City Council - Regular Meeting

Good evening. It is 645, and I call this June 2, 2026, regular meeting of the Cupertino City Council to order. Please stand for the Pledge of Allegiance.

I pledge allegiance to the flag of the United States of America and to the republic for which it stands, one nation, under God, indivisible, with liberty and justice for all.

Madam City Clerk, will you please call the roll?

Council Member Fruin?

Here.

Council Member Mohan? Here. Council Member Wong?

Here.

Vice Mayor Chau is not joined us yet for the dais. Mayor Moore?

Present. Right. Madam City Attorney, do we have any closed session reports? We do not tonight. Okay, thank you. For ceremonial items, we begin by taking a moment to recognize Pride Month. Pride Month is an opportunity to celebrate the contributions of LGBTQ plus individuals and reaffirm our commitment to ensuring all residents feel welcome and valued in our community. I'd also like to recognize representatives from the Santa Clara County Office of LGBTQ Affairs who are with us this evening and thank them for the important work they do. That is Sarah Fernando and Becca Ponce Valencia. and I invite everyone to join the city for our pride flag raising ceremony, June 10th at 3.30 p.m. in the Civic Center Plaza. On behalf of our city council, I wish everyone a happy Pride Month, and would our representative from the county like to make some brief comments?

Yes, hello, as mentioned, my name is Becca Ponce Valencia. My pronouns are she, her, hers, and I work in the county of Santa Clara Office of LGBTQ Affairs. For folks who may not be familiar with our work, our office was established in 2016, making it the first county-level office of its kind in California and nationwide, also making this our 10-year anniversary. We invite each of you to come celebrate with us on June 12th, where we'll host a Lavender graduation for high school and college students, followed by a flag raising resource fair and community performances. Pride is such a fantastic time of year, right? It's a time when we come together as a community to celebrate, to remember our histories, to honor our elders and uplift our youth. But pride is also a time of deep remembrance. It's a time to speak aloud and preserve the histories that are actively being erased, because if we do not tell them ourselves, someone else will decide them for us. And that warning is ringing very loudly right now. We're living through a time when our federal government has launched an unprecedented wave of attacks targeting LGBTQ plus people, most harmfully our transgender siblings. Executive orders strip legal recognition, bans on gender-affirming care for young people, and the erasure of trans identities from federal records and protections, and the attempts to remove us from all visibility. These are direct attacks on the lives, safety, and well-being of the real people in our community. it remains important now as it is ever that to remember that pride itself was born from moments like these from the generations who fought so we could stand here today and we honor them by refusing to be quiet and this fight cannot be done alone we ask that not only in pride month but in all the months moving forward that we are joined by our courageous allies people who are willing to do the work, to listen, to learn, and to stand with us just not in our celebratory moments, but through our hardest times, in the loudest rooms, and when they stand at the ballot box. It means speaking up when anti-LGBTQ plus rhetoric enters your spaces and using your platforms to protect the identities, dignities, and rights of our LGBTQ plus community members. That type of allyship is not optional anymore. It is necessary, and it remains active need. I invite you all to celebrate with our community, but I challenge you to keep showing up when June ends. We'd like to extend our deepest gratitude to the city of Cupertino for inviting us to this proclamation, for our community to be seen, to be heard, celebrated, and accepted. And I wish you all a very happy Pride Month. Thank you so much.

Now we will present the proclamation on the dais and have a group photo.

Mayor, for the record, Vice Mayor has joined the meeting.

Yes, just in time. Okay, now we move on to the second ceremonial item, and it recognizes World Environment Day observed on June 5th. This year's theme highlights climate action and the environmental changes we are seeing around the world. It also reminds us that local leadership and education play an important role in driving progress. In that spirit, we recognize Danza College's environmental studies program and its department chair for their leadership in environmental education and sustainability in our community. I completed the environmental studies basic and advanced certificate programs at Danza, and I am happy to share what an excellent program it is. And for locals wanting to learn more about sustainability, our general plan, phase one and phase two environmental site assessments, various regulatory agencies, environmental cleanups, our city's own climate action plan, CEQA, environmental law, water rights, each one of these topics is covered in their program and I highly recommend it. We are pleased to have Dr. De Toro joining us tonight virtually. Welcome, Dr. De Toro. If you would like to share a few words about the program at De Anza or the proclamation, that would be wonderful.

Thank you, Madam Mayor and Council for inviting us today. I am so appreciative of your kind words about our program. We at the Kirsch Center and De Anza are so celebratory with you, but also excited about sharing with our community and our students our knowledge of the environment. We have a great community and we encourage you all to come see the program. You don't necessarily need to enroll in classes. We have a beautiful garden. We've been working with the monarch butterflies. And we have our lovely environmental science or environmental studies area. As was mentioned, the theme for World Environment Day this year is a global call for climate action. And unfortunately, we're in a time where, as was already mentioned as well, we need to come together and educate others about the importance of the environmental issues that are being presented to us, and most particularly climate action and climate change. So as with the United Nations World Environment Day, I encourage collective action and I encourage everyone to focus this June 5th on educating others, educating yourself on the many aspects of the environment, including sustainability, which is, I believe, a framework that you all are working within. It's part of what we need to move forward. So once again, Madam Mayor and Council, thank you so much for inviting us today.

Okay, thank you so much, Dr. DeToro. Council will now go up front for a photo and through the magic of technology, you will be blended in with us. Okay.

Thank you.

And we'll make sure to get the proclamation to De Anza's Environmental Studies Department. All right. The next item is postponements and orders of the day. Madam City Clerk, do we have any? No postponements, Mayor. Okay. Do my council colleagues wish to motion any? Seeing none, we move on to oral communications. Madam City Clerk, how many speaker cards do we have?

We have three speaker cards in Community Hall, and I see... one request virtually mayor thank you will you please provide the instructions and conduct oral communications yes this portion of the meeting is reserved for persons wishing to address the council on any matter within the jurisdiction of the council and not on the agenda for discussion oral communications shall be limited to thirty minutes additional speakers wishing to comment on non-agenda items may be given time to speak at the end of the agenda after the city manager's report. Individual speakers are limited to three minutes. As necessary, the chair may further limit the time allowed to the individual speakers or reschedule remaining comments to the end of the meeting on a first come, first heard basis with priority given to students. In most cases, state law will prohibit the council from discussing or making any decisions with respect to a matter not listed on the agenda. a council member may however briefly respond to statements made or questions posed by speakers a council member may also ask a question for clarification provide a reference for factual information request staff to report back concerning a matter or request that an item be added to a future city council agenda in response to public comment anyone wishing to provide comments under this item please submit your request to speak in the next nine minutes And our first request to speak is from Marilyn Kung and David Goodman. Welcome.

Good evening, Mayor and council members. My name is Marilyn and here with me today is David. I'm a resident. Thank you for allowing us to speak today and we appreciate your time and your service. Today we'd like to bring a public comment on the Silicon Valley hopper. The hopper is not working well and Cupertino taxpayers deserve more for a service so expensive to operate. Hopper could enable Cupertino residents to get around the Bay Area without relying on a car. The state gave Cupertino grants to operate hopper as a first mile, last mile connection to Caltrain, but it currently fails that requirement.

Hi there, first I wanted to thank Vice Mayor Chau for taking the time to actually use Hopper and bring up concerns to the transit manager. I definitely agree with the concern that you brought up that we should not be wasting Hopper's limited capacity on rides that can be served by existing transit. I think it would make a lot more sense to free that up for things that could only be done with Hopper. But I wanted to particularly highlight two major concerns that I had. The first is that scheduling rides is not possible, and the second is that pickup and drop-off times are very unpredictable, even after a ride begins. And this makes it nearly impossible to use Hopper for its intended purpose of getting to and from Caltrain, since there's no guarantee I'll actually make the connecting train that I'm trying to reach. The slide deck presented by the transit manager at last month's city council meeting where Hopper was discussed showed screenshots of a feature in the Hopper app for planning Hopper plus Caltrain trips. This feature doesn't seem to actually exist in reality. I'm not really sure how it made its way into the slide deck, but it's not in the app and it's not advertised on VIA's website at all. When I've raised these concerns to VIA on a few different occasions, all I've heard was an apology from a support agent in New Jersey and I got no indication that they actually care at all. I'm hoping that you guys can make sure that VIA actually delivers what they promise if they're selected to continue operating a Silicon Valley hopper. Thank you so much.

Thank you. And next we have a requester that did not leave their name, but you referred to House. Anyone? Okay, welcome.

Hi. All students know our French city, Taichung. They murdered a high school student. His name is a $500 million high school student death. in Taichung, Taiwan, on May 4th, 2023.

Could you please speak into the microphone so the rest of the viewers on Zoom can hear you?

Yeah, these high school students, if everybody knows, if they hear, how could Sanda Pichai, Google CEO, can have murder cover-up? the conspiracy to lie, he commit suicide and fall 10th floor to death. If you see the photo at RottenMangoPodcast.com, episode 391. Two, you can say he fall 10 floor to death, but no any bruise, no any blood found at the crisis on his whole body. No bruise, even his teeth is no drop, no blood at all. His clothes is all clean. Now all student know he be killed, so we have a... Stanford University, June 14, we want to ask all students and residents of Cupertino to go protest. They cannot murder high school students in Cupertino in Taiwan. I told our main force a coffee not a mango podcast calm episode 392 they say he in here a 500 million dollar then marry a same-sex spouse less as a spouse is stranger only met once because he is a grandpa his father This killer's father, they inject poison into his body and put some strangle, uh, strangle his neck, and they press his, uh, uh, his, uh, this part, and they inject something poison to, uh, and now Google, like, he... commit suicide, he is so rich, his grandpa give him 500 million, 30 piece of land in Taichung. Actually, the value is 500 million to 10 billion, because the value is very high. Now, attorney Michael Zhewei Xu website in Taichung, they say two year later. Thank you, that is your time. Thank you. That is your...

