Cupertino Facts

Category: Email Blast

  • January 2024 Newsletter: Cupertino Gets Sued, March 5th Primary Elections, and More

    Cupertino Attempts to Trim Budget

    The January 17, 2024 City Council meeting to discuss potential budget cuts (“Service-Level Reductions (SLRs)”) revealed a bloated budget and long-standing accounting errors. Remarkably, over $2.2M of the proposed Service Level Reductions were actually just accounting adjustments. These changes are now being presented as “Potential Service Level Reductions,” when there are no associated service reductions.

    Council did advise on a few service reductions that may impact residents: Sidewalk and tree maintenance may now be the responsibility of the property owner. Community events, including concerts, movies, and festivals, will also have reduced funding. There were no significant staffing reductions or cutbacks for City employees.

    READ MORE

    Cupertino, We Can Do Better: Register to Vote and Vote Regularly

    The Santa Clara County Registrar of Voters commits to sending vote-by-mail ballots for the March 5, 2024 Presidential Primary Election to all county voters no later than Monday, February 5.

    In Cupertino, approximately 73% of all adult residents are registered to vote. Of the 73% registered, only 60% cast ballots in the November 2022 General Election. Cupertino had a better showing for the November 2020 Presidential Election, with 88% of registered voters returning ballots. However, relative to several nearby communities, Cupertino residents are registered to vote at much lower rates.

    Find out more about the upcoming March 2024 Primary Election, and why you should vote.

    READ MORE

    YIMBY Lawsuit Costs Cupertino

    On January 10, 2024, Cupertino settled a lawsuit filed by California Housing Defense Fund and Yes In My Back Yard (YIMBY) for missing its state-mandated Housing Element deadline. According to YIMBY Law, whose slogan includes “Sue the Suburbs,” about a dozen Bay Area jurisdictions have been sued for missing their housing-element deadlines, including Palo Alto, Burlingame, and the County of Santa Clara. Their complaint against Palo Alto drew the ire of residents who commented that the lawsuit is a scam used to raise money by organizations that are “backed by investment firms, developers and real estate lobbies.”

    Read more about what the lawsuit’s settlement means for Cupertino.

    READ MORE

    Browse Previous Cupertino Facts Issues:

    DECEMBER 2023

    NOVEMBER 2023

  • December 2023 Newsletter: New Plans for Former Vallco Site, Will Cupertino Raise Sales Taxes? — and more

    We thank you for following along this year as we shed light on many critical issues. From changes impacting the face of Cupertino to loss of public resources, we hope to spark dialogue amongst residents who rightfully expect the utmost of their city governance. In this issue:

    • Is Cupertino’s Single-Family Housing at Risk?
    • Will Sales Taxes Go Up in Cupertino?
    • New Plans Revealed for Former Vallco Site
    • County Deems Lehigh Quarry Application “Incomplete”
    • Small Business Spotlight: New Custom Cake Shop Opens in Cupertino

    Are Cupertino’s Single Family Homes At Risk?

    On November 30, 2023 Cupertino submitted its “Second Draft” (3rd submittal) of its Housing Element (HE) to the California Department of Housing & Community Development (HCD) for approval. Residents should be aware of two decisions that will impact homes across Cupertino if approved:

    1. Any Single-Family Home on a corner lot could turn into an apartment.
    2. Any Single-Family Home behind or around a shopping center on specific roads could turn into apartments.

    Example of Cupertino neighborhoods with single-family homes adjacent to retail

    These potential changes create uncertainty for current and prospective homeowners, and could drastically alter our neighborhoods. Cupertino has identified and is prepared to re-zone far more HE sites than is required to meet its Regional Housing Needs Allocation (RHNA) obligation.

    Reach out to your representatives now to provide input. The Cupertino City Council has the final say. Here is their contact information:

    [email protected]
    [email protected]
    [email protected]

    Individual City Council member emails can be found here.

    READ MORE

    Will Sales Taxes Go Up in Cupertino?

    On December 5, 2023, City Council voted to explore raising Cupertino sales taxes by 0.25% (to a total of 9.375%).

    City Staff Pushes for Sales Tax Increase

    At the December 5, City Council Study Session, staff asked Council for direction on four revenue-raising options. They recommended the Transaction and Use Tax (TUT), but also considered raising the Hotel Tax, Parcel Tax, and Business Operations Tax.

    Next Steps

    In January and February, the City will poll a subset of voters for their opinions on a higher sales tax. A majority vote on the November 2024 ballot is needed to raise sales taxes by 0.25%.

    READ MORE

    New Plans Revealed for Former Vallco Site

    On December 5, 2023, the property owner of the former Vallco shopping mall (N. Wolfe Rd. and Stevens Creek Blvd.) submitted a new development plan to the City of Cupertino. The plan, called “The Rise,” replaces the old site with housing, offices, shopping areas, and open spaces, similar to previous plans that have been submitted over the last decade.

    A Revised Design with a New Architect

    The developer recently switched to a different architectural design firm, Kohn Pedersen Fox (KPF). Via the developer’s announcement, “KPF is a world-renowned design firm known for their innovative and community-driven approach to urban design.”

    Will Cupertino Agree to the Modification?

