the deluge of housing bills we have been inundated with the last few years.

When our city retail goes away, not only do our residents suffer, residents from our neighboring
Cities suffer too. They also shop in our city and when our retail goes away, they have no place to
Shop. There used to be many bridal stores in our city. Now, residents seeking bridal supplies are
Forced to go to Willow Glen or The Alameda.

I think we need to have a Retail Summit to acknowledge the Retail Crisis in our city. I am not sure how we do this.

I am also worried about the loss of grocery stores and other amenities in the city. We have lost A lot of active retail along Stevens Creek Blvd. in the last year. We are losing Staples where we
shop a lot.

There is too much concentration of new housing on Stevens Creek Blvd. and in other places.

We are losing valuable Retail.

I think we need to have a Retail Town Hall to discuss Retail Issues in the city. In a year we may
Have no retail left on Stevens Creek Blvd.

I hope that 2026 can be the year we bring active retail back to Cupertino. We have a lot of Retail
Refugee Relocation Shops with no place to go. They are being chased out of the city.

Thank you.

Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
From: Henry Sang
To: City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject: Fw: Suggestion for the Euvlich Court red fire zone Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 2:39:13 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.

I have sent this email message to the City Council Members. Please let it be part of the record of communications from the public.

I am happy to have a follow up discussion.

Henry
408-821-5152
----- Forwarded Message -----
From: Henry Sang <[email protected]>
To: [email protected] <[email protected]>; Liang Chao <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>; Sheila Mohan <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 at 02:27:49 PM PST
Subject: Suggestion for the Euvlich Court red fire zone Madame Mayor, Vice Mayor and Councilmembers,
Some of you know me as a volunteer in our Community having lived here for 38 years. And you may know that I have recently taken up an awareness and education campaign for wildfire safety in our City.

I want to thank the Mayor and Vice Mayor for attending the event by the Cupertino Library Foundation hosting CalFire and SCC FD. We got a good lesson on how the Fire Danger Zone maps are created and on mitigation and preparedness instruction.

You are probably aware that the Euvlich Court property is in a red zone. I assume that our staff will make sure everything is up to safety standards in the planning and construction.

This property is particularly exposed to danger because a large part of it runs along the trail connecting Linda Vista Park and McClelland Ranch. On the other side of the trail is a heavily brush laden hillside leading down to Deep Cliff Golf Course.

That hillside is not the verdant green lawn of the golf course and is riddled with the detritus that SCCFD instructed to be removed and maintained.

While this also affects several other SFH along that trail, this is probably the biggest interface and very close to Linda Vista Park which is likely an avenue for a fire event. (The hill behind Linda Vista burned about 20 years ago requiring an airplane spreading the red stuff and helicopters dropping buckets of water.) I would like to suggest during negotiations with the property owner that they consider a fire proof fence along this trail and that they pay for the initial cleanup of that hillside.

It seems that all of the area except for the roadways will be in Zone 0 or 1 for these town and row houses. These are the recommended and soon to be required fire safety zones around a house. It is very important to adhere to these in the RED (VERY DANGEROUS) zone designations. Once one unit catches fire, it will domino spread to the others because of the short distances. The fuel load from a house then spreads heat and embers.

The density of the townhouses represents a fuel load that endangers the rest of the nearby houses much more so that individual houses situated 20-30 ft apart. Once they get started we can expect most of them to burn and that will put the rest of the houses at much higher risk. Wind coming down Stevens Canyon will spread embers for long distances, probably close to a mile out. Then even the non-fire zone houses are at risk. (Look at Altadena and Pacific Pallisades.) Perhaps it also makes sense to have their other fences be fire proof or with at least an A rating for materials. Also, avoid wooden decks, wooden pergolas, and other such structures. SCC FD doesn't want flammable mats or furniture within 5 ft of the house or extended house areas. (Zone 0)
As such, I would like to suggest that strict guidelines for Zone 0 and 1 be maintained in this facility with annual surveys and remediation required as part of their HOA's CC&Rs.

Please note, I am NOT pushing to avoid building this project. While I personally think it is too dense for the neighborhood, that is not the issue at hand. The issue that I wish to raise regards proper fire safety for our Community and concrete things that might be done to decrease our risk.

