Cupertino Matters
- In the News
- UPCOMING – City Council, Tues., Sept. 16, 2025, 6:45 p.m.; Closed Session, 6:00 p.m.;
- RECAP – Commission Interviews, Mon. Sept. 16,6:00 p.m.
- RECAP – Planning Commission, Sept. 9, 2025,6:45 p.m.
September is a busy month. The city-wide garage sale is Sept. 20-21, a great opportunity to declutter, make some money and even pick up bargains from your neighbors.
Check your mail! Cupertino has a brand new newspaper, The Outlook, which will be mailed monthly for free to every household in the city. It is produced by SASCC – Successful Aging Solutions and Community Solutions which is based in Saratoga but is extending its services to other communities in Santa Clara County. The Outlook will focus on senior concerns, but will cover other stories about good things happening in the community, including at De Anza College. The Cupertino Courier still survives as a weekly print publication and is the newspaper of record for legal notices. Actual local news coverage is limited, pulling news stories from the parent company, Bay Area News Group, whose largest local paper is the Mercury News.
The chair of the Planning Commission, Santosh Rao, has become increasingly controversial. Following a lively discussion at the Mayor’s Chat on Sept. 8 regarding the role of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC), Chair Rao claimed he felt unsafe around another commissioner and advocates, leading to THREE sheriff’s deputies being present for the Planning Commission meeting on Sept. 9. Fewer than 5 people were present in a very empty council chamber for the meeting.
The real issue is Chair Rao’s attempt to eliminate the very effective BPC, which is chartered with oversight of safety for pedestrians and bicyclists, focusing heavily on school children and seniors. This surfaced as the last agenda item at 11:08 p.m. at the last council meeting, when Mayor Chao attempted to ramrod the proposal through the council over the objections of the public. There were twenty letters supporting retention of the current BPC with a name change–including a multi-signature memo supported by Assemblymember Ahrens and other members of the Silicon Valley delegation in Sacramento; there were two letters of opposition authored by the Planning Commission chair (who would get more power) and a frequent commenter at council, who double-dipped in speaking and submitting letters. Ultimately, the mayor ran out of time and closed the meeting to continue it as Item No. 22 for tonight’s council meeting.
Tonight’s agenda includes a second reading of an oversize vehicle ban. An essential part of that ordinance includes outreach to identify impacted residents. The San Jose Spotlight provides some insight in an article entitled Cupertino’s RV permit policy could affect homeless residents. The item was also covered by Cupertino Today, Cupertino Council Unanimously Approves Oversized Vehicle Parking Ban.
In a bright note, an ADU desk item from the Sept. 3 council meeting notes that Cupertino has received 201 ADU applications since Jan. 2023. The eight year Housing Element objective is 192 ADUs, or 24 annually. This compares to 23 permits issued in 2023 and 41 in 2024. This means the city is exceeding its target for ADUs, which are popular among homeowners and their families to accommodate seniors and dependent children.
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 – CITY COUNCIL, Tues. ,Sept. 16, 2025, 6:45 p.m. , Regular; 5:45 Closed Session
Closed Session: 5:45 p.m.
Item No.1: Conference with Real Property Negotiators; California Government Code Section 54954.5 Property: Finch property Agency Negotiators: Tina Kapoor, Interim City Manager, and Floy Andrews, Interim City Attorney Negotiating parties: City of Cupertino and Cupertino Union School District Under negotiation: Price and terms of payment.
Item No. 2: Conference with Legal Counsel – existing litigation; California Government Code Sections 54956.9(d)(1) and 54954.5(c): Lixin (Leon) Chen, et al. v. City of Cupertino, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 25CV462857 Yes In My Backyard, et al. v. City of Cupertino, et al., Santa Clara County Superior Court, Case No. 25CV263924.
Item No. 3: Conference with Legal Council – anticipated litigation, California Government Code Sections 54956.9(d)(4) and 54954.4(c): (1 case).
Open Session; 6:45 p.m.
Closed Session Report
Ceremonial Items include (1) Recognition of September 15-October 15 as National Hispanic Heritage Month, (2) Recognition of September 16 as National IT Professionals Day, (3) Recognition of Friends of Children with Special Needs (FCSN) for supporting families with disabilities and promoting inclusion in the community, and (4) Recognition of Parents Helping Parents for supporting families facing disability and promoting inclusive systems of care.
Oral Communications from the public on non-agenda items precede the Consent Calendar, which contains twelve routine items. Note that Item No. 11 Accept Ad-Hoc Legislative Review Committee (LRC) City Council Subcommittee recommendation regarding Senate Bill 63, Senate Bill 707, and Measure A includes a letter of opposition to Measure A, the tax measure to save Santa Clara County medical facilities from Trump administration cuts. Does this reflect the community sentiment or just the majority council? Mayor Chao, for instance, is one of the principal signatories of the ballot arguments against Measure A that voters will find in their ballot materials. The County has made presentations on how their programs are funded and what Measure A would accomplish in other cities. None have taken positions. Why should Cupertino? Also note Item No. 18 Award of a design professional services agreement to DIALOG Design LP for the City Hall Annex Improvements project (420-99-248) for the renovation of an existing building located at 10455 Torre Avenue for a total not-to-exceed amount of $493,243 is highly questionable. Does it make financial sense to design a building that will cost over $7 million to renovate for 5,730 sq. ft. of space (30-35 people) when the city needs 20,000 sq. ft. to accommodate city staff? It’s less expensive to buy office space in this market, not renovate a 1977 building. Former City Manager Wu had identified a property at 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. Is this fiscal responsibility?