    Despite significant changes from the prior plan, the developer claims that this project is only a modification of its SB35 application. If the City agrees that the modifications are minor, then the new buildings can use outdated 2016 building codes, even if the development is built years from now. This may make the new buildings less energy-efficient and less environmentally friendly.

    Next Steps

    The City has 60 days to respond to the developer as to whether the project is compliant with SB35 or it can be considered a modification to a previously-approved SB35 project. Since the developer intends to subdivide the project and build it in phases, it is unknown when it will be completed, if ever.

    READ MORE

    County Deems Lehigh Permanente Quarry Application Incomplete

    On December 7, Santa Clara County’s Planning and Development Office deemed Lehigh’s Reclamation Plan application incomplete. The 31-page letter listed a number of areas that require clarification such as, appropriately defining the land areas to be reclaimed, fish and wildlife protection, water quality concerns, new truck routes, and additional truck traffic.

    READ MORE

    Small Business Spotlight: New Cake Shop Opens in Cupertino

    A new custom cake shop, Horizon Bakery, has opened in Cupertino. This family-owned establishment boasts a wide portfolio of creations, ranging from intricately hand-painted cakes to elaborate floral and figurine toppings.

    horizon bakery

    Horizon Bakery’s owners have poured an immense amount of effort into making the space their new home. They spent one year remodeling the location, demolishing and then rebuilding the entire interior.

    READ MORE

    Wishing you a very happy holiday and new year,

    The Cupertino Facts Team

  • November 2023 Newsletter: July 4th fireworks defunded, Cupertino’s first Builder’s Remedy apartment project, and more

    What’s in this issue:

    • Cupertino Cancels July 4th Fireworks
    • Cupertino Receives First Builder’s Remedy Development Application
    • Will High Capacity Transit Come to Cupertino?
    • Apply for Cupertino Commissions

    Cupertino Cancels July 4th Fireworks

    While many residents were preparing for their Thanksgiving holiday, the Cupertino City Council decided to cut its July 4th fireworks display.

    There was no community input taken in staff’s recommendation to axe the popular fireworks show, enjoyed by thousands of residents for decades. The suggestion to defund the celebrations was hidden as a one-liner within agenda item #11 for the November 21, 2023 City Council meeting.

    Differing opinions

    Councilmember Kitty Moore cast the lone dissenting vote against defunding the fireworks. “I don’t feel this decision has the input from the public,” Moore stated. “It’s being done at a time when the public isn’t here to comment on it, because it’s buried on this agenda.”

    Moore said that funding can be made available to support the fireworks. “We have 14 positions which aren’t filled, at an average of $180,000 per position,” said Moore. “We do have money available if we are looking into the budget, in areas where there has actually been leftover year over year.”

    On the other hand, Mayor Wei voted to get rid of the July 4th fireworks. The reason Wei gave was that there are worse budget cuts planned in January 2024, so it would be “responsible” to start cutting now.

    A Tale of Two Cities

    The reason cited for eliminating the July 4th fireworks was Cupertino’s $15M structural deficit. However, Cupertino’s handling of this deficit has been inconsistent. On November 7th, Council approved cost of living (COLA) raises for both non-unionized and specific unionized employees, ranging from 3-5%, and added two new fully paid holidays. On October 17th, Council voted to pursue a brand new City Hall building, rather than a renovation of existing buildings for a fraction of the cost.

    Meanwhile, the City has chosen to cut community services. Eliminating the fireworks in 2024 yields a one-time savings of $140K. The city also cut its $30K funding to Shakespeare in the Park, and a $10K teen boba event.

    What’s in Store

    Council voted to retain July 4th morning activities at a reduced scale compared to prior years, at a cost of $7K. Councilmember Liang Chao asked for the Parks & Recreation Commission to explore creative ways to celebrate July 4th without fireworks, and to fund future July 4th events.

    READ MORE

    Cupertino Receives First Builder’s Remedy Development Application

    Cupertino has been vulnerable to the “Builder’s Remedy” since it missed its January 2023 deadline for an approved Housing Element from the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD). The “Builder’s Remedy” is a State law that allows developers to bypass local zoning laws for projects that offer affordable housing.

    Builder’s Remedy Reaches Cupertino

    Menlo Park developer Acclaim Properties has submitted Cupertino’s first Builder’s Remedy application: a 141 home apartment complex on 1.63 acres, at the corner of Stevens Creek Blvd and N. Blaney Ave. The site is zoned for commercial use, with a maximum height of 45 feet. However, the developer’s application uses the “Builder’s Remedy” to circumvent these rules, raising its height to 70 feet, and leaving no space for commercial businesses. If this project proceeds, the development will force businesses like Vidyarambh Preschool and Daycare Center and Be Natural Music to vacate the site.

    Source: Builder’s Remedy Project Proposals, Cupertino.org

    Mayor Wei appears either unaware of or indifferent to existing height limits. Via the Mercury News, Wei stated that “five-stories on one of the city’s busiest thoroughfares isn’t unusual,” even though there currently are no other buildings of that height nearby. Wei also said that “there will be more in the next eight years.”

    A Loss of Local Control

    This project, like Vallco using the SB 35 law to tear down our mall, or Westport using the Density Bonus law and decreasing the Oaks Shopping Center area, lowers Cupertino’s retail base at a time when the CDTFA audit is expected to reduce our sales tax revenue by $30M annually, plus back payments.