Sincerely,
Henry Woo Sang, Jr.
21975 Hyannisport Drive
Cupertino
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Floy Andrews; Public Comments Subject: Restore Residents’ Right to Pull Consent Calendar Items Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 12:32:58 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,
Would you please kindly include the below in written comments for items not on agenda for the 12/16/25 council meeting. Thank you.
[Writing on behalf of myself only as Cupertino resident] Subject: Restore Residents’ Right to Pull Consent Calendar Items Dear Cupertino City Council, CM Kapoor, Interim City Attorney Andrews, I write to raise a matter of procedure regarding the consent calendar.

Under the current Council Procedures Manual, only Council Members may remove consent calendar items. Residents have no direct means to do so. Since this rule came into effect, Vice- Mayor Chao has been the sole Council Member to act on such requests. If she chooses not to, residents are left with no recourse to have items pulled to be explicitly discussed.

This arrangement places disproportionate control in the hands of individual Council Members and diminishes accountability to Cupertino residents. It effectively restricts their ability to ensure matters of concern receive proper attention.

I urge the Council to amend the Council Procedures Manual. Residents should be able to request removal of consent calendar items themselves, both before and during city council meetings, and for both in‑person and remote attendees.

Restoring this right will reinforce accountability of the city to Cupertino residents and ensure residents can hold council acceptable to fully engage with staff on explicit Council deliberations on agenda items rather than blanket approvals via consent calendar.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely
San Rao (Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino Resident) From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Floy Andrews; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Public Comments; Chad Mosley; Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly; Gian Martire
Subject: Mary Avenue Villas – Inverse Condemnation Liability and City Risk Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 10:12:48 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 comments for items not on agenda for the 12/16/25 city council meeting.
[ Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Subject: Mary Avenue Villas – Inverse Condemnation Liability and City Risk Dear Cupertino City Council, Interim City Attorney Andrews, CAO, CM Kapoor, I am a Cupertino resident writing on my own behalf.

The proposed Mary Avenue Villas project, including narrowing Mary Avenue and removing approximately 89 on-street parking spaces, raises serious legal and financial risks for the City.

These changes could materially impair access along the public right-of-way, affecting residents, visitors, service vehicles, and emergency responders. California law recognises that substantial impairment of roadway access can give rise to inverse-condemnation liability, even when the roadway remains technically open.

Black-letter rules from California precedent include:

Protected Access Right: Users of a public roadway have a protected right to reasonable access (Bacich v. Board of Control, 1943; Breidert v. Southern Pacific Co., 1964).

Substantial Impairment: Liability arises where access is materially degraded in safety, convenience, or functionality, even if access technically exists (Breidert; People v.

Ayon, 1960).

Property-Specific Burden: Roadway reconfigurations imposing a severe, location- specific burden on ingress or egress may support compensable claims (Clay v. City of Los Angeles, 1971; Border Business Park v. City of San Diego, 2006).

Causation Requirement: The impairment must result from deliberate public action affecting the roadway, not from general traffic or unrelated factors.

Based on these principles, narrowing Mary Avenue and removing on-street parking could materially degrade safe and convenient access, creating a real risk of legal claims and unpredictable financial exposure for the City. In light of these foreseeable risks, the City would be prudent to reject the project as proposed or require modifications that fully preserve safe, reasonable access along Mary Avenue.

I respectfully urge Council, City Attorney, and City Manager to prioritize protection of the City from liability by carefully considering these access-impairment risks before any further approvals or implementation.

Thank you for your attention.

Yours sincerely,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) CC 12-16-2025
#1 - Closed session
Conference with Legal-
Council- Existing
Litigation
Written Communications
From: Rhoda Fry
To: Public Comments
Subject: for closed session today
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 2:27:33 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear City Council,
Please do what you can to reject the massive development project adjacent to Linda Vista Park. I have written to you about this site previously. I also want you to know that the County has our back with regards to developments on hillsides within the City’s sphere of influence on Peacock Court, near Stevens Creek Reservoir. If the County is pulling out all the stops to protect us, y’all should too.

Thanks Much,
Rhoda Fry, 40+ year resident
From: Ram Sripathi
To: Public Comments
Subject: Vista heights
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 1:36:28 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.

Dear Mayor Moore and Councilmembers,
since the council is meeting today on the Vista Heights (Linda Vista Dr) Builders Remedy project, I am writing to encourage councilmembers to stand up for what is right for the residents. Over 700 nearby residents and growing have voiced opposition to this project.