Okay, next we have Kathy Helgerson. Welcome, Kathy Helgerson.

No, I'm sorry. Next speaker. I don't want to.

No. Next speaker. Next speaker. Welcome, Kathy.

I'm worried about it.

You have three minutes.

Hi there.

I attended the Economic Development Committee meeting that was just recently formed again. They are looking at adding and encouraging businesses to come to Cupertino to set up businesses. There will be a meeting again in July, and I will be attending, and I think they will have monthly meetings after that. Ray, you're familiar with that. Okay. We should look at the builds on Stevens Creek Boulevard that the city of Cupertino has approved that will be replacing Pizza Hut's Staples Store and Fontaine's Restaurant. They will be gone, which is a real shame. Many people have lost their jobs at Staples Stores and complained, but no one listened. This is also on the other side of Stevens Creek Boulevard, another approved build that will be replacing the Voyager Coffee Shop and Panera Bread. This is another build. This building will also replace the daycare center and office center. The Cupertino small offices at this site are necessary to the city. We need the daycare center. This has also been approved. This is all so sad and the public really did not get a chance to stop this terrible tragedy. My feeling now is that I have to comment by asking the question, how can Cupertino attract any new businesses if, in fact, there could be a possibility that once they establish themselves and set up businesses, all that would have to be in vain? A housing project could come up and they would have to move or never to be... or never be heard from again. The question I asked at the Economic Development Committee meeting was how can you think that any business would want to come to Cupertino if they know that once they get their businesses established that they may have to move out because of the housing quota requirements? How can the Economic Development Committee even function after that. I am sure they have to look at this great problem. It should also be noted that the key project, The Rise, formerly Valco, is currently slated to provide 2,669 units of housing that is not listed on the city of Cupertino's major project list. As of April 2025, the city of Cupertino at this site has approved 2,852 units of housing, and has 424 additional units under review, totaling 3,267 units of housing. This is roughly 70% of the goals certified 2023 to 2031. Housing element is housing element to comply with the state regional housing needs allocation. Of these, approximately 1,880 units must be affordable to lower-income households. How is the quota really decided? Who is in charge of this determination? I contacted Cupertrino's District 13.

Thank you, Kathy. And now we will move to those members of the public requesting to speak virtually. We have two speakers, Jennifer Griffin and San Rao. Welcome, Jennifer. Jennifer?

Thank you. Can you hear me okay? Yes, we can. Okay. I have a really bad cold, so I am staying home. Thank you for all the public activities before. I had several things I wanted to mention tonight. One of them is I am I have an ongoing concern about the loss of retail, which is what Kathy previously had talked about. You know, for the life of me, I cannot remember if there is any retail that has been approved for the Valco Rise project. You'd think I would remember this, but I don't. I just was curious, especially since they have such a large frontage on Stevens Creek Boulevard, I hope that if they are going to be having retail, I hope that it's up close to Stevens Creek Boulevard. The second item I wanted to talk about was there is a new bill, AB 1751, which is Sharon Quirk Silva, assembly lady from Southern California, and Buffy Wicks, who is out of, I think it's Oakland. This bill is rather startling because it is attempting to have townhouse projects be ministerially approved. And they're calling it the missing middle townhouse project. Well, I appreciate townhouse projects, but a lot of them are not missing middle. We're talking about market rate homes. And I think that this bill is genuinely misguided. They want to have ministerial approval for these projects. which as we know, to have a viable, responsible project, there has to be input from everyone about the project. We can't just have it be, we're plunking down these townhouses and that's it. We have to have everyone come to the table and talk about it. The other thing is that this bill is attempting to override any CEQA of the townhouse project, which I think is very, very irresponsible on the part of these two assembly members. You cannot just shut down CEQA. We have too many issues with contaminated soil, earthquakes, et cetera, et cetera. And I just think that this type of a bill is very, very, irresponsible and I hope that it gets shut down quickly. Thank you. Thank you, Jennifer. Next we have San Rao.

Welcome, San.

Good evening, Mayor Moore, council members. I want to remind you, speaking on behalf of myself only as the rest, and I want to remind you the oral communications is limited to items within the jurisdiction of the city council. And the prior speaker that disturbed the meeting was speaking on topics not in the jurisdiction of the city council and this is a repeating scenario which is very disturbing to attendees i urge the city attorney to please make sure that in future the oral communications are limited to items within the jurisdiction of the council meeting and if needed to have such disturbances proactively managed since this is occurring repeatedly and it is a it's the same person that is causing the disturbance it has also occurred in other commissions i believe as we are entering the campaign season I'm also requesting the Mayor and CAO to proactively ask for campaign donations from all interested parties for agenda items. Specifically, there are agenda items related to an applicant and the applicants project involves neighbors that have written into the city and so please exercise the diligence needed of both the candidates or potential candidates that are due for the election. Even though one has filed and the other has not, both should be asked if they have accepted in the past 12 months or intend to accept in the next 12 months any donations of $250 or more from direct or indirect parties associated with agenda items coming up today. There is also the appointment of a BPAC commissioner to a to a CAC and whether they have accepted or will accept any donations from that person. Furthermore, there are also appointments or limits being enforced on campaign financing and both council members due for re-election should recuse on that item. So I'm asking at the Andrews to be particularly diligent in enforcing and asking these questions so that we have a process that is not allowing for votes on the bias on items where candidates may not yet have disclosed whether they have accepted donations. The restaurants of Cupertino deserve to have the next six months of votes on dais to be fair and free of influence due to donations that have not yet been disclosed. Thank you.

Thank you, San. And Mayor, that concludes the speakers for this item.

All right. Thank you. Our next item is the consent calendar, items 3 through 13. Have any items been pulled? No, Mayor. Are there requests to pull any item by the council at this time? And I'm going to be looking at the home panel. Okay, Council Member Wong.

Yeah, I would like to pull three items from the minutes. Item number five, item number six, and item number seven for separate vote. I would need to abstain more for a procedural perspective.

Okay. And are there any other items that anyone is interested in pulling? I'm not seeing any hands raised at this time. So we can go to... Can we group five, six, and seven?

Sorry about that.

We can when we move the item, but we need to go to public comment for the consent calendar.

So I believe we don't have to pull those items. We just need to vote. Correct. We're going to vote separately. Just wanted to clarify.

Yes. You're not asking to comment on them. You just simply want to have a separate vote, which is not a problem.

Mayor, I see two requests to speak virtually. Okay. Okay, just a reminder, anyone wishing to provide comments for this item, please submit your request in the next nine minutes. We have Jennifer Griffin and San Rao. Welcome, Jennifer.

Yes, thank you. I just wanted to ask a question. Was the item that pertained to Zoom participation by the public like what I'm on now, was that item pulled? There was one item on consent calendar that concerned the public, like if a meeting had Zoom problems. It was not pulled.

It was not pulled, item A.

Okay. So is that, I'm still confused. Is that item going to be voted on then?

Mayor, the public speaker seems to be addressing the item that is on the regular calendar pertaining to meeting disruptions. versus the subsidiary bodies having the permission to use teleconferencing?

Okay, so item eight will remain on consent and be voted with the consent items as we are going to regroup them. And then there's the other item, 16, regarding SB 707. Okay.

Okay, that was the one I had the question about. Okay, you'll have a chance to talk about that. Okay, is that coming up on the agenda? Correct, it's item 16. And what number, sorry, what number is it? It's 16. Thank you. Okay, okay. I appreciate that. Thank you. I'm L. Okay, thank you.

Okay, Jennifer, you may provide your comments now or later on the agenda for item 16. Correct. Okay, now we move to San Raul. Welcome, San.

Good evening, Mayor Moore. Speaking on behalf of myself only, I'm requesting any of the council members to pull agenda item 13 and pull agenda item 12. Agenda item 13 should never have been on the consent calendar. I'd like to understand why this was placed on the consent calendar. A particular member being reappointed or proposed to be reappointed was appointed by a prior council majority. The appointments of the prior council majority do not reflect the will of the voters. That changed the majority in 2024. The voters of Cupertino sent a very clear message in 2024 that they were dissatisfied with the anti-resident majority that existed between 2022 and 2024 that caused irreversible havoc and chaos in Cupertino and appointments of that majority no longer reflect the will of the models And to see that on consent is really ignoring the will of the voters that give you a clear message in 2024. I urge you to pull item 13 from the consent calendar and reject the item and bring back a fair recommendation from the BPC on who should be appointed with the council having the prerogative to override that. The residents do not want to see this appointment. This person has not reflected the majority of the Cupertino voters in terms of multimodal fairness and equity, and we are particularly concerned about VTA. Because VTA has the potential to bring SB 79 to Cupertino. And so this is not a simple appointment. This is an appointment that reflects the potential harm of bringing in SB 79 by passing policies in VTA that may encourage the investment in transit stops that we may have no control over. So I urge you to pull item 13. And on item 12, once again, I'm urging you to pull the item and have the two council members coming up due for re-election to recuse themselves. Thank you.

