1 CITY COUNCILMEMBER REPORT Meeting: April 7, 2026 Reporting Councilmember: Mayor Kitty Moore Report Dates: 3/9/26 to 3/30/26 Item Date, Title, and Description: March 11, 2026. Meeting with Summerhill regarding the Evulich Ct. development. March 11, 2026. Mayor’s Chat. Shared slide deck which is attached at the end of this report. Made announcements for upcoming events. Took questions which Staff collects and responds to any which require follow-up. Light refreshments were provided. March 12, 2026. Check-in with Staff. Weekly check-in meeting to go over ongoing projects and concerns. March 12, 2026. Sheriff Contract Ad Hoc Committee meeting. Ongoing meetings to discuss how to address the 40% proposed increase in the contract. March 12, 2026. VTA Policy Advisory Committee meeting. The agenda packet is here: https://santaclaravta.iqm2.com/Citizens/FileOpen.aspx?Type=1&ID=4377&Inline=True Of most local importance was the presentation regarding SB 63 which proposes to raise sales tax another 0.50% in the County. I assembled data provided by Staff and some prior data regarding the SV Hopper program and have submitted it to VTA for inclusion to the VTA PAC per our prior meeting discussion on sharing our data. That report is attached to this file. March 13, 2026. Evulich Ct. prep. session with Staff.
City Council Mayor Moore Report
2 March 14, 2026. Meeting with Congressman Ro Khanna regarding Cupertino issues and grant requests to include City Hall and Torre EOC Annex March 16, 2026. Agenda look ahead with Staff. March 16, 2026. SVCE Mandarin Class. March 17, 2026. Special Study Session and Regular City Council meeting. Postponed Summerhill/Evulich Ct. to April 1, 2026. March 18, 2026. Met with Copertino Sister City delegation for pizza lunch and then tour of City Hall and Community Hall. March 18, 2026. Mayor and Commission Chairs meeting. Commission Chairs provided brief updates on their recent achievements and received a report from the Mayor provided at the Mayor’s Chat and with further information regarding the Sheriff’s Contract and County Budget. March 19, 2026 Check-in with Staff. March 19, 2026. Worked with Video Division for a Cherry Blossom promo and 2 other promotional videos. March 19, 2026. Sheriff’s Contract Ad hoc Committee meeting. March 20, 2026. Attended FUHSD Foundation Spring for Education event. March 22, 2026. Made brief presentation at the LWVCS meet and greet. March 23, 2026. Agenda look ahead meeting with Staff. March 23, 2026. SVCE Chinese Class Graduation Ceremony. After 15 hours of classroom education and outside practice, the class received certificates in celebration of completing level 1. March 25, 2026. Quarterly Mayors and City Managers meeting with Sunnyvale, Mountain View, and Santa Clara. Heard updates from each city and shared local news and upcoming events.