It is imperative that the City lead from the front, not concede. The Builder’s Remedy was never intended to force high density hillside development in areas with severe fire risk, a designation which by the way, was updated in severity after the initial Vista Heights proposal.

In today’s world of climate change this will cause risk and danger to the new construction and to the existing residents.

The council has shown restrain and the ability to support residents in critical projects.

Standing firm here matters not just for this project, but for every future proposal that tests the limits of what should be built and where.

Thank you for your time and for considering the voices of the community.

Respectfully,
Ram Sripathi
Cupertino Resident for 2 decades .

Sent from my iPhone
From: David Yan
To: Public Comments
Subject: No to Vista Heights at Linda Vista
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 12:36:13 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 Moore and Councilmembers:

As the council meets today on the Vista Heights (Linda Vista Dr) Builders Remedy project, I am writing to encourage councilmembers to stand up for what is right for the residents. Over 700 nearby residents and growing have voiced opposition to this project.

Standing firm here matters not just for this project, but for every future proposal that tests the limits of what should be built and where.

Thank you for your time and for considering the voices of the community.

Respectfully,
David Yan
Cupertino Resident
From: David Yan
To: Kitty Moore; R "Ray" Wang; J.R. Fruen; Liang Chao; Sheila Mohan Cc: City of Cupertino Planning Commission; Luke Connolly; Emi Sugiyama Subject: No to Vista Heights at Linda Vista
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 12:25:31 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 Moore and Councilmembers:

Standing firm here matters not just for this project, but for every future proposal that tests the limits of what should be built and where.

Thank you for your time and for considering the voices of the community.

Respectfully,
David Yan
Cupertino Resident
From: Deepa Mahendraker
To: Public Comments
Subject: Linda vista Dr and scofield Dr
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 4:03:03 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 Moore and Councilmembers:

Standing firm here matters not just for this project, but for every future proposal that tests the limits of what should be built and where.

Thank you for your time and for considering the voices of the community.

Respectfully,
Deepa
Sent from my iPhone
CC 12-16-2025
#1
Presentation by Poet
Laureates Keiko O'Leary
and Thomas Celerier
Written Communications
From: Keiko O"Leary
To: Thomas Celerier
Cc: Kirsten Squarcia; City Clerk
Subject: Re: City Council meeting on 12/16/25
Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 11:25:51 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.

Hi Kirsten,
Here is my poem. I believe it has already been posted on the city website somewhere. https://www.dropbox.com/scl/fi/va123e4rvjemgcygwpikt/Friends-Create-Cupertino- poem-by-Keiko-O-Leary.pdf?rlkey=g934v0lz6krckt5krp4d8nj3g&dl=0 I look forward to seeing both of you tonight.

Thanks,
Keiko
P.S. Thomas, what a delightful video. I'm guessing it shows the inspiration for your beautiful poem.
--
Keiko O'Leary
Cupertino Poet Laureate 2023-2025
Get unstuck. Stay inspired.

KeikoOLeary.com
On Mon, Dec 15, 2025 at 7:37 PM Thomas Celerier <[email protected]> wrote:

Thank you so much, dear Kirsten.

See you tomorrow.

Best,
Thomas.

On Dec 15, 2025 7:31 PM, Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected] > wrote:

Hi Thomas,
Very beautiful! Yes, happy to project it during your time to speak.

Regards, Kirsten

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

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

From: Thomas Celerier <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2025 7:15 PM
To: Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: RE: City Council meeting on 12/16/25

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.

Thank you dear Kirsten, sounds good.

This is the poem I plan to read: The Angels' Bath.

Let me know if all good. If it is possible to project it, that would be great. I included a pdf and a ppt, feel free to chose what is easier.

Dear Keiko, looking forward to this time together!

Have a great night everyone.

Best,

Thomas.

De : Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]>
Envoyé : lundi 15 décembre 2025 16:39
À : Thomas Celerier <[email protected]>; [email protected] <[email protected]>
Cc : City Clerk <[email protected]>
Objet : RE: City Council meeting on 12/16/25

Additionally, please forward your poems, either before or after the meeting. We will post to the city's website. Thanks again, Kirsten

Image removed by sender.