    Cupertino faces difficult fiscal decisions ahead. The lack of local control in retaining retail can have a dire effect on healthy economic planning. Most importantly, these laws will not help lower housing costs. It is unknown how many more “Builder’s Remedy” projects will be proposed while we wait for the City to get an approved Housing Element.

    READ MORE

    Is High-Capacity Transit Coming to Cupertino?

    Via the Stevens Creek Corridor Vision website: Santa Clara, San Jose, Cupertino, Santa Clara County, and the Valley Transportation Authority (VTA) are conducting a two-year transportation study for the Stevens Creek Boulevard/West San Carlos corridor. Their goal is to create a vision including multi-modal transportation improvements and possible high-capacity transit connecting Diridon Station in San Jose to Santa Clara and the De Anza College/Highway 85 area in Cupertino.

    Share your feedback by filling out the survey on StevensCreekVision.com, or attend upcoming events:

    Community Advisory Group Meeting #2 (In-Person)
    Santa Clara Central Park Library
    2635 Homestead Rd, Santa Clara, CA
    Thursday, December 7, 2023
    5 – 6:30 p.m.

    Apply for Cupertino Commissions

    The City of Cupertino is now recruiting for its commissions. Those interested in getting more involved in City affairs may visit the Commissions Vacancies page to learn about open positions, and the Commissions page for instructions on how to apply.

    Here is a list of vacancies as of 11/28/30:

    • Audit Committee: 3 available seats
    • Housing Commission: 2 available seats
    • Parks & Recreation Commission: 2 available seats
    • Public Safety Commission: 3 available seats
    • Sustainability Commission: 3 available seats
    • Technology, Information, and Communications Commission: 2 available seats

  • July 2023 Newsletter: Memorial Park updates, Council’s unusual move to reduce lobbyist transparency, and more

    What’s in this issue:

    • Memorial Park Redesign Takes Another Step Towards Completion
      Council Makes Unusual Move to Reduce Transparency into Lobbyist Activity
    • A Simple Explanation of RHNA and how it impacts local residents

    Memorial Park Redesign Moves Closer to Completion

    After a year of research and community outreach, plans for a revitalized Memorial Park are moving closer to completion. The new plans will provide recreational opportunities for all ages and abilities, improve upon dated features, and increase connectivity with more bikeways and walkways.

    Proposed Park Plan

    Source: Memorial Park Preferred Draft Concept Presented 6/21

    Many features in the park plan put forth by city staff appear to have council support. However, a few areas generated questions during the June 21st City Council meeting:

    1. Removal of softball field: The new Memorial Park plan proposed eliminating the softball field. This is one of the only local softball fields with lighting at night, a size large enough for slow-pitch (adult) softball, and home run fencing. It is currently used by at least 16 teams, and helps draw business into the city. To save the softball field, a few other features in the new park plan (basketball courts, pickleball courts) would be moved or eliminated. Given strong demand for the field, including a petition with 835 signatures, Council voted to have staff return with a revised schematic plan including the softball field.

    Aerial view of Memorial Park as it is today with the softball field

    Source: Memorial Park Preferred Draft Concept Presented 6/21

    1. High cost of redesign: While cost estimates have not been provided, one should expect such a large-scale renovation to cost significantly more than the Jollyman Park playground renovation, which will cost about $5M for a much smaller scope. The Memorial Park renovation plan was initiated in 2022, before Cupertino was hit by a significant budget deficit. Currently, only its design phase has funding, with a $650,000 budget. “The City is facing a very tight budget now, so I hope that staff can come back with a more economical version of the plan,” stated Council Member Liang Chao during the meeting. “We tried to pack [many things] in the proposed plan, but we don’t have just one park, we have many parks. Many of these nice features, even if they don’t get implemented in Memorial Park, can be implemented in other parks in the city,” said Chao. For example, instead of replacing the highly-used softball field with basketball courts, residents could use the brand new basketball courts at Wilson Park.

    Read more to find out what new features are planned to be added to the park, what will stay the same, when the Memorial Park renovation might begin, and more.

    Read More

    Cupertino Council Majority Moves to Reduce Transparency into Lobbyist Activity

    At the July 6, 2023 City Council meeting, three Councilmembers (Wei, Fruen, and Mohan) approved first round changes weakening Cupertino’s lobbyist registration ordinance. The changes include a provision that allows lobbyists who are paid less than $5,000/quarter to avoid publicly disclosing their activity. Councilmembers Moore and Chao opposed the changes.

    Background

    In February 2021, the Cupertino Council enacted an ordinance that requires lobbyists to publicly disclose their activities. The term “lobbyist” included individuals, media, businesses, and select organizations that attempt to influence the government in exchange for paid compensation. This ordinance provides transparency to Cupertino residents around lobbying activity, and helps ensure that our city’s democratic processes are not unduly influenced by conflicts of interest.