City Council Mayor Moore Report
3 March 25, 2026. West Valley Mayors and Managers monthly meeting. Received a legislative update from CalCities Peninsula Division executive. Several new housing bills are in the works. March 25, 2026. Meeting with Staff and lobbyist regarding the Gonsalves Act and Property Taxes returned to Cupertino. March 26, 2026. Check in meeting with Staff. March 26, 2026. Sheriff ad hoc committee meeting. Continuing negotiations and next steps. March 27, 2026. Attended the 15th annual WVCS Chefs of Compassion fundraiser event at the Computer History Museum. This lively and sold-out event included a successful donation auction and silent auction. March 28, 2026. Participated in and won my division for the CEEF 5k Run for Great Schools event. 2 Attch: Mayor’s Chat and Commission Chair Slides SV Hopper Data Compilation Mayor’s Chat
March 11, 2026
Outline
Sports Center Data
SV Hopper Data
Santa Clara County Budget Review – Donor City
Sports Center Data
Raw Data – New Memberships
New Cupertino Sports Center Memberships
Year Resident Non-Resident Total
2022 113 71 184
2023 113 46 159
2024 137 85 222
2025 188 124 312
2026* 61 52 113
*To date as of February 25, 2026
Raw Data
Total Sports Center Memberships
Year Resident Non-Resident Total
2022 815 406 1221
2023 965 393 1358
2024 1157 519 1676
2025 1293 625 1918
2026* 1295 756 2051
*As of March 9, 2026
Sports Center Data – Resident/Non-Resident Usage
0 500
1000
1500
2000
2500
2022 2023 2024 2025 2026* *As of March 9, 2026
Total Memberships by Category
Total Sports Center Memberships Resident
Total Sports Center Memberships Non-Resident
Total Sports Center Memberships Total
63%
37%
2026 SPORTS CENTER MEMBERSHIPS
Resident
Non-Resident
SV Hopper Data
12%
24%
19%
15% 14%
9%
4%
2%
18%
12% 13%
19%
13%
15%
8%
3%
0%
5%
10%
15%
20%
25%
30%
18–24 25–34 35–44 45–54 55–64 65–74 75–84 85 and
older
SV Hopper Demographic Data
ACS 2023 (Service Area) SV Hopper (N=457) 2025 Survey
Ridership
by Fare
Type 2024
• Demographic Comparison Analysis
• The data highlights significant trends in who is using the microtransit service compared to the general population of the service area:
• Young Adult Over-Indexing: The 18–24 age group accounts for 18% of SV Hopper ridership, despite making up only 12% of the general population. • Senior Mobility: Adults aged 65–84 represent 23% of the ridership (15% for ages 65–74 and 8% for ages 75–84), while they only comprise 13% of the local population.
• Gap in 25–34 Segment: While individuals aged 25–34 make up 24% of the service area population, they represent only 12% of SV Hopper riders. • Gender Trends: The service is utilized more heavily by women, who make up 57% of riders, compared to their 48% share of the general population. • This comparison indicates that the SV Hopper is particularly successful at providing mobility for groups that traditionally face transportation barriers, such as students and seniors.
• SV Hopper completed 103,468 passenger trips in calendar year 2025, with March as the highest month at 11,324 completed rides. • Within VTA’s service area, several cities are already operating or planning microtransit services:
• Sunnyvale – Via (Peery Park microtransit, operating). • Palo Alto – RideCircuit (electric shuttle).
• Gilroy – Pilot effort under VTA PAC guidance (operator TBD). • Morgan Hill – Starting microtransit pilot (operator TBD). • East San Jose – Microtransit operating as part of VTA’s Transportation Demand Management efforts.
• Mountain View – City-operated fixed-loop shuttles (not point-to-point microtransit but functionally similar for local access). • These services create opportunities for regional coordination, cost sharing, and consistent rider experience at the VTA network scale.
Costs
Total SV Hopper Program Costs (Grant and Municipal Funds) Phase
Fiscal
Year
Cupertino
Service
Area Share
Cupertino
Cost
Santa
Clara
Service
Area
Share
Santa Clara
Cost TIRCP TFCA Measure B
Total
Program
Cost
1 FY23/24 58% 2,655,941 42% 1,923,267 5,561,000 – – 2,764,381 1 FY24/25 – – – – 3,801,453 – – 3,801,453
1 FY25/26 – 500,000 – – 4,074,374 500,000 – 4,074,374
2 FY26/27 39% 850,056 61% 1,329,575 2,904,000 – 726,979 5,810,610 – Total – 3,505,997 – 3,252,842 8,465,000 500,000 726,979 16,450,819 Cupertino Cost ,
$3,505,997 , 21%
Santa Clara Cost ,
$3,252,842 , 20%TIRCP,
$8,465,000 , 52%
TFCA, $500,000 ,
3%
Measure B,
$726,979 , 4%
SV HOPPER COST BREAKDOWN FY 23 -27
59% Grant Funded
Key operating characteristics include:
• Operating cost per trip: $31.87 (FY24–25 cost snapshot). • Net city cost per trip after TIRCP , TFCA, and Measure B grants: $12.72. • Current service performance standard: response time of at most 12 minutes at the 95th percentile, with a minimum of 13 vehicles dedicated to Cupertino and Cupertino retaining approval authority over service zones.