Thank you, San. Mayor, no additional requests to speak on this item?

All right. Thank you. Council Member Wong, your hand's raised.

I would entertain the option to pull item number 13 if someone else would actually second that. Or can I just pull it myself?

You can pull it yourself.

I will pull it myself. Thank you.

Okay, so we have pulled item 13, so that will come later in the agenda. So do I have a motion to move items 3, 4, 8, 9, 10, 11, and 12?

So moved. Second.

Do we have any comments from the council on those items? Seeing no hands raised, Madam City Clerk, will you set the voting panel and we will vote. Okay, is everyone voted?

Motion carries unanimously.

Okay, great. And so we've separated out five through seven. Do we have a motion to move items five through seven?

So moved.

Second. And a second. Not seeing any hands raised to comment on this item. Madam City Clerk, please set the voting panel and we will vote.

I have a question for the City Attorney Mayor. If Council Member Wong abstained, may he still second the motion?

I don't think so. I think that that... I think we should have somebody who is seconding the motion, somebody who will actually be voting on the item.

Okay.

Moore, I second.

Wait. But I don't think that there is a requirement for that, though. I have motioned or seconded a motion, and then I eventually voted no. but I made the motion because it's for discussion purpose. After discussion. I would like to have control of what's in the motion.

Vice Mayor, that does make sense to me. I still could decide to.

Okay, let's go through the chair. So we're going to hold the second, and we're going to take the vote using that motion in the second.

For moving and Wong seconding? Correct. Okay. All right. Okay, please vote. Yeah, we're restarting the vote. Thank you.

But I couldn't, it doesn't. What?

It doesn't take my. Vice Mayor, you voted already. I did? Yes. Okay, yeah. The motion carries with Wong abstaining.

Okay. Next we move on to public hearings. First is item 14, renewing the 1992 storm drain fee and the 2019 clean water and storm protection fee with a 3% increase. Madam City Manager, do we have a presentation on the item?

Thank you, Mayor. We do have a presentation. This is the annual renewal of our two parcel-based stormwater pollution prevention fees. The revenues support compliance with the regional water quality control board regulations that the city must comply with. There is a supplemental report that was issued yesterday related to the 1992 storm drain fee. And with that, I will now turn it over to Ursula Sarova, Environmental Programs and Sustainability Manager, to present this item. SUPPORTING IT ALONG WITH ERSULA IS JAD MOSLEY, DIRECTOR OF PUBLIC WORKS.

GOOD EVENING, MAYOR MOORE, COUNCIL MEMBERS. I AM ERSULA CEROVA, ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS MANAGER HERE TO TALK ABOUT THE RENEWAL OF THE CITY'S TWO STORMWATER FEES WHICH WE BRING TO COUNCIL ANNUALLY THIS TIME OF YEAR. Cupertino is required under permit to keep our stormwater clean. The permit is called the San Francisco Bay National Pollution Discharge Elimination System Permit, aka the Municipal Regional Permit. And it covers 76 agencies in the Bay Area and establishes requirements for stormwater pollution prevention. It's over 700 pages long, we're out of the Clean Water Act, and includes about 20 categories of compliance that the city must adhere to. The city has two property-based fees in place to support our compliance activities. These fees require an annual renewal process in advance of the county assessing the fee via property tax bills. The first fee was adopted in 1992, and the second fee was adopted in 2019. Rates for the fees are based on land use as shown here. And both fees appear on property tax bills. Here are just a few examples of the preventative, responsive and educational activities which ensure our compliance with the permit. This work includes responding to spills, conducting annual preemptive inspections, reviewing building plans and coordinating installation of new trash capture devices. Other activities include hands-on learning at McClellan Ranch Preserve, education during outreach events and administrative work to gather and track data and report out annually as required by the permit. As part of our work, we also conduct two volunteer-driven creek cleanup events each year, and staff do additional cleanups in areas less accessible to volunteers. We have our own vector truck, which we use to clean and maintain over 2,100 storm drains, many of which are fitted with special devices to keep trash from entering the system and being carried to our creeks. Our program also covers half the expense of street sweeping in the city. And to further assist with compliance, we are part of a regional organization called the Santa Clara Valley Urban Runoff Pollution Prevention Program, which conducts required water sampling and online visual trash assessments. Also provides guidance for compliance and preparation and submission of our extensive annual report that we submit to the regional water board. The fees also funded the project to assess the outfalls in the city to identify those that may need repair or maintenance. In 2019, as part of establishing the newer fee, council approved a cost share program that is available to low income property owners, which provides a 20% rebate upon approval and then a 20% reduced rate on their bill going forward. An additional 44 residents qualified for this program this current fiscal year, bringing the total to 322 participants. People who want to apply for the cost share program or recertify can do so at Cupertino.org slash water cost share. This annual process concerns only budget and activities related to Fund 230, Environmental Management, Clean Creek Storm Drain, which is for activities related to operating the non-point source pollution prevention program. It is distinct from Fund 215, Storm Drain AV 1600, and it's distinct from Fund 210, which is for construction maintenance of storm drain facilities through the Capital Reserve. The non-point source program and storm drain maintenance revenues and expenses are audited annually during the regular external audit. Additionally, we worked with finance staff to establish an agreed upon procedures AUP audit by calendar year of expenses and revenues. The AUP audit for calendar year 2025 is in the packet and no exceptions or concerns have been noted by the auditors. The 1992 fee has no mechanism for increase, so it will remain the same. The 2019 clean water and storm protection fee does allow for an annual increase up to CPI with a maximum of a 3%. The calculated CPI increase for this period was 3.04%, but the terms of the 2019 fee ordinance limit us to 3%, so we recommend that increase of 3%. To the annual fee for 2627 fiscal year. The unused 0.04% may be carried forward to a future year where the CPI increases under 3% retaining the 3% maximum in any individual year. If approved by council increasing this fee by 3%. would increase revenue by $35,500 for the coming fiscal year, which is about $1.44 per year additional for an average single family home parcel. so tonight's recommended actions are to renew the 1992 fee with no increase and renew the 2019 fee with a three percent increase that concludes my presentation and i'm happy to answer any questions that council or the public may have okay thank you ursula for the presentation do we have any clarifying questions from the council at this time before opening it up for public comments

Not seeing any hands raised. Madam City Clerk, do we have any members of the public who would like to speak on this item?

Yes, Mayor, I have one request to speak from Community Hall, Kathy Helgerson. Okay. Welcome, Kathy.

Hello, I would like to ask a question of those people here I have a storm drain on my cul-de-sac and I've been cleaning it for 40 years and nobody helps me Now you want to increase your rates for what you're not cleaning the storm drain the leaves I've stopped them from going in by putting a netting over and the area and cleaning it all the time. I've painted the storm drain. It was rusty and ugly. It's now white and black. I make sure that the water goes down and the city or no one comes out to clean it. If I didn't do this, I can imagine how many leaves would be down there, and it would back up. Now, years ago, probably maybe 30 years ago, it backed up right up to my home. And so I learned my lesson, and I don't wait for the city to come out and clean it. But when somebody's over here asking for a 3% increase for nothing, I'd like to know what's going on here. They're rusty. They're ugly. They're not protected. They're not cleaned. I've wanted to come and talk to you many times, but I didn't think you would help me. You've never helped me in that sense. And many times you won't even talk to me. So most of the people in Cupertino have given up on you guys. I hope the new election can bring some decent people into the city because I'm tired of it. And so is everybody else. I'm 77 years old. I'm a senior and I should be treated better. And I'm not okay. And I'm not going to mention names up there. Okay. You guys need to talk to me more. You need to help me more. And right around the corner, you should see this house they're building. It's got three different sections. It's huge. It's right up against the other house. It's disgusting, and I took pictures. And I can't wait to get with somebody. Now, John's not here, and that really upsets me. He should be here. He should be here. This is wrong. I don't know why he's not here, but he should be here. And he knows. I've been trying to get a hold of him, so he knows what's going on. You guys need to consider helping the public here. We elected you. There's a new election coming up, okay? Those people coming in, we want to see them. We want to meet with them, and not for just a half an hour, Kitty. I need to meet with you more than a half an hour, and that was about Lehigh, and I won't even bring that up right now because you already know and are doing nothing about Lehigh, okay, and the EIR, okay? I expect you to do something about it, okay? Listen. I expect you to do something about it. I've got 24 seconds left. Three minutes to talk about these things? Open forums. This is horrible. Horrible. Okay? I'm really sorry for you folks. If you don't understand what I'm trying to say, I speak English, okay? Sorry.

Thank you, Kathy. And we have one member of the public requesting to speak virtually, San Rao. Welcome, San.

