Cupertino Matters
- Council News
- UPCOMING – Planning Commission, Tues., June 24, 2025 6:45 p.m.
- RECAP – City Council, Tues., June 17, 2025, 6:45 p.m.; Closed Session 5:30
Summer is officially here marked by the longest day of the year–the solstice on June 21–and the unofficial start of summer vacations. Residents, both young and old, will enjoy the recently completed all-inclusive playground at Jollyman Park, as covered by the San Jose Spotlight and in the Mercury News.
At the June 17 council meeting, the city council formally approved the $311,089.53 settlement with the former city manager, Pamela Wu, as announced in a city press release. The community’s response is perhaps best expressed in a Letter to the Editor that appeared in the Mercury News that same day:
A new city will benefit from Wu’s contributions
Re: “Leader officially vacates position” (Page B1, June 10).
As a long-time resident of Cupertino, I want to thank Pamela Wu for her contribution as the city manager. Pamela kept the needs and interests of this city in her focus. She made some hard decisions that demonstrated those efforts, even in the face of some misguided adversity.
She will be remembered as someone who did what was necessary to move the city forward in some challenging times and deserves all our thanks. The next city that brings her on will be adding a person who cares for their city and its residents.
Steve Sulgit, Cupertino
The unfinished business facing the city council remains daunting, but ignored in favor of projects popular with specific councilmembers. The deficiencies at the current city hall building have been on the council’s radar since at least 2018, with seismic safety issues identified as far back as 2011. The building has been declared seismically unsafe, a concern to both staff members and the public. The former city manager addressed these concerns and explored different options which ran into opposition, resulting in the proverbial can being kicked down the road. She also addressed the need for an Interim City Hall to relocate staff during any renovation which could last from 3 to 10 years, depending on the project level, through the potential acquisition of a choice site at 19400 Stevens Creek Boulevard.
The city owns 10455 Torre Avenue, but this building is less than 5,000 sq. ft. and is therefore inadequate to accommodate all staff from the approximately 24,000 sq. ft. city hall. Wu had identified the 19400 Steven Creek Boulevard site as a solution. At roughly 20,000 sq. ft., the existing building, once renovated, would have met the city’s space needs. Unfortunately, the council failed to act so the property has been sold to El Camino Hospital for a medical clinic for $10.4 million. Instead of leasing space for an interim city hall for several years, the city could have had more flexibility and an asset, purchased at a rock-bottom price. Cupertino office space of the right size is extremely limited, so this is a significant lost opportunity. Renovation of the Torre Avenue building is in the City Work plan, but there is no plan to address the entire city hall seismic issues, which would cost at the minimum of $20 to $25 million ($7 million for seismic updates, plus required building upgrades to meet current legal requirements).
On a different matter, the issue of unsheltered residents is an ongoing challenge. Apparently Mayor Chao has demanded–and the interim City Attorney has obliged–to address part of the problem without council direction. As a result, the Planning Commission will be considering additional restrictions on the parking of oversized vehicles, specifically aimed at discouraging these residents from parking on public city streets. The approach is narrow and ignores the broader context of unhoused residents living in tents, and cars/vans. Mountain View has Safe Parking programs which differentiate between cars/vans which can be accommodated in church parking lots, and RVs in commercial areas which can provide more space and waste disposal services. Some churches in Cupertino take part in car and van safe parking on a rotating basis, but do not accommodate RVs. Contrary to the staff report’s claim the Prince of Peace Lutheran Church in Saratoga does NOT accommodate RVs. How are other similar jurisdictions managing unhoused residents?
The staff report focuses on punitive actions which impact both residents with recreational vehicles as well unhoused residents. Context is missing. It cites 200 complaints about oversized vehicles in the past year. But how many individual vehicles are actually involved? What are the demographics? How many are “working poor” who have to live close to their work? What outreach has been done to the occupants of these vehicles? The San Mateo City Council adopted a “compassionate approach” to enforcing its ban on people sleeping in vehicles, prioritizing outreach and services before citations. Due to lack of affordable housing, “vehicle lodging” is a reality until more permanent housing is available.
For research, past issues back to January 2020 of Cupertino Matters are posted on the website. Encourage your friends who would like to become better informed about our community to subscribe to our email newsletter at CupertinoMatters.org.
UPCOMING – Planning Commission, Tues., June 24, 2025, 6:45 p.m., Regular
Other than approval of the minutes for the last meeting, the Commission has a sole action item to consider Item No. 2 Study Session regarding possible updates to oversized vehicle parking restrictions in the public right-of-way. At the April 22 meeting, the Planning Commission considered an initial set of draft policies, which it then sent back to a hitherto unknown deputy city attorney for additional research..