• Reduced rates for students and seniors
• Regular rate: $3.50, reduced rate: $1.75.
Destinations
(2024 Data)
The five most popular destinations are:
1. De Anza College
2. Monta Vista High School
3. Caltrain Stations
4. Cupertino Library/ City Hall
5. Various Shopping Centers
Santa Clara County
Budget Review
Finance and
Government,
$2,750,431,233 , 21%
Public Safety and
Justice,
$1,177,596,302 , 9%
Children, Seniors, and
Families,
$1,376,597,543 , 10%
Santa Clara Valley
Health and
Hospital System,
$7,125,878,095 ,
55%
Housing, Land Use,
Environment, and
Transportation,
$612,837,192 , 5%
Santa Clara County Adopted FY 25 -26 Expenditures by Policy Area Finance and Government Public Safety and Justice
Children, Seniors, and Families Santa Clara Valley Health and Hospital System Housing, Land Use, Environment, and Transportation
11 Year
Budget
Trends
Santa Clara
County
19%
14% 16%
45%
6%
21%
9% 11%
55%
5%
0%
10%
20%
30%
40%
50%
60%
Finance and
Government
Public Safety and
Justice
Children, Seniors,
and Families
Santa Clara Valley
Health and Hospital
System
Housing, Land Use,
Environment, and
Transportation
Santa Clara County Spending Trends FY 2025-FY 2026
Percentage of Total Budget FY 2015 Percentage of Total Budget FY 2026 FY 2025-2026
County
Comparisons
County Total Budget
(Billions)
Healthcare Spend
(Billions)
% of Budget Provider Model
Santa Clara $13.7 $7.15 - $7.5 55.0% Owns/Operates 4
Hospitals
Orange $10.8 $2.9 26.9% Contracts most care
Riverside $10.0 $2.8 28.0% One county hospital
San Bernardino $10.5 $2.7 25.7% Mixed model
Sacramento $9.2 $2.3 25.0% Contracts most care
Alameda $5.1 $1.32 25.9% Public hospital
authority
Staffing: Over 52% of all county employees (approx. 12,000+ people) work directly for the Health and Hospital System. In most other counties, health workers typically make up less than 30% of the workforce.
Cupertino is a donor
city
Where Your Sales Tax Goes — Cupertino FY2026 (Post Me asure A, effective 4/1/2026) Source: CDT FA, HdL ECONSo lutions, Santa Clara County. All rat es verified again s t official dis trict tax s ch e d ules.
KEY ASSUM PTIONS
Tot al Sales Tax R ate ( Po s t Meas ure A) 9.7 500%
Tax able Sales B ase ($M ) $1, 099.95
Tot al Sales Tax R ev enu e ( $M) $107. 2
Fiscal Yea r FY 2026
R ecipient / Lin e Item Tax R ate % of T o t al R evenue ($M ) Cate gory HdL Tax Dis trict Name R ecipient Agency Notes State B ase — General Fu nd 3.9 375% 40. 38% $43. 3 State State B ase Sales and Us e Tax Calif ornia State General Fund
3.9 375% of the 7.25% stat e base ( R& T Code §§6051, 62 01, 6051.3 ). Funds stat e general operations. R emaining 3. 3125% of sta te base is distributed as Realignment, Pr o p 172, and local allocation s s ho wn separat ely below.
State B ase — 1991 R ealignment 0.5 000% 5.1 3% $5. 5 County State B ase Sales and Us e Tax Santa Clara Coun t y — Health & Social Services 0.5 % component of the 7.25% s tate base (R & T Code §6051. 2). Funds local health an d social ser vices programs under the 1991 R ealignment .