Good evening, Mayor Moore and council members. Speaking on behalf of myself only as a resident, I agree with the prior speaker and Cupertino longtime resident, Kathy. I clean the storm drains on the west side myself. It gives me great satisfaction to do that. The hillside has steep runoffs and we have quite a bit of sediment that accumulates all around the hillside around the storm drains. Those drains are never cleaned. and the only people that clean it are any conscientious residents in neighborhoods that go by and actually clear those trains now the staff report says you may increase the fee it doesn't say you must increase the fee while the fee increase may seem may seem small this is symbolic and the fee increases on a cpi basis what is the justification to apply cpi to this line item It's not like the staff are coming by to clean the drains. I haven't seen that. The drains by Forlap, the drains by Stevens Creek, the drains by Foothill, they stay clogged forever. The drains by, I can go on and on and on, and I can give you a list of 20 drains or more that stay clogged forever, and I personally clean over 10 drains myself. And so I don't believe there's any justification for this fee increase. And a vote for this, especially by those running for re-election, will be closely watched because they have a track record of repeatedly voting for fee increases on restaurants. Let the restaurants be aware that in 2023, the two members on bias that were responsible for floating the cost recovery policy that has since resulted in double digit fee increases on Cupertino restaurants are up for reelection this year. And so we just need to be aware that we have two council members that are responsible for the fee increases that we're seeing. And you're reminded that you may increase, you're not required to increase, and you're certainly not required to increase at the rate of CPI. So please vote no. This is why we elected you. Vote no. Thank you.

Thank you, Sam. Mayor, no additional requests to speak on this item?

Thank you. I would like if the city manager could provide us with some information about the number of complaints that we've received regarding storm drains not being cleaned, if there have been a number of these. at a later date mayor or do you want me to try to get information maybe maybe at a later date yeah yeah so i know i think it's probably a region dependent within the city and if individuals are using 311 and not having a responsive improvements then we need to know about that But with regards to, I just have a quick question about the storm drain repair that was on Stevens Creek Boulevard a couple of years ago. So we had the very large, it was about a five or six foot diameter corrugated metal storm drain, which was very old and it had rusted and it failed. Is that something that this, either of these storm drain fees would have assisted with the detection of the problem or the repair of it?

It's repair would certainly be in the purview of what the fee could cover I'm not recalling this moment how it was budgeted exactly in that moment as an emergency repair but we did conduct the outfall repair assessment, you know partially to try and get ahead of a similar type of event and

right the inspections and yeah i know there was a lot of rain that that year and then and then it happened in kind of a drier spell that i believe um so i think that personally the infrastructure repair is really um important for the city and i believe i heard that the um the inspections is part of what this is going to be covering that's correct okay okay Seeing a hand raised from Council Member Chow, followed by Council Member Mohan, I mean Vice Mayor Chow, sorry.

Hi, thank you. So you mentioned that there are three funds related to storm drain. So fund 230 is the one from this fee that we are approving today?

Correct.

That's mainly for storm water pollution prevention program. And then fund to 15 is from developer impact fee. I'm assuming that's for expanding capacity of our storm drain for projects.

That's my understanding it relates to interconnection from new development. But Chad would be able to speak more to that.

Maybe I'll finish the fund to 10 is According to your slide is construction and maintenance of storm drain facility through CIP project for example Regular maintenance and then the big part Emergency project we had I guess that might be mostly covered from this fund to 10 so I If I can get more clarity on exactly what kind of activities are being covered by Fund 210 related to the fee will be helpful also. Thank you.

That's something we could follow up on. I would have to talk to Finance. I'm not sure how much it's even in use, but we just like to raise the distinction.

So does Chad have some comment about Fund 215 and 210? Is that what I described about CORRECT.

I MIGHT HAVE SOME INFORMATION ON THAT. I BELIEVE FUND 215 IS DEVELOPER FEES WHEN THERE'S REDEVELOPMENT FOR ANY PROPERTY. WE TRUE UP THE FEES AND THOSE ARE USED TOWARDS ONGOING MAINTENANCE OF OUR STORM BRAIN SYSTEM. AND THEN 210. YOU WANT TO PULL THAT SLIDE UP? EITHER WAY WE CAN BRING ADDITIONAL INFORMATION ON THESE ACCOUNTS TO YOU THROUGH A MEMO.

Okay, that's fine. So fund 210, this fee, I think there were comments about they are wondering whether the city needs to increase the fee. So I think the question would be what kind of activities are currently covered by this fee? and whether that activities actually have a cost increase, salary or material, right? So if we can get more understanding what these fees are being used for.

for the activities covered under two thirty as as detailed in the engineers report in the staff report and we do have uh... quite it we have felt uh... we have labor costs that do increase a bit and overall the program runs at a deficit it doesn't it's not full cost recovery so uh... that's where we're at right now and why we would recommend the increase

So the problem is runs at the deficit right now even with the increase correct because we on so you do cover inspection cleaning and then it's over the city so you cannot possibly clean every gym that likely I mean how is it determined which area of the gym will be cleaned or not.

I mean, my understanding is we get to all the drains, but if there are certain ones that we need to double check, of course.

Their own area were not covered. So how can they then reach out to the city to get more attention to their area?

And I can provide some clarity there. The city does clean every... every drain in at least once annually some drains actually receive multiple cleanings i think part of the concern is during heavy leaf fall some of the leaves will block the top of the catch basin we try and address as much of that as possible through street sweeping But we do request that residents either help with cleaning the leaves off of plugged drains or to post their observations through 311 so that city staff can get out there and do it themselves.

Great, thank you so much for the information.

Council Member Mohan.

Thank you for the report. I think many of my questions were answered. But I just wanted you to remind me, during budget cuts, did we have a change in schedule for, or a reduction in the schedule for street sweeping? We did not. Yeah, go ahead. Street sweeping maintained its schedule. We didn't make a change. There were some complaints about leaves accumulating and sidewalks and so on. And I don't know if we actually cut back on the removal of those leaves or we did not.

We didn't adjust the sweeping schedule at all or frequency. Oh.

I know that there were some concerns when we shifted over to a new contractor. And so there were some hiccups with that initial shift, but I think we've got those worked out.

My other question is, do you have a maintenance plan for these storm drains or is it complaint driven?

They're all on a regular cadence of attention every year. Okay, I think you mentioned it.

Every storm drain is checked once a year at least?

Correct.

Okay, thank you. I just want to give a shout out for Manny. He's our longest serving city employee and I had called in anonymously a complaint about concrete slurry getting into the storm drain and He did a phenomenal job getting it cleaned up. I was really quite impressed and they used I don't know what the name of this they used that to basically scour out the storm drain to get it cleaned. So I was really very impressed with the city staff work on that. Vice Mayor.

You mentioned that the program currently operate at a deficit. I just want to get some idea how much of a deficit. So the general fund is covering the difference, right?

Right, for the past few years we've had a little bit of fund balance in 230 that's covered the deficit. We are projecting to exhaust that in 26-27. We bring in about $1.5 million from the two fees. The program itself is closer to $2 million to run all the labor and cleanup activities and the storm drain attention and all the activities that are detailed in the staff report. so how come then we didn't increase with the CPI last year we did I think the staff report mentioned we didn't increase we increased the 2019 fee by CPI which was I think 2.38 or something like that last year okay thank you

Okay, so at this point, do we have a motion, Council Member Wong, for purposes of deliberation?

For purposes of deliberation, I do have a question here. Can someone define the difference between a storm gutter and a storm drain? Because I don't want to make sure I'm confused.

I mean, I would say the gutter is the part that runs adjacent to the sidewalk, and then the drain is where, say, water running down the gutter would drop into the inlet.

And this is only the drain we're talking about, not the gutters?

GUTTERS ARE CONSIDERED A PATH FOR POTENTIAL POLLUTION UNDER THE STORM PERMIT.

ARE WE CLEANING THE GUTTERS OR THE DRAINS? JUST THE DRAINS.

IF WE'RE RESPONDING TO A SPILL RESPONSE, THEN WE WOULD HAVE ATTENTION TO THE GUTTERS AS WELL.

which is what happened in the scenario that I was describing.

And I should state briefly that this fund does partially pay for street sweeping, which that's the way we clean the gutters, is through street sweeping.

Okay, so do we have a motion for this item? Happy to make a motion for staff recommendation. And do we have a second?

Second.

Okay, so we have a motion and a second. I'm not seeing any further requests to speak. Madam City Clerk, will you please set the voting panel? And we can vote. Okay, is everyone voted?

The motion carries with long voting no. Thank you.

Okay, our next public hearing is the, thank you very much for the presentation. Our next public hearing is the Bandley Drive Residential Project. I met with the developer last week, visited the site, and I did speak to Rod Deardon Jr. of Apple earlier today. Are there any other ex parte communications which need disclosing? Please press your... A REQUEST TO SPEAK BUTTON. OKAY. BEGIN WITH COUNCILMEMBER MOHAN, FOLLOWED BY COUNCILMEMBER FRUIN, COUNCILMEMBER WONG, AND VICE MAYOR CHAO.

MAYOR, I'VE SPOKEN TO THE APPLICANTS AS WELL A COUPLE OF TIMES. I'VE ALSO SPOKEN TO ROD DERRIDON JR. THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER FRUIN.

LIKEWISE. I'VE SPOKEN WITH THE APPLICANT A COUPLE OF TIMES AND ALSO WITH ROD DERRIDON JR. AND COUNCILMEMBER WONG.

I've spoken to the applicant, Apple, as well as some of the tenants that are in that space.

And Vice Mayor Chao. I've spoken with the applicant. Very well. Thank you, everyone. Madam City Manager, do we have a staff presentation?