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

City Manager's Office
[email protected]
(408) 777-3225
Image removed by sender.

Image removed by sender.

From: Kirsten Squarcia <[email protected]>
Sent: Monday, December 15, 2025 11:44 AM
To: Thomas Celerier <[email protected]>; [email protected] Cc: City Clerk <[email protected]>
Subject: City Council meeting on 12/16/25

Hello Thomas and Keiko,

We are looking forward to your presentation on 12/16. Attached is the agenda. Your item is listed at the beginning, so please arrive closely to the 6:45 pm meeting start time. You will have up to 4 minutes each to present. Please refrain from presenting any themes that may be perceived as politically sensitive. We will see you then!

Thank you, Kirsten

Image removed by sender.

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

City Manager's Office
[email protected]
(408) 777-3225
Image removed by sender.

Image removed by sender.

[email protected]
Friends Create Cupertino
by Keiko O’Leary
From the saltwater aquarium at the Cupertino Library,
a butterfly fish gazes into my baby son’s eyes
then flits off in a spray of tiny bubbles.

My little daughter laughs and lifts her arms.

My father swings her up and holds her to his heart.
“Grandpa,” she says, with the certainty of being four years old, “The fish are our friends.”
Another year, when my son can walk,
we dance in a circle with Otter and the other animals,
bronze statues that remind us of characters from a book.

They are real to my children. They are our friends.

And later still, at McClellan Ranch, we draw the trees.

I realize they are our friends, too: oak, buckeye, redwood, accepting our attention with their silent smiles.

My memories to me are also friends:
my dad’s job selling suits at Vallco mall,
the joy I felt each spring on seeing blossoms
of wisteria fill the trellis in the parking lot.

The movie theater at The Oaks I went to as a teen,
the cherry blossom festival in Memorial Park.

These memories are friends I visit
even though the landscape may have changed.

I have human friends as well,
writers and poets
practicing our craft together
at Quinlan Community Center,
at restaurants and cafés.

We share our lives through the work that we create.

I see the future in the sky,
in clouds that rise up brilliant
and edged with sun.

Under that sky in Cupertino,
other friends are working, too.

We create the city together
through everything we do.

From: Thomas Celerier
To: Kirsten Squarcia; [email protected]
Cc: City Clerk
Subject: RE: City Council meeting on 12/16/25
Date: Monday, December 15, 2025 7:17:07 PM
Attachments: The Angels Bath.pdf
The Angels Bath.pptx
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.

Thank you dear Kirsten, sounds good.

This is the poem I plan to read: The Angels' Bath.

Let me know if all good. If it is possible to project it, that would be great. I included a pdf and a ppt, feel free to chose what is easier.

Dear Keiko, looking forward to this time together!
Have a great night everyone.

Best,
Thomas.

Additionally, please forward your poems, either before or after the meeting. We will post to the city's website. Thanks again, Kirsten

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

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

Hello Thomas and Keiko,

Thank you, Kirsten

Kirsten Squarcia
Interim Deputy City Manager/City Clerk

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

The Angels’ Bath
In the light of the rising, flooding,
There they are, the Angels, spreading their wings,
Roaring, streaming, facing the mighty star,
Maybe you see them, innocent or frail?
I see their auras shine with a thousand flames,
Flying, taunting the bawling deer in the distance,
Their wings, flapping, a cloud of drops,
Prism squirting, their silhouettes cut out.

A white Chloe would like to touch them,
Or even, with its claws to grip them,
Dreaming of food tastier than cockroach,
But, supernatural, in turn locusts,
Doves, slipping within a becquerel,
There they are the Angels, spreading their wings,
Green, their adornments, blue and yellow irises,
Sparkling sparks, Amazons.

Quick, the bath is coming to an end, hurrying,
Because the clock turns, now is the time!
The hard and noble work, their labor,
For the lost souls, well needing them.

Here and there, in an eclipse of time,
There they are the Angels, spreading their wings,
For you and me, for all of us, for him and her,
Forever, never static for more than a moment.

CC 12-16-2025
#5
FY 2024-25 Annual
Comprehensive Financial
Report (ACFR)
Written Communications
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Kristina Alfaro; Public Comments Subject: Please pull agenda item 5 (ACFR) from consent calendar by council vote if it pulled by any council member already.

Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 1:51:31 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,
Would you please kindly

include the below in written comments for agenda item 5 (ACFR) for the 12/16/25 council meeting. Thank you.

[Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Dear Cupertino city council, CM Kapoor, Finance Director Alfaro, I am a Cupertino resident writing on behalf of myself only. I am writing about agenda item 5 (ACFR) and related financial aspects of city operations and the burden the city’s operating costs and expenses place on us Cupertino

residents.

I am very concerned that the 2023 cost recovery policy passed by prior council majority

and
the resulting 10+% successive annual

fee increases are making life unaffordable for
Cupertino

residents. The City should urgently be looking to

cut its own costs before raising or
maintaining high fees and instead undertake measures to reverse the fee increases and lower costs on residents instead.

City financial reports show three clear issues. First, actual General Fund spending has been well below the final budget because many posts remain vacant year after year. Second, large operating departments such as Public Works, Parks and Recreation and Community Development absorb most spending. Third, several fee‑
funded operations, such as the Sports
Center, Blackberry Farm and recreation programs, still need subsidies even though user fees are high.

I respectfully request that the Council consider the following future

actions:

1. Turn vacancy savings into real cuts
The City should identify posts that have been vacant in

non-essential

areas such
as

administrative, non-automotive transportation,

and other non-community facing support
areas. These posts should be reduced or converted to external contractor positions to eliminate the burden of healthcare and pensions for those roles, not carried forward in future budgets.

Management should also remove duplicated analyst and “special project” roles that do not directly serve residents.

2. Move staff to front‑line community roles
The City should protect and, where needed, strengthen staffing for building and planning review, development services and code enforcement. Instead of hiring new people, staff from lower‑priority internal projects and discretionary initiatives should be reassigned or reduced to realign funding into these critical roles. This will speed up permits and enforcement without raising fees.

3. Slim down high‑cost departments
Public Works, and Community Development should be reviewed program by program.

Low‑use or low‑value activities should be merged or ended. Supervisory and back‑office roles linked to these activities should be removed or shifted to higher‑priority work.

4. Cut consultant dependence and linked internal roles
Spending on consultants and contracts / study projects should be reduced. Where possible, existing staff should take on key project and analysis work. As consultant use falls, internal roles that exist mainly to manage discretionary contracts should be phased out, and the savings should support planners, inspectors and code officers.

5. Reduce non‑automotive transportation staffing and projects Transportation staff and funds should focus on essential traffic management, safety and congestion relief on busy Cupertino roads and main corridors. Roles and projects not directly tied to these core functions, including niche or low‑usage mobility initiatives and prolonged pilots, should be reduced or discontinued. Any positions that exist mainly to design, market or manage low‑usage transportation projects should be eliminated or redeployed to essential traffic engineering and safety work.

6. Make staff realignment part of every fee decision

When the Council considers fee schedules, staff should first show which posts have been cut or reassigned in that programme. Only after this should any fee change be discussed. Essential community services, especially in building, planning, code enforcement and core traffic management, should not be priced to cover overhead roles that could be removed instead.

Cupertino faces revenue pressure and residents face very high housing and living costs. It is fair and reasonable to expect the City to expedite reduction in non‑essential roles, realign staff, and lower its own cost base before asking residents to pay more in fees. By doing this, the Council can ease the cost recovery burden and help keep Cupertino more affordable for the people who live here.

Yours faithfully,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino Resident) CC 12-16-2025
#5-7
Consent Items
Written Communications
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Public Comments Subject: Please pull Agenda Items 5–7 from Consent Calendar Date: Saturday, December 13, 2025 8:06:21 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
[Writing on behalf of myself only as Cupertino resident] Dear Council Members,
I urge the Council to pull agenda items 5, 6, and 7 from the consent calendar for the 12/16/25 council meeting.

If the LRC is placed on consent, the Council should agendize a future item to disband the LRC. Public funds should not support private deliberations on matters the public cannot see or hear.

The Council should focus on core city business and the immediate concerns of Cupertino residents. This includes inter-agency engagement with Santa Clara County on renewal of the Lehigh Quarry conditional use permit, with truck operations limited to weekdays after 6:30 a.m., consistent with Stevens Creek Quarry.

The Council should also examine power and electricity options with the City of Santa Clara, which operates its own utility. Reducing reliance on PG&E should be a priority.