State B ase — 2011 R ealignment 1.0 625% 10. 90% $11. 7 County State B ase Sales and Us e Tax Santa Clara Coun t y — Health, Jails , DA, Social Services
1.0 625% component of the 7.25% state base ( R& T Code §6051. 15). Funds Local R evenue Fund 20 11; supports public safety and s ocial serv ices realignment from s tate to county.
State B ase — Prop 172 ( Public S af ety ) 0.5 000% 5.1 3% $5. 5 County State B ase Sales and Us e Tax Santa Clara Coun t y — Local Public Safe ty Fund 0.5 % component of the 7.25% s tate base (C A Const itut ion Ar t. XIII §35, 1993 ). Funds sheriff, DA, fire, and co r rectio ns .
State B ase — Local Transportat ion Fund 0.2 500% 2.5 6% $2. 7 Tra n s it State B ase Sales and Us e Tax Santa Clara Coun t y → VT A ( via Local T ransportation Fund)0.2 5% component of the 7.25% s tate base. Go es t o county , NOT city . Distributed per Tra n s po rt ation Dev elop m ent Act (1971) primarily for public transit via VTA.
City of C u pert ino — General Fu nd 1.0 000% 10. 26% $11. 0 City State B ase Sales and Us e Tax City of C u pert ino — General Fu nd 1.0 % component of the 7.25% s tate base (R & T Code §§7202, 72 03). T he city 's share of the lo c al 1.25 % allocation ( remainin g 0. 25% goes t o county transportat ion above) .
SC County T ransit Dis trict 0.5 000% 5.1 3% $5. 5 Tra n s it Santa Clara Coun t y Tr ansit D ist rict VTA — B us & Light Rail Opera tions District tax , ef fective 10/1/1 976, no ex piratio n. Oldest of t h e VTA dis trict taxe s; funds core VTA bus and light rail operat ions.
SC Valley T ransportation Authority 0.5 000% 5.1 3% $5. 5 Tra n s it Santa Clara Coun t y Valley T ransportat ion Aut h orityVTA — B AR T Ex tension ( Silicon Valley B AR T) District tax , ef fective 4/1/20 06. M easure B ( 2000). Funds the B AR T ex tension into Santa Clara County ( Berr yess a/Milpitas t o downtown San J o s e and Santa Clara).
VTA BAR T Operating & M aintenance TU T 0.1 250% 1.2 8% $1. 4 Tra n s it Santa Clara VT A B ART Op er ating and M aintenance T UTVTA — B AR T Operat ions & M aint enan ce District tax , ef fective 7/1/20 12. Funds o ng o ing operating and ma intenance costs of t h e B AR T ex tension once operational.
SC County R etail T UT 0.1 250% 1.2 8% $1. 4 Tra n s it Santa Clara Coun t y R etail T UT VTA — County T ransportation Pro g rams District tax , ef fective 4/1/20 13. M easure B ( 2000) component. Funds county-wid e VTA trans p ort atio n program s and ser vices.
Silicon Valley Transportat ion Solutions Tax 0.5 000% 5.1 3% $5. 5 Tra n s it Silicon Valley Transportat ion Solutions Tax VTA — R oads, Trans it & Activ e T ransportation District tax , ef fective 4/1/20 17. M easure B ( 2016). 30-y ear measure funding roads, hig hways, transit, and bicy cle/pedestrian improv ements county-wid e .
Penins u la Corrido r JPB — M easure RR (C alt rai n) 0.1 250% 1.2 8% $1. 4 Tra n s it 2020 Peninsula Corrido r Joint Powers Board R etail T UTCaltrain (Peninsula Corrido r Joint Powers Board) District tax (M easure R R) , eff ective 7/1/2021, 30-y ear term. Voter-approved Nov 2020 by SF, San M ateo & Santa Cla ra c o unties. First d edicated fundin g f or C alt rain operations and capital. Generated $121. 6M in FY2 023 a cross all three countie s.