    Council Moves to Limit Lobbyist Ordinance

    Three Councilmembers approved first round changes to the lobbyist ordinance (Wei, Mohan, and Fruen voted YES; Chao and Moore voted NO). This means:

    • Expenditure lobbyists will no longer be required to publicly disclose activity (Defined as entities who pay others to lobby the City or elected officials on behalf of a position).
    • Media will no longer be required to disclose lobbying activity, regardless of who funds the media activity.
    • All nonprofits including member benefit organizations will no longer be required to disclose lobbying activity, regardless of who funds them.
    • Any lobbyist who is paid less than $5,000 per calendar quarter will not be required to register as such with the City of Cupertino.

    A Comparison of Local Lobbyist Ordinances

    One justification made for the changes was to make Cupertino’s lobbying ordinance consistent with other local cities, counties, or the state. However, lobbying ordinances in the cities and counties closest to us are actually in line with the current Cupertino lobbying ordinance. For example, both Santa Clara County’s and San Jose’s lobbyist payment thresholds are $1,000/consecutive three month period or $5,000/year for expenditure lobbyists. In-house lobbyists who lobby for 10 hours or more in a consecutive 12-month period must also register.

    During the July 6th meeting, Councilmember Chao disagreed with using California (population: 39 million people via July 2022 U.S. Census Bureau estimates) as a benchmark for Cupertino. “For the entire state of California, the limit is $5,000 per quarter,” stated Chao. “For a tiny city of Cupertino, if the limit is $5,000 per period, I don’t think anyone would ever qualify.”

    A Loss of Transparency in Cupertino

    The U.S. District Court upheld the 2021 lobbyist registration ordinance, dismissing a lawsuit filed against the ordinance by the League of Women Voters Cupertino Sunnyvale. However, the City chooses to disregard the Court’s ruling, and dismantle the ordinance by adding exemptions and raising threshold reporting amounts.

    From 2021 to 2023, the Cupertino City Council has shifted in sentiment from favoring transparency to shielding lobbyists more than the rest of the county. Failure to provide real accountability, and instead focusing only on partisan politics, further sacrifices quality governance at the expense of undisclosed pandering.

    The lobbyist registration ordinance will be discussed by Council again in September 2023. Click below to get the full story about why the ordinance was challenged and revised.

    Read The Full Story

    Simple Explanation of RHNA and Housing Markets

    By Amy Kalish
    Marin Post

    RHNA is the Regional Housing Needs Assessment — the number of housing units (a place for at least one person to live) assigned to an area by the state. This happens in eight-year housing cycles, and the allocation numbers are determined by the California Department of Housing and Community Development (HCD).

    Read The Full Story
  • April 7, 2023 Email Newsletter: Shakespeare in the Park – To Be or Not To Be? – City Hall Renovation, and More

    April 7, 2023 Email Newsletter: Shakespeare in the Park – To Be or Not To Be? – City Hall Renovation, and More

    April 7, 2023 — Welcome to the Cupertino Facts newsletter! This resident-led publication is dedicated to ensuring that we have a safe, vibrant, honest and effective community. We stand for win-win situations.

    In this issue, we explore the following issues:

    1. Cupertino Shakespeare in the Park – To Be or Not To Be?

    2. Should Cupertino Spend $72M on a New City Hall?

    3. Cupertino’s Payments to a Politically-Driven Organization Raise Questions

    We have seen the rhetoric of doing good and doing well. Yet far too often, problems have accumulated, requiring much greater efforts to solve, following ever-increasing harms. These include financial accountability and the addressing of social problems. As well, we are at a point in time when public discourse is unfortunately dominated by the politics of attack. We are not interested in contributing to this problem. 

    What is the remedy? Communication is essential. We will dedicate both to setting forth good work, and communicating regarding this work. If we disagree, it must be on honest, principled differences.

    We must start with the commonly-accepted premises that the facts matter, and that we can address concerns while improving endeavors for all. We believe in the politics of efficacy, not the politics of accusation. We are there for you, and we will keep engaging and supporting the values of thoughtful, honest discussion.


    Cupertino Shakespeare in the Park – To Be or Not To Be?


    THE FACTS: Cupertino residents have enjoyed free Shakespeare in Memorial Park every summer since 1995. But at the April 4, 2023 City Council meeting, Toby Leavitt, Executive Director of the San Francisco Shakespeare Festival, made the dramatic announcement that Shakespeare in Memorial Park is at risk of being canceled this summer by the Cupertino Parks and Recreation Department. 


    Staff stated that they were experiencing “unexpected financial constraints affecting both staffing levels and their ability to host free Shakespeare in the Park this summer.” Leavitt asked for help in finding solutions to retain this program along with the many other beloved Cupertino community summer events.

    WHY THIS MATTERS: As resident Rhoda Fry explained at the Council meeting, Cupertino’s Q4 2022 and Q1 2023 sales and use tax revenue is significantly down from prior years. She is concerned that the City faces a “double whammy” with the decline in revenue, plus potential fallout from an impending tax audit of one of Cupertino’s largest sales-tax revenue sources. Meanwhile, our Council and Commissions are being asked to allocate funds for new projects.

    We won’t sugarcoat things – less tax revenue eventually impacts all residents, whether it’s cuts to community programs or capital improvements. Yet while the City looks to cut Shakespeare in the Park, Mayor Hung Wei and City Manager Pamela Wu will spend 10 days in Taiwan visiting sister cities. Wu confirmed that the expenses for this international trip will be paid for by Cupertino. It is customary for the Mayor to go on taxpayer-funded sister-city trips, and our students will certainly benefit from her insights. However, there is no record of a City Manager ever going on a sister-city trip. The cost of the trip has yet to be approved by the City Council.