More broadly, the Council should focus on lowering costs, not increasing them. PG&E, San Jose Water, and Recology bills continue to rise. Affordability is a serious concern for residents.

Agenda Item 5, the ACFR, should be pulled for detailed public review. After two consecutive years of 10%+ fee increases, residents expect scrutiny of non-essential costs and staffing, not financial items placed on consent.

Placing major financial matters on consent signals a lack of urgency. Many residents face higher property taxes, declining services, and ongoing pressure on quality of life.

Finally, please pull Agenda Item 7 on committee assignments. These should be discussed in public, with transparency and resident input.

Thank you for focusing on the practical and immediate concerns of Cupertino residents.

Thanks,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) CC 12-16-2025
#10
Development Project
United Furniture Site
Written Communications
From: Jong, Nancy
To: Gian Martire; City Clerk
Cc: [email protected]; [email protected]; Guerra, Alicia C.

Subject: Revised Idlewild Project - 10065-10075 East Estates Drive (Application No(s): DP-2024-004, ASA-2024-008, TM- 2024-005, & U-2025-004) [IMAN-BUCHALTER.FID2641494]
Date: Friday, December 12, 2025 8:52:46 AM
Attachments: 12_15 Letter to Gian Martire_ Senior Planner_ City of Cupertino(106992073.1)(106994722.1).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.

Good morning:

On behalf of Alicia Guerra, the attached updated letter is being submitted to Mr.

Martire for City Council Meeting Agenda Item No. 10, Idlewild Project.

Please see
that the letter is distributed to the City Council members in advance of Tuesday evening’s City Council meeting.

Thank you,
Nancy Jong
Assistant to Alicia Guerra
Buchalter
Nancy Jong
Legal Assistant to Jay Paxton, Thomas Sherwood and Bukola Mabadeje.

T
(415) 296-1659
F (415) 227-0770
[email protected]
425 Market Street, Suite 2900
San Francisco, CA 94105
www.buchalter.com
Notice To Recipient: This e-mail is meant for only the intended recipient of the transmission, and may be a communication privileged by law. If you received this e-mail in error, any review, use, dissemination, distribution, or copying of this e-mail is strictly prohibited. Please notify us immediately of the error by return e-mail and please delete this message and any and all duplicates of this message from your system. Thank you in advance for your cooperation. For additional policies governing this e-mail, please see http://www.buchalter.com/about/firm-policies/
.
425 Market Street
Suite 2900
San Francisco, CA 94105
415.227.0900 Phone
415.227.0770 Fax
BUCHALTER 106992073v1
415.227.3508 Direct
[email protected]

December 15, 2025

VIA E-MAIL ([email protected])
Gian Martire
Senior Planner
City of Cupertino Planning Department
10300 Torre Ave
Cupertino, CA 95014
Re: Revised Idlewild Project - 10065-10075 East Estates Drive (Application No(s):

DP-2024-004, ASA-2024-008, TM-2024-005, & U-2025-004)
Dear Gian:

Buchalter, APC, (“Buchalter”) represents, Toll Brothers, Inc. (“Toll Brothers”) as land use counsel regarding the entitlement process for its project to develop 55 townhomes and 10 accessory dwelling units (“ADUs”) and associated infrastructure (the “Project”) on the property located on the 2.72-acre Idlewild Shopping Center site at 10065-10075 East Estates Drive (APNs 369-06-002, -003, -004) (the “Property”) in the City of Cupertino (the “City”). Toll Brothers is the developer of the Project and Idlewild Center, TIC is the Property owner.

On December 4, 2025, I submitted a letter, on behalf of Toll Brothers, responding to comments raised at the November 12th Planning Commission public hearing regarding the Project approvals. The purpose of this letter is to provide further updated clarifications to the response I submitted on December 4th.

As I noted in my letter, at the Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission and members of the public raised concerns regarding the status of environmental contamination associated with the former dry cleaner that operated on the Property. As a further clarification to my December 4
th letter, the dry cleaner operated between the 1960s and 2010.

Additionally, commenters noted that information available from the Santa Clara County Department of Environmental Health (SCDEH) and GeoTracker indicated that the SCDEH is overseeing the cleanup of the Property and a soil vapor extraction system (SVE) operated on the

Gian Martire
December 15, 2025

Page 2 ends

BUCHALTER 106992073v1
Property to remediate elevated levels of tetrachloroethylene (PCE). My December 4th letter indicated that the SVE was turned off earlier this year to monitor the groundwater to determine if PCE remains in the groundwater.