Thank you, Mayor. We do have a staff presentation, and the applicant also has a presentation that will follow the staff presentation. So as a brief introduction to this item, this is a review for a 27-unit townhome project that has been recommended for approval by Planning Commission on May 12th. There are minor changes to the conditions of approval, which are included in a desk item, which was issued a few minutes before the meeting tonight. And with that, I will turn it over to community development staff, John Mardier, senior planner, and Lou Connolly, assistant director, acting director of community development.

Good evening, Mayor, Vice Mayor, Council Members. John Martyr, Senior Planner, Community Development Department. I've been the project manager of this since it came in, even as SB 330 project over the summer and as a preliminary application earlier in 2025. So I'm not with. Without repeating what the city manager had read in the subject line, this is, again, to consider a residential project with 27 three-story townhomes, including fire-affordable units, and existing office development off of Banley Drive. A LITTLE BIT OF BACKGROUND, AS YOU CAN SEE IN THIS SLIDE, HERE'S AN OVERVIEW OF THE ZONING MAP OF THE AREA WITH THE PROJECT SITE HIGHLIGHTED IN RED. PRETTY MUCH THE MIDDLE OF THE SCREEN. YOU CAN SEE IT'S A MIX OF USES. MOST OF THE USES ARE AROUND BANLEY DRIVE BETWEEN LAZANEO AND MARIANI AVENUE. office developments with the exception of the church in Christ which is catty corner to the project site as well as a single home family home development on Mary Avenue adjacent to the r110 district and across from the r17 district you do have triplexes to the southwest of the development as well as further office and commercial office uses to the south The site itself is 1.55 acres. On that site, you do have an existing 20,000 square foot commercial office building with multiple tenants. I believe there's about seven operating there currently. It is within the North De Anza special area of the general plan and within the North De Anza conceptual plan area, which is a conceptual plan that was approved by council in the mid 1970s. bit of background on this project as mentioned earlier this project came in in july of 2025 with the sp 330 pre-application by november 6th the applicant application was submitted and the way the staff analyzes as this is a planned development zone the development standards must adhere to multi-family r3 zoning regulations Here is a site plan of the development of the 27 townhomes. This is with the Bentley Drive at the bottom, and on the north, east, and south, you do have commercial office uses, particularly Apple tenancy. Of the 27 units, five are BMR, three median income, and two moderate income, with the .4 units to be paid in lieu. The resulting density is around 17.41 dwelling units an acre when 25 dwelling units an acre are allowed. This project consists of four three-story buildings ranging from 2,120 square feet to 2,822 square feet. That's inclusive of garage space. And this qualifies as a density-based project. applicant is asking for four waivers again the first one is for front setback where 20 feet is required they're asking for eight from the property line rear setback where 34 feet is required they are proposing 12 and a half feet again the standard in r3 is either 20 feet or 20 of the length of the parcel whichever is greater Landscape planner strip, this is not a major waiver, but the parking ordinance does require that on on the sides of parking spaces, outdoor parking spaces. You do have a 2 foot landscape strip, which they are foregoing in favor of pathways around the 5 visitor parking spaces. And with the North De Anza conceptual plan along auxiliary streets like Banley Drive, you are required to have an average of 25 foot landscape setback as well as 25 times the square foot area of that area of the width to be landscaped. Again, consistent with the front setback requirement, they are only proposing a foot. setback landscape setback uh the concession is that this is a hundred percent residential development where the general plan policy in this area would require a primary uses b of office r d with very limited commercial residential uses here's the design that is very contemporary in nature, lots of grays and muted colors. I will let the applicant during their presentation describe the architecture as well as landscape design if questions should be asked of that during their presentation again. On May 12th, the Planning Commission approved the recommended approval for the project for one. There was a slight modification to an existing conditional approval within the draft ASA ordinance, which would modify the CCNR condition to explicitly notify the The residents of future residents of any non residential uses and the properties that acknowledge the mixed use the nature of the developments, particularly uses. By the neighboring South into the North. Tendencies of the office already developments. Again, the applicant requests an AB 130 CEQA statutory exemption for this project. Our consultant, Placeworks, reviewed this project for consistency with the statutory exemption and found that this project meets the criteria for the statutory exemption. as well as this project complying with all the conditions and further be conditioned by our chapter 17 of the municipal code. The recommended action from staff is that the council approved the proposed draft resolutions as recommended by the planning commission to find the project statutory exempt from CEQA as well as the three draft resolutions. the next step is that the council's decision is final less reconsidered within 10 days of the decision notice of the decision rather and if the project is approved the applicant may apply for billing permits at that time and that concludes my presentation

Thank You John for the presentation and this is our friendly reminder we're following the flowchart for the hearing item where the staff reports and makes a recommendation and then the council members ask clarifying questions then that's followed by the applicant making a presentation for up to eight minutes and and then council members will ask questions of staff or the applicant at that time. So right now we're opening up for council clarifying questions of the staff report.

Vice mayor. Yeah, thank you for the presentation so is the planning Commission recommendation included in the staff recommendation.

That's correct we we have a deviated from the play Commission recommendation.

So that's included there, right? There will be a requirement for disclosure.

That's correct. It's condition number 17 in the draft ASA resolution.

Okay, great. And do we have a different noise standard for residential versus office area?

we do in terms of daytime and nighttime standards internal in terms of internal DBLs allowed the decibel levels within a residential units limited to 45 so that's one thing our building code as well as this the municipal code requires that you know prior to final occupancy that the applicant provide proof through an acoustical engineer that that the the way that the units are built out that the Noise limits are limited to 45 decibels within within the unit for interior.

How about exterior?

It's 55 at night 65 during the day and

But I mean, since this residential area would be right adjacent to other office use, so does the external office area have a higher noise allowance than the residential property?

I believe if it is different, it would be not much different. I can tell you just for this project itself, it's 55 at night time, 65 during the day. Yes, 65 during the day, correct.

Okay, yeah. And I think you didn't mention parking, the number of parking space.

Sure.

Does that mean that? Was that in the presentation? I don't remember. No. I think they provide plenty of parking, so I'd like, yeah, that's something people really care.

Yes, and more than happy to provide that information. The municipal code only requires one parking space per townhome. They are providing two per townhome plus five extra for guests.

Okay, great. And then the unit size, I think it's in the staff report, but I think it would be nice for people to know if you have that information.

That's correct. I believe it goes between 2100 square feet to 2800 square feet, inclusive of garage space.

Okay, great.

Thank you. Mayor. Yes? So on this item, we did have a desk item, and it came in quite late, and I have a sense it might make sense to present this now.

Please do, and I was wondering if someone could share the screen on it. I think that might also help. But do you plan on reading it out? I... Oh, thank you.

Maybe we should start with number 17 because that was the condition of approval that staff just referenced. Last page. Mm-hmm. So the recommendation is to add the underlined language to what originally was in the last bullet point of item 17. And it basically clarifies, it just is requiring that the CCNRs clarify for future purchasers the nature of the neighborhood and it's adding the language, maybe I'll just read it quickly. non-residential character and commercial and industrial uses including but not limited to approved trash slash loading areas, permitted uses, delivery schedules, hours of activity that may be outside of standard business hours, and associated noise levels.

Madam City Attorney, so this is more in keeping with the letter of request that we got from the neighboring property owner, which in this case was Apple. Exactly. Okay, I have a question. Should... Would it be permissible or prudent, I should say, to add the storage of hazardous materials for the permitted uses? Or do you have an opinion about that?

You know, my sense is that the that the work done by, I believe it was, whoever was reviewing the environmental existent issues at the site covered that clearly and that it doesn't seem that it's an unusual circumstance such that one would need to put that here, but it's certainly an available option if council wants to go in that direction.

Okay, thank you. And then you'll go over the change, the modification to number 11.

Yes, this is regarding potential noise impacts because it is a residential building going into more of a commercial area. It reads, and it's basically reiterating what's currently in our municipal code. Prior to the issuance of a building permit, the applicant shall retain a qualified professional acoustical engineer to conduct an acoustic analysis of the project plans. The acoustical engineer must certify in writing to the director of community development that the proposed building envelope design, including walls, doors, and windows, will achieve interior noise levels that do not exceed 45 decibels, community noise equivalent level, within all habitable residential rooms. The requirement and subsequent certification are mandated to ensure full compliance with the city's noise standards pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 10.48. then in the following paragraph there was a description in the conditions that the sound attenuating fence could be modified if or when the neighboring property to the south is also developed as residential that seems It seems that it's not necessarily useful to be added. If that were something the two property owners wanted to do in the future, they could decide to do so, and it didn't really make sense to leave it here. And so we've suggested, or at least this modification has suggested that that sentence be removed.

Thank you. And do we have, I see a hand raised from Council Member Hwang.