SCC — M easure A ( 2025) 0.6 250% 6.4 1% $6. 9 County M easure A Santa Clara County Sales Tax Increas e Santa Clara Coun t y — General Fu nd (Hea lthcare & Public Safet y)
District tax , ef fective 4/1/20 26, expires 3/31/20 31. Ap prov ed b y 57% of v oters Nov 2024. Genera l tax — est . $330M /year county-wid e . Priority u s es: tra u m a care, ER s, ment al health, public safety . Pass ed t o off set projec ted $ 1B+ federal funding cuts by 2029-30.
TOT AL 9.7 500% 100. 00% $107. 2
TOT AL COUNTY SER VICES (Exc l. T ransit & City) 2.6 88% 27. 56% $29. 6 In c ludes: 199 1 & 2011 R ealignment, Prop 172, Local Transport ation Fund, M easure A
City Percent of the 1% Property Tax Returned to the
City
Milpitas 16.26%
Mountain View 16.07%
San Jose 13.29%
Sunnyvale 13.28%
Los Altos 11.66%
Campbell 10.51%
Morgan Hill 10.29%
Santa Clara 10.02%
Gilroy 9.70%
Palo Alto 9.42%
Los Gatos 9.42%
Cupertino 6.51%
Monte Sereno 6.35%
Los Altos Hills 6.24%
Saratoga 5.77%
Average 10.32%
Talking points
•Cupertino keeps about $46M, but county and countywide agencies take about $129M each year from Cupertino taxpayers – about 2.8 times what the City retains.
•Out of Cupertino’s $107M+ in sales tax, only $11M stays in the City; nearly $30M goes to county health, social services, and public safety (including Prop 172 and realignment), and over $23M goes to VTA/Caltrain. •From the 1% property tax alone, the County’s share is more than double the City’s ($73.5M vs. $35M), plus another $27M+ in county debt levies tied to retirement, hospital, housing, and library systems.
•Cupertino is clearly a donor city: countywide services, including sheriff, jails, DA, and the health system that serve Cupertino, are financed by far more Cupertino -generated revenue than Cupertino receives back as a city.
•When the County claims Cupertino has been “subsidized,” these numbers show the opposite at the macro level: Cupertino taxpayers substantially subsidize the county’s public safety and health infrastructure.
Recap
Sports Center Data
SV Hopper Data
Santa Clara County Budget Review – Donor City
Announcements
• Big Bunny 5k last Saturday – Great turnout!
• Read See Marcus Grow! At Baby Storytime – read councilmember reports for other activities
• SOTC event – hope everyone enjoyed it
• Sheriff contract ad hoc committee continues to meet weekly – We are a donor city. • Website with FAQs coming
• Mercury News Op -Ed came out
• Pickleball sound wall is not an adopted budget item
• Evulich project will be on 3/17 agenda
• The Blesch property will be on the 3/17 agenda – red rancher by Blue Pheasant • Monthly meeting with Commission Chairs is 3/18
• Chamber will be hosting Holi Festival 3/28
• Cupertino City Hall will be closed 3/31 for Cesar Chavez Day • 50+ Golf Tournament is Wednesday April 1 – Through Senior Center • Earth and Arbor Day is Saturday April 4
Thank you!