ENGEO has provided further clarifying information confirming that the SVE was turned off earlier this year to monitor soil gas conditions for rebound and determined whether SVE has achieved cleanup goals or whether additional SVE operation may be necessary” (there has been no groundwater monitoring at the site). This information does not change the conclusion in my letter and provides further information demonstrating that the prior contamination has been subject to remediation.

We appreciate your consideration of the information contained in my December 4 th letter
as supplement by this letter. Please let me know if you have any questions regarding this matter and we look forward to the City Council’s deliberations concerning the Project at the December 16th meeting.

Best,

BUCHALTER
A Professional Corporation

Alicia Guerra
AG:nj

cc: City Clerk
Nick Kosla
Rob Connolly

From: James Lloyd
To: Kitty Moore; Liang Chao; Sheila Mohan; J.R. Fruen; R "Ray" Wang Cc: Piu Ghosh (she/her); City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; City of Cupertino Planning Dept.

Subject: public comment re item 10 for tonight"s Council meeting Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 1:04:11 PM
Attachments: 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd - HAA letter - CC.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 Cupertino City Council,
The California Housing Defense Fund (“CalHDF”) submits the attached public comment re item 10 for tonight's Council meeting, the proposed 65-unit housing development project at 10075 E. Estates & 19610 Stevens Creek Blvd, which includes 6 median-income units and 5 moderate-income units.

Sincerely,
James M. Lloyd
Director of Planning and Investigations
California Housing Defense Fund
[email protected]
CalHDF is grant & donation funded
Donate today - https://calhdf.org/donate/

425 Market Street
Suite 2900
San Francisco, CA 94105
415.227.0900 Phone
415.227.0770 Fax

BUCHALTER 106992073v1

415.227.3508 Direct
[email protected]

December 15, 2025

DP-2024-004, ASA-2024-008, TM-2024-005, & U-2025-004)
Dear Gian:

As I noted in my letter, at the Planning Commission meeting, the Planning Commission and members of the public raised concerns regarding the status of environmental contamination associated with the former dry cleaner that operated on the Property. As a further clarification to my December 4th letter, the dry cleaner operated between the 1960s and 2010.

Gian Martire
December 15, 2025

Page 2 ends

Best,

BUCHALTER
A Professional Corporation

Alicia Guerra
AG:nj

cc: City Clerk
Nick Kosla
Rob Connolly

10065
-
10075 E. Estates Drive, Cupertino, CA
Idlewild Shopping
Center
Toll Brothers is an award-winning
Fortune 500 company and the
nation’s leading builder of luxury
homes. Founded in 1967, the
company embraces an unwavering
commitment to quality and customer
service.

Toll Brothers has been one of
Fortune Magazine's World's Most
Admired Companies
for 11+ years
in a row, has been named National
Builder of the Year by Builder
Magazine, and is the first two-time
recipient of Builder of the Year from
Professional Builder Magazine.

Stevens Creek Bld.

Unit 1

Unit 2 ADU

Unit 3
Unit 4

CC 12-16-2025
#11
City Hall Improvements
Project
Written Communications
From: Santosh Rao
To: City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; Jimmy Tan, P.E.; Benjamin Fu; Public Comments Subject: Continue City Hall Agenda Item Pending ASCE 41 and Peer Seismic Review Date: Sunday, December 14, 2025 6:55:23 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.
[Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Subject:

Request to Continue City Hall Item Pending ASCE 41 and Peer Seismic Review Dear City Council,
I respectfully request that the City Hall item be continued until a complete and comparable ASCE 41 based assessment and peer review are first provided.

ASCE 41 is the nationally recognised standard for evaluating the seismic safety of existing buildings. It distinguishes clearly between Immediate Occupancy, Life Safety, and Collapse Prevention performance levels. To date, the City has not publicly disclosed which ASCE 41 performance level was assumed, nor whether the existing building fails Life Safety or merely falls short of Immediate Occupancy.

This distinction matters. Across the Bay Area, cities with mid century city halls similar to Cupertino’s have generally accepted Life Safety performance, pursued targeted upgrades, and continued occupancy.