Yeah, through the mayor. My suggestion in general is as we start putting residential units into mixed areas that we preserve the existing zones that are there. A great example from a policy perspective is what we do with airports. In airports, we have an airport and vicinity disclosure. We could say you're in an industrial zone disclosure. You could have airports have an aviation easement so it doesn't allow people to sue later on because that area was an airport. We're same thing with this industrial area. And also a noise attenuation and building restrictions. So I think if those three things are in there, I think those are going to be important in similar fashions that would show up in the CCNRs. I also have a question for the city staff that's related to that. Actually not related to that is we've got this medium strip in Banley that looks like a PITA when people are going to come in and out given the number of residential folks that are there. Are we going to remove that strip that's filled in with rocks and concrete and Maybe some trees in there, but most of Banley isn't like that. And so is there a way to widen that road so that residents can be able to get in and out of that? You're referring to the road itself? I'm talking about Banley, yeah. Banley. Banley has that weird strip in the middle. I don't know why it's there. It doesn't exist any other part of Banley.

that that's beyond the scope of what we've been reviewing for this project so i mean that's a great public works uh question that we could pass along to our public works staff to see if there's what the future plans are for family okay because i'm worried about the traffic flow there as a number of residents are coming in and out it's already crazy with the daycare there but i can only you know imagine it's a little different so thank you

So we've completed our clarifying questions and next the applicant may present for up to eight minutes and then after that council members may ask questions to the staff or the applicant so you'll get another opportunity there. All right, welcome and we'll set the timer eight minutes for you.

To the TV crew, I have the presentation on my screen over here.

So let's reset it to eight. And it's presentation beginning. There we go.

Good evening, Mayor and Council Members. My name is Jared Brotman, Director of Development with Summerhill Homes. I'm joined tonight by Steve Bull, Vice President of Development for the project, Kevin Ibrahimi, Senior VP of Development, and members of our design team. Thank you for having us tonight to speak about our project. For those of you unfamiliar with Summerhill, we're a local residential builder based in San Ramon. Since 1976, we've built over 7,000 homes across the Bay Area. We take pride in the quality of our homes and the communities that we create. We're really excited to bring another thoughtfully designed community to the North De Anza area, which will bring new homes within walking distance of Stevens Creek Commercial Centers, including Target and Whole Foods. The project will also be within walking distance of Garden Gate Elementary, Collins Elementary, and Lawson Middle School, as well as Cupertino's Memorial Park. Before I discuss the project further, I'd like to take a moment to thank staff for their professionalism and responsiveness throughout the review process, as we've been working on this project for about a year now. In particular, John Martier, who's been incredibly responsive and available to answer questions and clarifications whenever needed. We'd also like to thank Luke Connolly from Planning, Jennifer Chu from Public Works, as well as Matthew McKenna and Caleb Flanagan from Santa Clara County Fire, for their professionalism and thoughtful input throughout the process. Next slide, please. We're proposing to build 27 townhome-style condominiums. The units range in size from 1,500 to 2,300 square feet and will be three and four bedrooms designed for growing families, each of which will have a two-car garage. All homes will be offered for sale, with the majority of them being market rate. However, five of the homes will be offered as below market rate units and sold through the city's affordable housing program. Next slide, please. We've worked closely with city staff to develop a project that complies with Cupertino's objective development standards. In addition, we conducted outreach to the neighboring property owners to minimize construction-related disruptions and long-term impacts. During our meetings with Apple, their main request was to keep the existing easements in place, which we have done. Additionally, before our planning commission hearing, we received an email from one of the neighboring property owners. The request included a few items for us to consider. The items were all reasonable and are gonna be incorporated into the plans and associated project documents. To address one of the comments, we have included an eight foot tall sound attenuating fence in accordance with the city's fencing ordinance. We will also be including the language into our CCNARs and disclosures informing buyers of the surrounding non-residential uses. And as the project approaches construction, our neighbors will be welcome to review the construction management plan, which is gonna be put together by a construction team. This type of development is actually very common for us. Summerhill has a strong track record throughout the Bay Area of converting underutilized commercial spaces into successful residential communities. These projects often serve as catalysts for the thoughtful evolution of commercial centers, transitional areas between residential and commercial uses. And although the site was not designated as the housing priority site in the city's housing element, city staff has confirmed that the units to be constructed here can be counted towards the arena numbers. Next slide, please. We hosted a neighborhood meeting in April of 2025, submitted our SB 330 preliminary application in July of 2025, and submitted our formal application in November 2025 with a request for an AB 130 CEQA exemption. After the application was deemed complete in January 26, we worked closely with city staff and the fire department through several rounds of detailed review of the plans and technical reports. On May 12th, we brought the project to the Planning Commission where we received recommendations for approval. Next slide, please. The architectural design adopts a contemporary style that fits well with the surrounding neighborhood. Simple shapes like flat and hip roofs add visual interest while keeping an overall balanced look. A mix of materials, including stucco, siding, and metal details create variety and a polished appearance. Subtle changes in building form and detailing help reduce the building's perceived massing to one that is appropriate for a residential development in an urban setting. To maintain the walkability of the area, the homes along Banley Drive all have front doors facing the street, with the garages hidden behind the homes. Additionally, all the homes have been oriented so the primary windows of the living rooms and bedrooms face towards Banley or back towards North De Anza to provide a greater sense of privacy. Next slide, please. In addition to complying with the state energy code and the city's REACH code, all the homes will be equipped with solar panels. The community will also include drought tolerant landscaping, water conserving irrigation systems, and low impact design for the treatment of storm water runoff. Also, every garage will be EV ready with the capacity of a level two EV charger. Next slide, please. The project will provide several important community benefits. First, it will provide 27 new homes, giving first time home buyers and families an opportunity to purchase in Cupertino. Second, we're proposing to designate five of the units as below market rate units, affordable to median and moderate income households. And finally, the project will contribute approximately $1.3 million in park fees, $285,000 in school fees, and a surplus of $18,000 annually to the city's general fund through estimated property tax, sales tax, and parcel transfer taxes as verified by the city's third-party consultant. We will also be installing public art within our project to add another beautiful piece to the city's collection. Next slide, please. Thank you for your consideration this evening. We respectfully request you vote in favor of approving our project. And at this time, I'd like to invite Margo Bradish, our land use counsel, to say a few words.

Good evening, members of the Council. I'd just like to comment briefly on the housing laws that support your approval of the project this evening. First, SB 330, the city rules applicable to the project are those that were in effect when the SB 330 preliminary application was submitted in July of 2025. the state density bonus law because the affordable housing that is included in the project the project qualifies for the benefits of the state density bonus law including waivers and concessions as you heard in your staff report the project is taking advantage of four waivers and one concession Third, the Housing Accountability Act. As you know, the Housing Accountability Act prohibits the city from disapproving or reducing the density of a project that complies with applicable objective standards absent a public health and safety issue that is also objective. Use of the density bonus law does not make a project inconsistent with objective standards. And again, as you heard in your staff report, with the use of the state density bonus law, the project is consistent with the general plan, the zoning, the De Anza concept plan, and the BRMR housing program that were in effect when the SB 330 application was submitted. And finally, the AB 130 CEQA exemption, as detailed in your staff report, the project meets the qualifications for use of the AB 130 CEQA exemption, and tribal consultation was completed. and pursuant to the AB 130 timelines, tomorrow is the deadline for the city to take action on the project. So in closing, the project is consistent with applicable housing laws, including SB 330, Density Bonus Law, HAA, and AB 130, and we encourage you to approve the project this evening in accordance with applicable housing laws. Also, I just want to touch base on the one change that we'd like to request to the conditions that were put up. It's a very minor clarification. Can I continue?

Please finish your sentence.

Thank you. It's a very minor clarification to the condition requiring the acoustical assessment just to require that be done before the first building permit for vertical construction. That would be the permits for the townhomes coming up. That's what we're measuring is that noise and then not for a building permit, for example, grading or underground utilities or anything. So just that adding that very brief language for vertical construction related to the building permit. Thank you.

Right. Thank you for the presentation. And now council may ask questions of the staff or the applicant. And council member Wong.

Question for staff. Are there gas lines available there for residents if they were to access gas lines?

I'M NOT QUITE SURE. I'M ASSUMING THERE'S GAS LINES AVAILABLE IF THEY WOULD LIKE TO DO IT AND SUBJECT TO THE BUILDING CODE STANDARDS AND WHATNOT.

THERE'S NO RESTRICTION ON GAS LINES, IS THAT CORRECT? NOT CURRENTLY, NO. QUESTION TO THE APPLICANT, IS THERE ANY REASON WHY YOU'RE NOT PUTTING GAS LINES FOR DUAL USE AND MULTIPLE ZONES?

Yes. Kevin Abrahimi, Summer Hill Homes. Thank you for having us here for the questions. So what we have found in our market research, we have nine active projects in the Bay Area, greater Bay Area. Especially in this area, most of our buyers prefer all electric. There are some that may prefer gas, but for our experience, projects that are all electric perform better. So this project will be all electric.

I understand you want to do that. I just wanted to make sure the public knew that the gas was still an option. Gas was still available and I would disagree with your statement on what the most people do want here, but that's just my opinion. Thank you very much.

Council member Mohan.

Thank you to the applicants for their report as well as to staff. I wanted to say thank you especially for the supplemental report that we received about the business outreach strategy that staff has implemented. It's very detailed and it answers a lot of our questions, especially questions that we received from some of the businesses that operate out of the building. It would be good if we could get periodic updates on how the outreach is going. We did something similar for the Panera and Voyager issues and if we could sort of make sure that nothing falls through the cracks and that these four or five businesses that are in the building, you know, stay on all our, My other question was separate from the concerns that the residents had. Apple sent out a memo with a whole list of concerns that they had and I think when I talked to staff, my understanding was that it had most of the concerns or all of the concerns had been addressed. So I just wanted you to clarify that that is happening. And there was especially major concern about the noise. And I know we just talked about it. But have you talked to Apple? And are both the parties in agreement with the changes that you've suggested?