1 SV Hopper Ridership & Efficiency Data: March 2026 Mayor Moore and Staff compiled data Program Background SV Hopper is a microtransit partnership between the City of Cupertino and the City of Santa Clara, operated by Via, and designed to provide first/last-mile service and local mobility within the service area. The program began as an 18-month pilot funded by Cupertino and has since transitioned into a multi-year, grant-supported service with shared costs between Cupertino and Santa Clara. The SV Hopper program began with a $1.75 million general fund commitment from Cupertino to support an 18-month pilot. As the pilot neared completion and during the COVID period, staff sought external funding and partners to continue the service. Through a partnership with Santa Clara, Cupertino secured multiple external funding sources: • TIRCP Award (CalSTA): • 8.5 million from the Transit and Intercity Rail Capital Program (TIRCP), funding 50% of a four-year continuation of SV Hopper. • TFCA (Transportation Fund for Clean Air): • 500,000 awarded for service in FY25/26 (year 3 of 4 of the TIRCP-backed program). • Measure B Innovative Transit Funding: • 726,979 awarded for FY26/27 (year 4 of 4 of the TIRCP-backed program). The non-grant portion of program costs is shared between Cupertino and Santa Clara based on the proportion of service area within each city for each operating year. 2025 Total Ridership: What was the total number of completed rides for the full 2025 calendar year? - 103,468 passengers Total SV Hopper Program Costs (Grant and Municipal Funds) Total SV Hopper Program Costs (Grant and Municipal Funds)
Total
Program CostMeasure BTFCATIRCPSanta Clara
Cost
Santa
Clara Service Area ShareCupertino
Cost
Cupertino
Service Area Share
Fiscal
YearPhase
2,764,381––5,561,0001,923,26742%2,655,94158%FY23/241
3,801,453––3,801,453––––FY24/251
4,074,374–500,0004,074,374––500,000–FY25/261
5,810,610726,979–2,904,0001,329,57561%850,05639%FY26/272 16,450,819726,979500,0008,465,0003,252,842–3,505,997–Total– 2 Demographic & Fare Data Fare Type Breakdown 2025: - Students: 52% - Seniors: 7% - Low Income: 5% - ADA: 2% Student Impact: same 50% ridership in 2024 and 2025 Demographic Comparison Analysis Because SV Hopper operates across both Cupertino and Santa Clara, staff do not segment ridership by assumed residency; instead, they conduct periodic rider surveys. In 2025, staff surveyed 457 riders and compared their responses to the American Community Survey (ACS 2023) for the SV Hopper service area.
Cupertino Cost,
$3,505,997 , 21%
Santa Clara Cost,
$3,252,842 , 20%TIRCP,
$8,465,000 , 52%
TFCA, $500,000 ,
3%
Measure B,
$726,979 , 4%
SV HOPPER COST BREAKDOWN FY 23-27
3 Rider Demographics vs. ACS (SV Hopper Service Area) Data Category ACS 2023 (Service Area) SV Hopper (N=457) 2025 Male 52% 43% Female 48% 57% Age Categories Age Range ACS 2023 (Service Area) SV Hopper (N=457) 2025 18–24 12% 18% 25–34 24% 12% 35–44 19% 13% 45–54 15% 19% 55–64 14% 13% 65–74 9% 15% 75–84 4% 8% 85 and older 2% 3% Based on the 2025 rider demographic survey and the corresponding American Community Survey (ACS) 2023 data for the service area, here is a comparison of the SV Hopper ridership versus the general population. The data highlights significant trends in who is using the microtransit service compared to the general population of the service area: • Young Adult Over-Indexing: The 18–24 age group accounts for 18% of SV Hopper ridership, despite making up only 12% of the general population. • Senior Mobility: Adults aged 65–84 represent 23% of the ridership (15% for ages 65–74 and 8% for ages 75–84), while they only comprise 13% of the local population. • Gap in 25–34 Segment: While individuals aged 25–34 make up 24% of the service area population, they represent only 12% of SV Hopper riders. • Gender Trends: The service is utilized more heavily by women, who make up 57% of riders, compared to their 48% share of the general population. This comparison indicates that the SV Hopper is particularly successful at providing mobility for groups that traditionally face transportation barriers, such as students and seniors. Service Quality & Geographic Data Key operating characteristics include: • Operating cost per trip: $31.87 (FY24–25 cost snapshot). • Net city cost per trip after TIRCP, TFCA, and Measure B grants: $12.72. • Current service performance standard: response time of at most 12 minutes at the 95th percentile, with a minimum of 13 vehicles dedicated to Cupertino and Cupertino retaining approval authority over service zones. 4 • Reduced rates for students and seniors • Regular rate: $3.50, reduced rate: $1.75. Wait Times & Cancellations: What was the average wait time in 2025, and did the 5% cancellation rate improve or worsen? - 17.2 minutes was the average pick up ETA (average pickup ETA among all requests where a ride proposal was displayed) - 77% ride acceptance rate (proposals accepted by riders/ proposals displayed to riders) - The ride cancellation rate remained relatively flat at 6% (largely due to the March VTA strike, which caused a surge in booking aeempts to 19,562. The average monthly booking aeempts in 2025, when excluding March, was 12,885). Utilization Rate: Average utilization rate (completed rides per vehicle hour) for 2025? - The average utilization rate (completed rides/ net driver hours) was 2.7. - The average productivity rate (completed rides/ vehicle revenue hours) was 3.2. Aggregation Growth: Did the 33.5% "Shared Booking Rate" (aggregation) increase in 2025? Higher aggregation is the primary metric VTA uses to judge the efficiency of microtransit over subsidized ride-hailing. - In 2025, SV Hopper had a shared bookings rate (the share of bookings that had some boarded time shared with another booking) of 47%.