The need for Risk Category IV has not been clearly justified. Most administrative buildings operate under Risk Category II, with Risk Category IV reserved for facilities that must remain fully operational immediately following a major earthquake. Council has not been shown why City Hall, as currently staffed and used, requires this designation.

It is also unclear whether Public Works staff at the service yard, who are directly responsible for post earthquake response and recovery, are afforded the same level of seismic protection as City Hall staff. If continuity of operations is the stated objective, this disparity requires explanation. Much of City Hall staffing appears clerical, while Public Works personnel perform essential field operations.

For these reasons, I urge Council to continue this item and direct staff to first provide:

1. The ASCE 41 evaluation and the performance level assumed.

2. Confirmation of whether the existing City Hall meets Life Safety.

3. A justification for Risk Category IV versus Risk Category II.

4. A comparison of seismic standards applied to City Hall and the Public Works service yard.

5. A peer analysis of neighboring city halls, including cost and extent of retrofit decisions, risk level chosen and comparable scope of work considered or deferred.

These matters go directly to proportionality, credibility, and fiscal responsibility. They should be addressed before any irreversible commitment is made.

Thank you for your consideration.

Sincerely,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident) CC 12-16-2025
#11
City Hall Improvements
Project
Written Communications
From: Yuvaraj Athur Raghuvir
To: Public Comments
Subject: Please Continue City Hall Item. Limit Risk, Scope, and Cost.

Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 5:48:50 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe.

Dear Mayor and Cupertino Council Members,
I ask the Council to **continue the City Hall item** and not approve anything today.

The City has not shown that City Hall needs a higher risk level than other Bay Area city halls of similar age. Any risk level should be **no higher than peer cities**.

The goal should be **life safety only**. That means people can exit the building safely during a major earthquake. It does not mean the building must stay open after. Continued operations are needed at the service yard and for Public Works staff, not for clerical staff who can work from home for a period of time.

The scope must remain **strictly limited**. This should not become a full remodel.

Specifically:
* Do not expand the project into a full renovation.
* Do not include MEP work.
* Do not reconfigure interior spaces.
* Waive any code required work that is **not directly tied** to seismic retrofit for life safety only.

Before any approval, I ask the Council to require staff to return with:

1. Confirmation that City Hall currently meets or the proposed new scope will be to meet **life safety only**.

2. Proof that the proposed risk level is **no higher than needed for life safety rather than continued occupancy and no more than the frugal approach taken by comparable city halls**.

3. A clear study Public Works service yard facilities readiness.

4. The **lowest cost option**, capped at the most frugal approach used by any similar Bay Area city.

5. Written confirmation that the scope is limited to **seismic life safety only**, with no remodel or added work.

Please pause this item until these conditions are met.

Sincerely,
Yuva Athur
Cupertino
From: Ram Sripathi
To: Public Comments
Subject: Proposed spend for 54 M for city hall— limit cost Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 5:20:08 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 Mayor and Cupertino Council Members,
I ask the Council to **continue the City Hall item** and not approve anything today.

The City has not shown that City Hall needs a higher risk level than other Bay Area city halls of similar age. Any risk level should be **no higher than peer cities**.

The goal should be **life safety only**. That means people can exit the building safely during a major earthquake.

It does not mean the building must stay open after. Continued operations are needed at the service yard and for Public Works staff, not for clerical staff who can work from home for a period of time.

The scope must remain **strictly limited**. This should not become a full remodel.

Before any approval, I ask the Council to require staff to return with:

1. Confirmation that City Hall currently meets or the proposed new scope will be to meet **life safety only**.

2. Proof that the proposed risk level is **no higher than needed for life safety rather than continued occupancy and no more than the frugal approach taken by comparable city halls**.

3. A clear study Public Works service yard facilities readiness.

4. The **lowest cost option**, capped at the most frugal approach used by any similar Bay Area city.

5. Written confirmation that the scope is limited to **seismic life safety only**, with no remodel or added work.

Please pause this item until these conditions are met.

Sincerely,
Ram Sripathi
Cupertino resident for 2 decades
Sent from my iPhone
From: Deepa Mahendraker
To: Public Comments
Subject: Please Continue City Hall Item. Limit Risk, Scope, and Cost.

Date: Tuesday, December 16, 2025 4:11:05 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.