    WHAT CAN WE DO? Residents believe it is important to find responsible solutions to address Cupertino’s financial situation. While official conversations are still underway, resident-proposed solutions include:

    • Increasing fiscal transparency in order to better evaluate Cupertino’s expenditures
    • Identifying opportunities to reduce city expenses.  For example, at the meeting Peggy Griffin recommended capping fee waivers, limiting trips to sister cities, and prioritizing community events that bring people together. 
    • In Griffin’s own words, “Let’s live within our means and reduce the impact to the City.”


    (more…)

  • Non Profits: Not All are Charities

     

    As we get to the end of the year, we wish all of you a happy and relaxing holiday season. It is also the season of giving, where we contribute to our favorite causes, often represented by charities we donate to. We often use the words non-profit organizations and charities interchangeably. However they are NOT the same. 


    Did you know that the National Football League (NFL) was classified as a non-profit organization for almost five decades?


    While most charities are non-profits, not all non-profits are charities. Organizations become non-profits when they are classified by the IRS as exempt from paying taxes on the contributions and investment income they receive. 


     In fact many tax-exempt nonprofits are organized for the explicit purpose of advocating for the interests of the members, and NOT for social causes and the greater good which we associate charities with.

     

    In this post we go into the differences between nonprofits and also focus on a nonprofit (not charities) whose dealing with the City of Cupertino, and the use of our tax dollars raises serious questions.


    Different Kinds of Non-Profit Organizations 

     

    The IRS has published guidelines describing the tax treatment for various kinds of nonprofits. 


    Charities or 501 (c)(3) exempt organizations are typically what comes to mind when we think of nonprofits. 501 (c)(3) exempt organizations can be large organizations like the American Red Cross or local organizations like the West Valley Community Services who assist those in need in our neighborhood.


    Another class of non-profit are business and trade leagues whose tax exemption is covered under IRS Section 501 (c)(6). These organizations are organized to advocate for the interests of their members. The National Football League (NFL) was a 501 (c)(6) exempt non-profit for about five decades before giving up its non-profit status in 2015!


    Locally, the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce is a 501(c)(6) exempt non-profit, which advocates for its members. Out of the about 2400 registered businesses in Cupertino, less than 10% are dues-paying members of the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce.

     

    Cupertino Chamber of Commerce & the $16,000/year Ghost Contract

     

    For as far as anyone in the City Offices can remember, the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce has been sending a bi-annual invoice for $8000 ($16,000 per year) to the City of Cupertino. Under normal business practices the invoices are paid by the City for services delivered under a contract agreed upon prior to the delivery of the services.

     

    However, the City staff is unable to locate any such agreement or contract against which the Chamber of Commerce was invoicing the city and getting paid for many years! After further investigation, the City Council was informed that the payments were made under a verbal agreement which no-one can reproduce. 

     

    To summarize, there is:

    • NO Definition of the service the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce performs for the city
    • NO Criteria to determine whether the Chamber is fulfilling the terms of the contract for their invoices to be paid
    • However the City has paid hundreds of thousands of dollars to this organization whose charter is to lobby for its dues-paying members, without any contract in place.


    Councilperson Kitty Moore ‘s scrutiny of a  line-item during the review of the City’s spending led to the discovery of these payments. These annual payments are in addition to the membership dues which the City pays to the Chamber, or the more than $60,000 paid by the City to the Chamber to run the ILoveCupertino website, or other concession the city provides like the free use of City facilities. 

    City Elections & the Chamber of Commerce PAC


    As an organization created to lobby for the interests of its members, the Chamber of Commerce sponsors PACs during elections. During the 2016 election cycle, the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce PAC committed campaign finance violations and was fined by the FPCC.


    During the 2018 election the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce sponsored a PAC, to influence the results of local city council elections in the favor of certain candidates sponsored by the coterie of ex-mayors, The PAC used the name and the logo of the Cupertino Chamber of Commerce to solicit votes.

    For many years, the city was paying $16,000 of our tax dollars, annually, without a locatable contract, to an organization which ran a PAC in support of city council candidates backed by the coterie of ex-mayors.

     

    The Coterie of Mayors & Their Web of Influence

     

    One challenge the residents face is that the coterie of ex-mayors have a well entrenched web of influence among local organizations which they have cultivated over the decades.

     

    These networks have been built over the years via both soft favors like memberships in committees, endorsements & awards, and hard benefits, like the annual transfer of our tax-payer dollars to the Chamber of Commerce which then runs PACs to favor the coterie.


    Whether it was shutting down already overcrowded CUSD schools in the middle of a 100 year pandemic or granting their favorite developer the unheard of privilege to build without any height limits, or sending our tax dollars to lobbying organizations which then advocate to get them get elected, the coterie of mayors does not have the residents’ best interests in mind.

     

    Please stay alert and continue acting as a watchdog to keep them in check.