Monthly Trends: Monthly breakdown of ridership for 2025 to identify the "monthly high" and any seasonal fluctuations - Demand fluctuates most noticeably with the school calendar and during major holiday periods, when students are out of school and many workers are not commuting regularly. 0%10%20%30%40%50%60%70%2025-012025-022025-032025-042025-052025-062025-072025-082025-092025-102025-112025-12Bookings Shared 5 Destination Data Zone Distribution: for 2025 - In 2025, 62% of trips were Cupertino to Cupertino, 13% Cupertino to Santa Clara, 10% Santa Clara to Cupertino, 6% Santa Clara to Santa Clara, and then a combination of demand pairs involving Caltrain stations and El Camino Hospital. VTA Transfer Data: Identify how many SV Hopper trips started or ended at a VTA bus stop or Light Rail station. This directly addresses the PAC's interest in "First/Last Mile" connectivity rather than "Point-to-Point" competition. - Aeributing SV Hopper trips as first/last-mile connections to VTA bus service is more difficult than doing so for Caltrain. Unlike Caltrain stations, many VTA stops are located near a variety of surrounding land uses that independently generate demand, making it harder to determine whether a trip was specifically made to connect to transit. To beeer understand this FMLM relationship, staff surveyed 457 riders in 2025 about the purpose of their most recent SV Hopper trip. The survey asked, “Did this trip [most recent] link to or from public transit (e.g., bus, rail, etc.)?” and found that 31% of respondents used SV Hopper to connect to or from public transit: 16% connected to transit, 6% connected from transit, and 9% connected both to and from transit. - When asked a general question about FMLM, “What public transit operator did you link to/from?” respondents stated that when connecting to public transit, 73% connected with Caltrain, 18% with VTA bus, and 9% with ACE, Amtrak, VTA light rail, or the Mountain View Community Shuele Connector. When connecting from public transit, 68% of riders link from Caltrain, 23% from VTA Bus, and 9% other operators. 020004000600080001000012000
2025-012025-022025-032025-042025-052025-062025-072025-082025-092025-102025-112025-12 SV Hopper 2025 Completed Rides
6 Top Destinations: 1) De Anza College 2) Caltrain Stations 3) Monta Vista High School 4) Westfield Valley Fair 5) Cupertino Library 2025 Heat Map:
7 Regional Microtransit Landscape Within VTA’s service area, several cities are already operating or planning microtransit services: • Sunnyvale – Via (Peery Park microtransit, operating) expanding to entire city. • Palo Alto – RideCircuit (electric shuttle). • Gilroy – Pilot effort under VTA PAC guidance (operator TBD). • Morgan Hill – Starting microtransit pilot (operator TBD). • East San Jose – Microtransit operating as part of VTA’s Transportation Demand Management efforts. • Mountain View – City-operated fixed-loop shuttles (not point-to-point microtransit but functionally similar for local access).