Item No. 20: Introduce amendments to Cupertino Municipal Code, adding Title 14, Chapter 14.30 Small Wireless Facilities In Public Rights-Of-Way, pertaining to regulation of wireless facilities within City streets. State and federal law and regulations, including the Federal Telecommunications Act of 1996 and provisions of the California Government Code and Public Utilities Code govern how local jurisdictions may regulate wireless facilities, including small wireless facilities installed in the public right of way. Local governments retain the authority to establish aesthetic conditions for land use, including the authority to regulate small wireless facilities’ design and placement, as long as placement regulations do not inhibit a carrier’s ability to enhance their services. They also have authority to manage the right of way to ensure public safety and to coordinate uses.
On April 20, 2021, Council was presented with updated permitting guidelines for small cell wireless facilities in the public right of way. Council requested that staff consider creating an ordinance to further support the permitting guidelines and to establish objective criteria for the siting of the facilities. Staff presented a draft ordinance and regulations on December 6, 2022, and received feedback regarding further refinement to finalize the documents. Staff has incorporated this input and has prepared an ordinance and regulations that strengthens the City’s permitting process for small wireless facilities while complying with federal regulations and state law and incorporating recommendations from City Council.
Item No. 21: Revisions to Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual. Periodically, the procedures manual is revised, usually on an annual basis or longer. Revisions were made previously in March, 2025. These new revisions are the authorship of Mayor Chao and attempt to add restrictions on other council members in the decisions of other regional bodies where council has no direct role, and to justify her voluminous communications in city agendas. They do not address the lack of time management on the dais that is becoming a routine governance problem.
Item No. 22: Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters (Continued from September 3, 2025). Note: Public comment will be reopened for individuals who did not provide comment on September 3. This will be a very controversial item.
Traditionally, the city of Cupertino has relied on the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC) to aggregate public feedback and provide input on transportation matters. The Planning Commission has authority over land use. This practice mirrors that in surrounding cities and is a commonplace arrangement throughout the state. Recently, the chair of the Planning Commission, Santosh Rao, agitated to bring transportation under the purview of his own commission. Changing the structure would require modifications to the Cupertino Municipal Code. Options include: (1) splitting responsibilities between Planning and BPC, which introduces overlap between the two commissions, (2) expanding the role for Planning Commission to include a focus on major infrastructure changes (an effort primarily aimed at giving the Planning Commission greater say over lane changes to favor car use), (3) continuing with BPC oversight, renaming it the “Transportation and Mobility Commission”, and (4) transitioning all transportation matters to the Planning Commission and eliminating the BPC. Only Option 3 avoids impacting staffing resources and the budget. The other options would increase staffing costs. There has been significant support for Option No. 3, which retains the integrity of the Bicycle-Pedestrian Commission and its legally required role in obtaining infrastructure grant funding.
Item No. 23: City Manager Report, (now submitted in written form).
Item No. 24: Council Reports, (now submitted in written form) are provided by Mayor Chao, Vice-Mayor Moore, Councilmembers Fruen and Mohan. There was no report from Councilmember Wang.
Item No. 25:Upcoming Draft Agenda Items Report
RECAP – CITY COUNCIL, Mon. ,Sept. 15, 2025, 6:00, Special Meeting (Housing Commission and Economic Development Committee Interviews and Appointments)
Agenda with interview schedule
There are a total of 33 applicants applying for two positions on the Housing Commission and five industry sectors on the Economic Development Committee. Technology was the most popular with 17 applicants; Education boasted 8 applicants, Retail/small business featured 6 applicants. By contrast, the Hospitality/tourism and Commercial Real Estate seats only attracted 2 applicants each.
RECAP – Planning Commission, Tues., Sept. 10, 2025, 6:45 p.m., Regular meeting
YouTube: 3 hr.15 min.
Item No. 2: Consider Municipal Code Amendments to multiple chapters of the Municipal Code to make minor edits for clarity and consistency. (Application No.: MCA-2024-004; Applicant: City of Cupertino; Location: Citywide). The commission spent about an hour discussing these changes to the Municipal Code, primarily to comply with state law and to conduct code cleanup. The motion was to accept the staff recommendation, but separate out Cupertino specific changes not required by state law to a later date. The Commission unanimously approved.
Item No. 3: An update on the development of the Active Transportation Plan, including a summary of Phase 1 activities and an overview of what to expect during Phase 2. The presentation and subsequent discussion on this agenda item lasted over two hours. The staff presentation was comprehensive, outlining the results of extensive community outreach. The Active Transportation Plan (ATP) is principally focused on improving walking and bicycling in the city in a coherent fashion. The public expressed a high need for connected networks to be able to get point to point, particularly around schools. The data show that 30% of car trips are less than five miles, with a need for pedestrian improvements to reduce stress levels at crossings. The Commission gave extensive guidance to staff as the project goes to phase 2. The Commission approved unanimously.
CUPERTINO COURIER: September 12, 2025
The front page photo and article on page 5 is entitled Best of Class: Cupertino’s Ridge Zinfandel, a favorite of industry, consumer judges in a wine competition. The additional community briefs are (1) Candidate Forum on Oct. 7 for the Nov. 4 election, and (2) Credit is due. There are no legal notices.
Warm regards,
Jean Bedord
Cupertino Matters
Publisher and Editor