  • Stay Engaged to Preserve Your Interests

    A few years ago no one would have thought that CUSD would close schools even though: 

     

    • CUSD has the most crowded schools in the area
    • 30% of primary school classrooms are non-permanent portable structures
    • The district is projecting a $39M surplus over the next five years
    • And the savings from school closure are minimal

     

    Why do our elected leaders take such decisions?

    Part of the reason is that they do not face repercussions for their decisions.

    And that happens because they have well-oiled machinery to misdirect residents.

     

    One leg of that machinery is media outlets which spread fear, uncertainty and doubt (FUD) among residents; and the other leg of that is suppression of dialogue among residents which challenges that FUD.


    In this email, we focus on the second aspect: the suppression of free dialogue by the coterie of ex-mayors to harm residents’ interests. 

    Kent Vincent and Censorship on Nextdoor

     

    Kent Vincent has been living in Cupertino for more than 40 years. He worked at HP Labs where he (co)authored more than 50 patents before his “retirement”. For the past 15 years, he has been organizing large travel groups to destinations all over the world.

     

    Earlier this month, Kent wrote a post on Nextdoor challenging the premise of the editorial published by San Jose Mercury News about the Cupertino elections.


    Kent’s post was marked as disrespectful, and deleted, twice, from the platform by Nextdoor lead. 

     

    Not surprisingly, the six leads who deleted Kent’s post, are vocal cheer-leaders of investor interests on various forums and curtail any discussion which challenges the investor’s narrative.

     

    We are sharing the screenshots of those who voted to delete Kent’s post to suppress discussion, and also the content of the original post below.

    Kent Vincent’ Post

    Jollyman/Faria • 3 Nov

     

    There is a dynamic in the Cupertino Council race that bothers me. As in recent past elections, our six candidates are marketed by two PACs, three candidates supported by a pro-development PAC of past Cupertino mayors predominantly residing on the west end of Cupertino and three candidates supported by a “sensible growth” development PAC of individuals predominantly residing on the east side of Cupertino. 


    Virtually all of the high rise, high density, high traffic generating “big city” development that has been built or planned for Cupertino in recent years has been approved exclusively for the east of Hwy 85 east side and its residents by the Councils of the west end PAC mayors. This includes the ill-fated amendment of a Vallco General Plan in 2014 having no building height limitation that now allows the build of multiple 20-story skyscrapers on that site via SB35.


     What bothers me is that most of those pro-development PAC leaders personally live in neighborhoods isolated from the impact of their development decisions, areas of low traffic where significant development has not occurred for 40 years nor is planned. It is very easy to be pro-development altruistic when development you approve always occurs in someone else’s neighborhood and doesn’t negatively impact you personally. 


    I have good fortune to know most of the leaders of both PACs and view all as very decent, well-meaning leaders and residents that I respect and applaud for their commitment to our community. I am bothered, however, that the west end PAC and its influenced San Jose Mercury News editorials have labeled the east side PAC and its slate of current Council members and candidates as “nimbies” (not in my back yard) on development. 


    That’s “calling the kettle black” in my opinion. Always approving “yes in your backyard” development is just a different form of “not in my back yard” (NIMBY). Fact is, virtually no one wants high rise, high density, traffic impacting development in their neighborhood. We’re all NIMBYs in that sense. In my view, any candidate running on a platform of pro-development (altruistic or otherwise) should state willingness to bear the negative impact of their approvals in the part of the city where they live.  


    I know the PAC leaders read Nextdoor and I look forward to their comments. Do I have a valid concern?

    The Coterie of ex-Mayors and their “Ethics”
    One of the foundations of the democratic system we cherish, is our freedom of expression. That expression takes various forms, with yard signs being a convenient method for residents to express their preferences during election season. 

     

    The security video below shows how those rights are infringed upon by these power-brokers who have no qualms in stealing their opponent’s yard signs. The resemblance to one of the most prominent members of the coterie of ex-mayors is not accidental. While this sign-stealing video is from the 2020 election cycle  the behavior continued this cycle also.

    Video

    Please Stay Engaged and Involved

     

    They have no qualms in shutting down our already overcrowded schools in the middle of a 100 year pandemic, they have no problem trespassing and stealing our yard signs, they have no problem suppressing discussion among residents, but they do have a problem in registering as paid lobbyists.

     

    Whether it is unbalanced editorials in newspapers, or a constant barrage of half truths, vested  interests will force the city in a direction which enriches their backers substantially, at the cost of our quality of life.

     

    The only bulwark we have against these vested interests, is an engaged community.. So please stay engaged and come together to preserve your interests. One way to help is to share our content with your neighbors and friends.

    A reminder of how desperate the coterie of ex-mayors was to label our Harvard and Princeton educated resident focused council members as “bums” and “scoundrels” since they resisted the deep-pocketed investors.

  • Cupertino: It is a Lot More Than Vallco!

     

     

    This is going to be our last email before the elections.

    1. The Vallco Obsession

    2. Opt-In Email List

     

    The Vallco Obsession


    The coterie of ex-mayors sent out another email showing the Vallco lot. We wanted to set the record straight.

     

    Vallco SB35 Plan: Stuck due to Toxic Contamination


    The SB35 plan approved by the previous city council (Rod Sinks, Barry Chang and Savita Vaidhyanathan) after firing the City Attorney is still valid. 