This second draft is an improvement but proposes a punitive permit system that would be cumbersome and expensive to implement. Permits would cost approximately $50 each. The recommended option would require residents with recreational RVs to obtain a permit every 72 hours AND move their vehicle 1500 feet. All residents would be subject to the same enforcement as unsheltered RV residents. Is the city prepared to operate a permit system 24/7 so weekends and evenings are covered? City hall operates 8 to 5 Monday through Friday and there is already a staff shortage. Directors’ names are not on this report, but staff time would be required to enforce such a policy, instead of providing services to residents.
RECAP – CITY COUNCIL, Tues., June 17, 2025, 6:45 p.m. Regular; 5:30 Closed Session
YouTube: Part 1: 2 hr. 15 min.; Part 2: 2 hr. 6 min. Note: Council members Wang and Fruen participated remotely.
Closed Session: 5:30 p.m.
Item No. 1: Conference with Labor Negotiators, unrepresented employee; Title: Acting City Manager; California Government Code Sections 54954.5(f) and 54957.6(a). Tina Kapoor was appointed Interim City Manager by a 5-0 vote.
Interim City Attorney Floy Andrews reported that the settlement with former City Manager Pamela Wu was approved in Closed Session on June 3 by a 4-1 vote with Moore voting nay, and at a subsequent special Closed Session called at the last minute on June 6 by a 3-1-1 vote with Moore voting nay, and Fruen absent due to travel.
Open Session; 6:45 p.m.
Item No.12: Brush Abatement Program hearing to hear objections to proposed removal of brush and order abatement of the public nuisance; Resolution ordering abatement of potential fire hazard pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code (Section 16.40.200) regarding Defensible space (brush) and Resolution No. 25-029. There were no public comments, and the three property owners did not appear to contest the citations. Council approved unanimously.
Item No.13: Approve agreements for post-collection services and destination facilities for garbage and construction and demolition (C&D) debris with attendant rate increases. The staff report clearly explained the multiple agreements involved in garbage collection. Residents pay a single bill to Recology which collects garbage, but the contents of the three garbage containers and debris boxes are processed differently. Agreements for processing the blue and green containers will remain the same. Agreements for processing for the gray container (garbage) and debris boxes expire in November of 2025, so staff brought forward options to increase recovery of recyclable materials by post-processing garbage rather than sending these collections directly to landfill. Staff recommended continuing the current Newby Island agreement until the SMaRT Station in Sunnyvale is upgraded by 2027. The SMaRT Station option, while increasing rates by an estimated $6.25 per month (50% reduction for low-income) could reduce the amount sent to landfill by 50 – 60%. Staff also recommended switching debris box processing to Zander Greenwaste, which has a slightly higher recovery rate, and is closer to Cupertino. Council approved 4-1 with Wang voting nay.
Item No.14: Introduce Municipal Code amendments to Cupertino Municipal Code, Title 2, Chapter 2.96, Sections 2.96.010 Established-Composition and 2.96.020 Terms of Office, pertaining to the Economic Development Committee. Council discussion centered around the composition of this Committee with concern whether the Committee would be unwieldy. After 40 minutes, the Council approved an alternative compromise composition proposed by Councilmember Fruen of 1 councilmember, 3 commission members (one each from Planning, Sustainability, and Technology, Information and Communications) and 5 industry representatives. Council approved 3-2, with Mohan and Wang voting nay.
Item No. 15: Options on preservation and anti-displacement of Below Market Rate (BMR) units; Consider approval of BMR Anti-Displacement Policy. Discussion of alternatives was extensive. Six alternatives were deemed infeasible. With limited options, the staff recommendation was to (1) prioritize displaced BMR residents for the city BMR waitlist giving them 3 extra points, and to (2) require landlords to provide relocation assistance. Requirements for relocation assistance may be illegal, so the interim city attorney will do additional research and bring the item back. The council then approved providing an additional 3 points on the BMR waiting list to potentially displaced residents. Council approved 4-1 with Wang voting nay.
Item No. 16: Consider the potential purchase of and appoint a negotiator for the potential purchase of 10480 Finch Avenue, owned by the Cupertino Unified School District, adjacent to Sedgwick Elementary School (postponed from June 3, 2025). This item was not considered due to time limits.
CUPERTINO COURIER: June 20, 2025
The front page and article on page 5 is entitled Feeding the mind, body and soul: Nonprofit provides free vegetarian meals to local college students. Community briefs are (1) Sit on a committee and (2) Humanities internships. Page 8 is a previously published article from the Mercury News entitled El Camino Hospital buys Cupertino site. Legal notices include (1) Public Hearing Fiscal Year 2025-2026 Fee Schedule at July 1 council meeting, (2) Public Hearing before the City Council on July 1, 2025 for Summerhill homes application for 20770, 20830 and 20840 Stevens Creek Blvd. (Staples, Fontana’s, and Pizza Hut).
Warm regards,
Jean Bedord
Cupertino Matters
Publisher and Editor