Yes, we've had four meetings with Apple. The last one, I believe, was two days ago. yesterday sorry yesterday um so in their letter to us and in our conversations with them there were several things that they had asked for that asked to increase the efficiency of the sound attenuation inside the buildings that's the condition that staff has currently put and we've accepted that condition They had also asked to have a construction coordinator and require a construction management plan. All of our projects have a construction management plan and they had asked if we could interface with them to receive comments from them on that plan. We have committed in doing that. So we're on the same page in respect to that request. And they had asked for pre occupancy disclosures. So Summerhill does a very in-depth DISCLOSURE PACKAGE IS TYPICALLY 28 TO 30 PAGES OF DISCLOSURES. THAT'S SEPARATE THAN THE CCNR'S. THEY ASKED US IF WE COULD INCLUDE VERBAGE IN THE CCNR'S AND IN OUR DISCLOSURES REGARDING THE ZONING AND THE USES WITHIN THAT GENERAL AREA. WE WOULD DO THAT EITHER WAY AND WE AGREED WITH THEM THAT WE WOULD DO THAT. MAYOR MOORE, I THINK YOU HAD A QUESTION EARLIER. CAN THE CCNR'S DISCUSS THE ENVIRONMENTAL I don't know what the right wording for it is. It's the products that are used in commercial buildings. So we will do that. We will include that in our CC&Rs. I've talked to our attorney and that is something that will be included. So they won't specifically say this building has this or this building has this. They'll provide an analysis of THE COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS THAT ARE WITHIN THIS AREA CAN HAVE THESE KIND OF SUBSTANCES THAT ARE USED BY COMMERCIAL BUILDINGS. AGAIN, SHEILA WARD DID MUCH BETTER THAN I JUST DID, BUT THAT WILL BE INCLUDED IN THERE. SO THOSE WERE THE ITEMS THAT WERE ON THE LETTER IN OUR DISCUSSIONS WITH APPLE.

And just to confirm, there will be another opportunity to test the decibel level after?

Yes, so what will happen before the vertical construction of the buildings starts Our acoustical engineer will review the building plans. They will do their on-site testing. They will provide reports to staff. It'll be reviewed to comply with the city's ordinance, which is the 45 decibels.

And will there be another test once the units have been completed?

Yeah, generally, again, I haven't worked in a jurisdiction that requires that, and that's not a city code here either. It's an analysis that's done by the acoustical engineer looking at the window SDCs, the wall ratings, and they'll increase those to whatever it needs to be in order to meet the 45 decibels.

Okay.

Thank you. Of course. Thank you, Mayor. I just have a quick question. Was the request to add for design modification, it's item 11, prior to the issuance of any building permit, would we then just insert for vertical construction? That's what you're looking for? Yes, vertical building. Okay, and then for 17, approved trash loading areas, permitted uses, including the storage of hazardous materials, is that correct?

IS THAT TOO STRAIGHTFORWARD? YES, 17. THAT'S ACCEPTABLE? YES, THAT'S ACCEPTABLE.

THANK YOU. COUNCILMEMBER FRUEN.

LOOKING AT, I BELIEVE IT'S THE END OF Condition 11, where you discuss the fence. It says that you'll be installing an eight foot tall sound attenuating fence dot dot dot along the southern property line. So what's happening with the other two property lines?

Yeah, so we also spoke to Apple regarding those two other property lines. It's not in their request letter, but we have committed to providing that same fence on all three sides. So that's part of our commitment Okay.

And then I know that you had some concerns that were raised with regard to the hazardous materials stored at the adjacent parcel. Has FIRE had a chance to provide you with any commentary on that?

Yes staff reached out to comment and the fire department provided an email correspondence. I think staff probably has it they can read it. I think I have it too. But yes they they provided a response that is not an issue.

Okay. And then to staff, as I look at the area map, which you've conveniently included in the staff report, it looks like all of the parcels immediately surrounding the project site include a residential designation. And as I understand it, that residential designation has existed for some time up into the 90s, so 30-ish some odd years, correct? That's our understanding as well. Okay, so this has been a contemplated use here for a very long time, and it abuts a whole bunch of other existing residential uses, including a series of apartments to the southwest and then a whole bunch of single-family homes to the west. Okay. All right. I don't know that I have anything additional at the moment. I'll reserve the rest of my time.

Okay. Thank you, Vice Mayor.

Thank you.

So I looked at the city zoning map on the city website. It seems almost every office site West of De Anza, North De Anza is zoned similarly with mixed use and office industrial and rest. You mentioned in your presentation that this came from the North De Anza plan and the plan is intended to provide primarily office use with a small amount of residential. It was not meant to be 100% residential in the plan, right?

That was the policy and therefore that's why the applicants requested that concession.

That's why they require concession. Correct. Otherwise they don't comply with our current zoning.

Correct.

Okay. But then this also means any other office current office site zone. Similarly, I think that also include almost every office site along Stevens Creek. They also have include residential as permitted use, whether it's meant to be primary or not. With the current law, That means next year someone can propose an SB 330, 100% residential to replace any office, current office site we have. And with the proposed state bill, the missing housing streamlining for Townhome Act, this kind of project that replace a commercial site with Townhome likely will get streamlined. even if they are on a site that's not supposed to be primary residential use.

I can't confirm the latter of your points. Your former points are correct.

It's something I guess we need to look into. Precisely. The impact of that act because likely other projects might, even they don't completely comply with, we are saying permitted as a small amount, now it's like they can take over. But that said, this is still, and also I noticed that the density that's allowed in all these mixed use office site with residential permitted, the density is 25 units per acre. That means almost everyone who are going to just proposed townhomes. If that's what we intend, that's something we really need to look into.

Pardon, Vice Mayor, we need to stick to the projects at hand. Do you have more clarifying questions for the staff or the applicant before we move to public comment?

Okay. So I see that thank you for the information about the park fees. Do we have traffic impact fees still? Does that apply to this project?

We do and if there are traffic impact fees on this project it would be in the draft as a resolution I could probably pull it up in. One minute and get you the exact amounts when the public works conditions of approval. Look at racing the first.

Steve's joined in.

Yeah, so the traffic impact fee, I win, is $4,215 per townhome unit.

Okay. So what's the current occupancy percentage at this site? I know there's nothing we can do about it. You have the right to develop on this site, but I still would like to understand the impact to Cupertino. So what's the current occupancy for those current existing office tenant?

Are they all rented out? Yeah, so what I can say is that quite a few of the units within that building are occupied by the owners and that all of the leases will naturally expire before the project is to start. So none of the tenants are being asked to leave earlier or being negotiated to ask earlier.

I know that they, so their existing lease is going to expire.

Before we start.

Yeah. But then many of these are also long-time tenants. that have been, their business has been there. I guess they likely wish to have a long-term lease, but then were not given that option to have a long-term lease, so they had been, I guess, going to year by year or month by month.

Yeah, so they were all given leases, and they're just new leases aren't being signed on that building.

And do you know what's the current price per square foot for that building? I do not. The intent is I would like to understand we are actually losing naturally affordable office space in Cupertino. That will have an impact on other small businesses who need more affordable office space in our area. even though we can't do much about it, but I would like to know at least the impact. What's the current price square footage in this?

I'm sorry, frankly, I don't have that information because I'm not involved with the leasing of the units.

Because losing this basically means the average office price would also increase because we are losing the lower end.

I can't speculate on that. I apologize.

Thank you. Thank you. And please remember to stop your timer. IT'S TIME FOR US TO GO FOR PUBLIC COMMENTS. WE NOW INVITE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC TO SPEAK ABOUT THIS AGENDA ITEM. COUNCIL MEMBERS MAY ASK QUESTIONS OF THE SPEAKERS. MADAM CITY CLERK, DO WE HAVE MEMBERS OF THE PUBLIC WHO WOULD LIKE TO SPEAK ON THIS ITEM?

YES, MAYOR, WE HAVE THREE REQUESTS TO SPEAK FROM IN COMMUNITY HALL, AND I SEE THREE REQUESTS TO SPEAK VIRTUALLY. OKAY. SO WE'LL START WITH CATHY HELGERSON, FOLLOWED BY ANDREW, FOLLOWED BY DANNY HABTEM. Anyone wishing to provide comments, please submit your request in the next nine minutes. Welcome, Kathy.

I'm asking the City of Cupertino Council turn down this housing project at 10268 Banley Drive. This project is just one project now, but there will be more in the future if the street is rezoned to include residential. Senate Bill 330, the Housing Crisis Bill approved by Governor Gavin Newsom, is a subsidized housing bill and was never allowed to be voted upon by the public along with other bills that bypass CEQA. This is a violation of my rights and the people's rights. This will not solve the homeless housing problems. More people will come to Cupertino in California from all over the U.S. and other countries. My home is one street over from Banley Drive on Dunbar Drive in Cupertino. I don't want a three or four or five more story town home project to be built on Banley Drive over the wall close to my home or any place on Banley Drive this would be a detrimental thing. We need our small businesses and these commercial businesses. More housing projects could be a possibility in the future. Summer Hill Homes, the builders, applied to Cupertino to change the parcel zoning from commercial to residential, and the public was not notified about this. Why was this kept from the public? I believe that this includes all of Banley Drive. We need our commercial office buildings here on Banley Drive. Even Apple Computer has an R&D facility right on Banley Drive on the other side of Dunbar Drive. I must wonder here if Apple Computer wants their employees to live next door or close to Apple Computer business offices. If this is true, then Cupertino will lose a lot of commercial buildings, and that is terribly wrong. The housing crisis quota will rise each year. I provide the city council today with a list of properties, locations, number of units of each project, location on one page. This information was taken from the city's major residential projects listing. I'm also providing project information on the project approval or in review status unit totals. The City of Cupertino's quota is 4,588 units. 1,728 units have been approved and 1,250 units are in review. This report does not mention when these approved projects will be started or when the reviews will be approved and started. The public needs to know this information. Why is this not being provided in a report to report on the web? This should be public information with a complete report on the progress of the quota and bills. I hope the city of Cupertino read my comments that I provided the Planning Commission at their meeting. I believe it's on the web if you folks want to read it. I am sorry to say that they approved the project. I ask the City of Cupertino City Council not to approve the project or any project on Banley Drive location or any other residential building on Banley Drive and the Banley Drive. Thank you, Kathy. That is your time.