    However, the Vallco site is contaminated, and the County of Santa Clara Department of Environment Health (SCC-DEH) is supervising the cleanup. The City of Cupertino or the City Council is not involved. The city will issue the permits after SCC-DEH gives clearance.

     

    The developer knew of the contamination as far as 2016, but neither they, nor the previous City Councils listened to the residents who expressed concern about the potential impact on the workers who are working on the  contaminated site, and nearby residents, without adequate mitigation efforts.

     

    No Height Limits: The Empire State Building


    We also wanted to reiterate that the previous councils removed height limits at Vallco in 2014 and refused to put them back in 2017 when Steven Scharf and Darcy Paul requested them, due to the upcoming  SB35 legislation. In principle, the developer could have built something as high as the Empire State Building at that development since there were no restrictions in place. 

    The resident focused city council, in place after the 2018 election, put reasonable limitson the development for any future plans which come up.


    Cupertino Top Issues:

     

    We feel that the top issues facing Cupertino are the CUSD school closures and the potential of 14 units being permitted on a single lot in our single family neighborhoods under SB10.

     

    While we would all like to see Vallco developed, it is up to the developer to clean up the site, and start construction on the SB35 plan or discuss an alternative with the City if they prefer.

    VOTE WISELY

     

    To save our schools and preserve home values, please VOTE for Govind Tatachari, Liang Chao, and Steven Scharf for Cupertino City Council, and Darcy Paul, Satheesh Madhathil & Jerry Liu for CUSD Board. They have taken a public stand to keep school closure off the table and roll back past mistakes. These city council candidates are opposed to SB10 becoming a law in Cupertino.  They are not funded by external special-interests and will keep the interests of residents foremost.

     

     

    Please do NOT vote for JR Fruen, Sheila Mohan for Cupertino City Council, and Ava Chiao (CUSD).  They have been supportive of school closure and giving the land to developers, and have strong endorsements from the three CUSD trustees who closed the schools.  They have also received extensive funding from construction interests, who covet the land our schools stand on, and have not signed the City of Cupertino voluntary spending limit on election expenses.

    .

    Sign up for our Email List


    With the election season coming to an end, we are going to move to an opt-in subscription list. Our goal would be to send quarterly or as needed (without exceeding once a month) updates on issues of importance to our fellow residents, and also dispel any new FUD (Fear, Uncertainty, Doubt) being shared by vested interests.

     

    You can also contribute to help us inform our residents. The financial declaration about us is available here

     

    We end with a video showing how the previous council gave the Vallco owner a carte-blanche to build as high as they want at Vallco; a reminder of what can happen if the investors backed candidates take control again.

  • Debunking more Misinformation

    In this email, we cover the following topics:


    1. The financial condition of the City

    2. Debunking the “redevelopment needs office space to break even” myth

    3. An update on the campaign spending by various candidates

    4. A note from a fellow resident about the Bullying of our Treasurer Minna Xu

    That is the line of a mailer sent by the coterie of ex-mayors claiming financial ruin in the city.


    We would like to reassure the residents that the city is doing great financially, and your Harvard & Princeton educated councilperson (aka “bums”) are strengthening its governance.


    The city has also instituted an internal audit function, instituted better financial processes & controls as recommended by Moss-Adams, and has created a Fraud, Waste, and Abuse Program to allow whistle-blowers to report concerns anonymously to prevent embezzlement like the multi-year scam (2000-2014) which cost the city $800K. The City Manager has the following to say in his introduction to the city budget for 2022-2023

    “The City is on solid financial footing in FY 2022-23 with a balanced budget. The budget is balanced with ongoing revenues meeting or exceeding expenditures, and fund balance is being used to fund one-time projects”


    “Redevelopment Need Office Space to Break Even”: Not True


    Another myth propagated by the investors’ proxies is that redevelopment needs a huge amount of office space to break even. This was the reason given to grant up to 2M sq ft of office space allocation at Vallco, in spite of intense multi-year opposition by the residents. Residents oppose it since it increases traffic, and does not improve the jobs to housing ratio.

    The Westport development (Oaks) has zero office space. Later this month, the Marina Plaza redevelopment project is coming for review with the City’s Planning Commission, including commissioners Steven Scharf, Muni Madhdhipatla, and Ray Wang. It’s a 5.1 acre development with 206 condos and 41K sq ft of commercial space.

    These two projects clearly establish that redevelopment does NOT need millions of sq ft of office space to be viable, just a City Council which considers the wishes of the residents and the needs of the city, while working with property owners to revitalize our city.


    Campaign Spending Update (10/31/2022)

    The resident focused candidates for the Cupertino City Council, Govind Tatchari, Liang Chao and Steven Scharf  have raised/spent under $25,000 honoring the voluntary limit they agreed to for the election.


    JR Fruen and Sheila Mohan have breached the $80,000 mark and are racing towards the $100,000 milestone with investor backed elements and unions pouring money into their campaigns. Claudio Bono is in the middle, near $50,000 (his campaign has a large loan amount)

    From Cupertino.org

    Bullying of our Treasurer Minna Xu: A note from a fellow resident


    Minna is a long time Cupertino resident who is warm-hearted and volunteers a lot in our local community. She has helped with school Yosemite trip fundraising, with boy scouts’ activities, and coordinating several Chinese and Asian events in the past. Whenever friends’ ask for help, if she can, she will help. 


    Why is she suddenly famous this campaign season? It’s because her friends asked her to help with their accounting. This organization’s name is Cupertino Facts. She read their article drafts and believed they were doing the right thing. They work to deliver the truth. So, she helped just like she did, so many times in the past. 

    But this time her simple act has resulted in this kind and innocent Asian lady being attacked by an old boys network with a Big Title: the Council of Mayors. 


    It’s because what Cupertino Facts provides is not something this group of ex-Mayors want the residents to hear. They pick on the weak one, intimidate and threaten, and hope the weak person would back off and never dare to do anything they don’t like. Do you feel disturbed by seeing this? Can you imagine such things happening in Cupertino nowadays? 


    Our beautiful city belongs to all the residents who love it. Our city belongs to all the people like Minna who believe in kindness, caring, selfless contribution with no return. If you believe that everyone in Cupertino has the right to speak the truth, unite and stand up, protect our fellow residents. Don’t let any of our residents be bullied by those snobbish old-boys network of Mayors.

    VOTE WISELY


    To save our schools and preserve home values, please VOTE for Govind Tatachari, Liang Chao, and Steven Scharf for Cupertino City Council, and Darcy Paul, Satheesh Madhathil & Jerry Liu for CUSD Board. They have taken a public stand to keep school closure off the table and roll back past mistakes. They are not funded by external special-interests and will keep the interests of residents foremost.

    Please do NOT vote for JR Fruen, Sheila Mohan for Cupertino City Council, and Ava Chiao (CUSD).  They have been supportive of school closure and giving the land to developers, and have strong endorsements from the three CUSD trustees who closed the schools.  They have also received extensive funding from construction interests, who covet the land our schools stand on, and have not signed the City of Cupertino voluntary spending limit on election expenses.

    .

    Your fellow neighbors from Cupertino

    We became aware of another group of CUSD residents who have formed a group called “Voice of CUSD Residents for Better Education”.  You can learn more about them here.

    We finish with a video with Mayor Darcy Paul who is now running to help fix CUSD.

  • CUSD: Dispelling Disinfo with Data

    This email will debunk disinformation about CUSD with data. We also include video clips from Jerry Liu, a CUSD trustee who opposed school closure, who shares his experience and goes into more details.

    Disnfo #1: CUSD Budget Shortfall? No we have surplus!


    The big reason cited for the shutdown of schools was a projected budget shortfall. CUSD’s own projections show that it will end up with a surplus (revenue less expenditure in the table below) of $39.5 Million over the next five years.


    Please listen to current board member Jerry Liu who voted against school closure, who tells us that even this year CUSD will have a surplus of $16M!


    Savings from closing school campuses? It is like saving 50 cents while we have a $200 budget,, a reminder that the projected savings from closing a school campus was minimal

    Then why close schools during a once-in-a lifetime pandemic?
    Video

    This table is from Page 18 of CUSD Budget Adoption Report 

    Disnfo #2: Collapsing Child Population? No Its Stable!

    For the past decade, we have been repeatedly being told that CUSD enrollment is declining because the population of children in CUSD is declining.

    That is incorrect.


    The children population in CUSD has been fairly stable, fluctuating in a narrow band. The overall population is at the same point as it was about a decade ago.

    From kidsdata.org

    CUSD enrollment though is declining since parents are preferring private schools due to mismanagement by the CUSD board including the deeply unpopular decision to shut down school campuses.

    From kidsdata.org

    For those interested in more granular analysis, the date from the ACS Survey is available here including age-wise breakdown within the under-18 age-group

    The Future is in Your Hands


    To reiterate, a lot of disinformation which has been spread in the community, is debunked by data.


    Disinfo #1:  CUSD shut Schools because of lack of money

    => No. CUSD is projected to have a $39M surplus over next 5 years


    Disinfo #2:. CUSD enrollment is falling because number of Children in CUSD is dropping

    => No. Children population in CUSD is around the same level it was a decade ago

    We can only speculate why the coterie of ex-mayors and their protege who they get sponsor via endorsement and campaign finance support misled us. We do know CUSD has hired professional real-estate consultants to evaluate the desirability of CUSD land for investors. 

     



    In order to save our schools, and preserve our home values, it is critical that the City Council of Cupertino opposes any rezoning of school land  and preserves it for public usage. 

    VOTE WISELY

    To save our schools and preserve home values, please VOTE for Govind Tatachari, Liang Chao, and Steven Scharf for Cupertino City Council, and Darcy Paul, Satheesh Madhathil & Jerry Liu for CUSD Board. They have taken a public stand to keep school closure off the table and roll back the past decisions. They are not funded by external special-interests and will keep the interests of residents foremost.

    Please do NOT vote for JR Fruen, Sheila Mohan for Cupertino City Council, and Ava Chiao (CUSD).  They have been supportive of school closure and giving the land to developers, and have strong endorsements from the three CUSD trustees who closed the schools.  They have also receive extensive funding from construction interests, who covet the land our schools stand on, and not signed the City of Cupertino voluntary spending limit on election expenses.

     

    Your fellow neighbors from Cupertino

    (Some more videos with Jerry speaking are attached below)

     

    Video
    Video