You've been muted. Thank you. Next we have Andrew followed by Danny Habtim. Welcome, Andrew.

Hello. Yeah, housing is good. I actually live in a house, so I think we'd have more of it. I also want to call into and just bring to attention like the climate change impacts because it's 2026 It's the hottest year on record again, and I don't think I'm seeing that much commitment to Finding climate change from the folks who are in charge of summer hills There's a very big and or in Their description of how they would do the landscaping where they say drought tolerant and or native plants, and I don't think that's enough I I used to live in Biltmore, where they have a big lawn. They water every night. They water when it's raining, and the water goes on the sidewalk. And talking to them is like talking to a brick wall. And I know that once these things are approved, they kind of just never change afterwards. So if you care about climate change, then you have to do something about it right now. It's extremely practical and doable to put a native plant requirement of let's say 75%. Why would you prefer 100%? And I don't think there's really a reason not to unless it's just simply like a kind of like a cookie cutter lack of creativity kind of moment we're doing. I don't think it's very reassuring that they want to replace the trees in accordance with law. It's very vague. And I would want to ask the council to put a stipulation that these trees have to be native plants as well. Yeah, that's it. Thanks.

Thank you, Andrew. Next we have Danny Habtim followed by Marilyn Kung. Welcome, Danny.

I'm speaking here because it is obvious that Cupertino needs more housing. The fact that the cheapest deed restricted affordable unit in this project targets people with six incomes demonstrates that. I think this location is a decent place as any to put it. It's not only close to decent several like commercial and residential amenities. It's also pretty close to North De Anza which already has good transit connections to Stevens Creek Boulevard and the Sunnyvale Caltrain Station. I've traveled on that road many times so I'm pretty sure of that. Thank you very much.

Thank you Danny. Next we have Marilyn Kung. Welcome Marilyn.

Hi, council members and mayor again. I want to just applaud the efforts to build more housing in Cupertino and just agree with the previous two speakers. For the first one, we just had the ceremonial idea of proclaiming and recognizing United Nations World Environment Day, which is amazing. Thank you for doing that. And if we want to commit to that proclamation, then we want to really have policy that actually contributes to sustainability in the city. And secondly, with affordability, I was raised here. I went to Cupertino Union School District schools and also Fremont Union High School District schools here. And the truth is that I probably cannot ever buy a home in the city that I grew up in, me and my peers. And then third, about the gas stove, this is a public health issue. You know, there's higher rates of children having asthma in homes with gas stoves. And I really applaud the developers and implore that they continue coming to having no gas in these developments. For example, like in my own home, my parents, they actually switched to induction stove this year because it's a public health issue and they were really concerned about that. And, you know, California has really strong climate goals and really strong electrification goals. And we are going full speed ahead to electrification. So even if we do have these gas stoves in the future, it could be possible that you're just going to have to rip them out and just replace them with electric. So that's just going to be a waste of money. So, yeah, but thank you for having this item today. And I really urge the city council approve this item. Thank you.

Thank you, Marilyn. And now we will move to those members of the public requesting to speak virtually. We have Nori, followed by Jennifer Griffin, followed by Jean Bedard. Welcome, Nori.

Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Thank you for this opportunity. 10268 Bunley Drive building is not just commercial office building. The building is mainly occupied by schools for children and a studio for children to adults. Beyond the learning center is after school for Chinese language, Taiwanese culture, and education for children from kindergarten, to sixth grade. There are over 200 students. Mirai Gakuen is Japanese language and culture school from younger than three years old to eighth grade. Capybara Clay Studio teaches clay poly for children, small children to adults. And Enjoy Dance Studio is popular hip hop and K-pop dance studio for children to adults. Many, many children enjoy to attend those schools and studios. However, once again, Summerhill plans to develop the property to townhome. I didn't know until planning commission meeting on May 12th. School principal, teachers, studio instructor, and many parents in those school and studio are devastating the Summer Hills development plan. Those school and studio desperately wants to stay there. Many children are having so much fun in those school and studio. you just celebrated and proclaimed recognizing the month of May for AAPI in last council meeting cupatino is widely recognized for highly diverse multicultural city so please keep those school and studio for children i hope you have visited those school and studios please keep the building for the children schools and the studio please find alternative location We would be very appreciated for your understanding and help to keep the building for school and the studios. Thanks for listening.

Thank you, Nori. And next we have Jennifer Griffin, followed by Jim Bedard, followed by Estevan Lopez. Welcome, Jennifer.

Thank you very much. I hope you can understand what I'm saying. My cold is still getting worse. I'll just start out and I would ask the developer to please soften the architecture. If my husband and I were looking to purchase another home, downsize, I will tell you right now, I would not purchase a home that had that contemporary architecture on the outside because I don't find it appealing. So I would be forced to go somewhere else. to look for something that had a more traditional style, especially of Cupertino, which is, as you all mentioned before, the Spanish mission style, etc., which to me is much more graceful and respectful of the history of our fair city. One of my main concerns is, yes, this location is in a low-rise tech park, but are we taking into consideration the families that are going to be living there, which means very, very limited space to play, limited yards. That means that when you have those empty Apple parking lots after hours, 5 p.m., 7 p.m., you're going to have residents over there playing games of I mean, I have three brothers, baseball, tag, you're going to have children with e-bikes, bikes, et cetera, in the parking lots. I can guarantee it. It's not a good use of it, but they have no play yards on this site. And I could not walk to the adjacent park. I'm an old lady. I have walking problems. But when we're trying to establish new residential in the middle of a tech park, basically, We have to make sure that the residents and children are safe on those roads when they're going to school. I think we need to have more sidewalks. You're going to have children with e-bikes, e-scooters going up and down. We go through that area quite often, and it's mainly tech employees. I'm also concerned that we're going to start getting the homeless trailers in there around the project. Hopefully, God bless the poor souls. But also, are we putting in street trees? There is very little large tree cover in this area. It's basically a tech park. Also, what has been done to make sure that we're not just cutting off the retail, especially valuable daycare. Thank you so much.

Thank you, Jennifer. Next, we have Jean Bedard followed by Estevan Lopez. Welcome, Jean Bedard. Can you hear me? Yes, we can.

Okay. Good evening, Mayor Moore, Vice Mayor Chau, council members, and staff. My name is Jean Bedard, and I am a Cupertino resident. I'm speaking tonight to urge you to unanimously approve this housing project. Summerhill is a well-regarded housing developer known for high-quality developments. Cupertino simply does not have enough housing, particularly housing for first-time buyers and families. This development provides this badly needed type of housing close to schools, transit on Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevard, as well as retail on Stevens Creek. It includes BMR and market rate housing. The city should not be a barrier to housing development. This project complies with city and state requirements. There are no grounds for obstructing it. Again, I urge you to unanimously approve the project. Thank you for the opportunity to speak.

Thank you, Jean. And our final speaker is Esteban Lopez. Welcome, Esteban.

Good evening, Mayor and City Council. My name is Esteban Lopez. I'm a research analyst with the Bay Area Council, and we represent more than 370 of the Bay Area's largest employers whose members employ over 4.5 million workers across the region. I am here tonight in strong support of the Summerhill Homes proposed 27 townhomes at 10268 Banley Drive. The National Association of Realtors reports that the median age of a first-time homebuyer is now 40, up from the age of 28 in 1992. First-time homebuyers are just 21% of the market, a historic low. Here in Cupertino, the median home sale price hit $3.4 million in March, up 16% year over year. That math does not work for the next generation of Cupertino families. Our region's housing shortage is immense, and no project is too small to help. Banley Drive is exactly the kind of location we should be building. It is located in an area where emissions from driving will be much lower than the alternative, and there are thousands of jobs nearby that can be accessed by walking, biking, and transit. Stevens Creek and De Anza Boulevards are under a half mile away, with a target less than a quarter mile away. William Faria Elementary, Lawson Middle, Cupertino Memorial Park, and the Quinlan Community Center all sit within a mile. the project fully conforms to the city's zoning and general plan and the use of ab-130s sequa exemption pathway is appropriate for a project that meets all zoning design and building code requirements At 17 units per acre, Summerhill is proposing well below what the site allows. Five of the 27 homes will be deed restricted affordable for median and moderate income households. Cupertino's teachers, nurses, and public safety workers desperately need these homes. Townhomes like these are for the next generation starter home. For these reasons, the Bay Area Council respectfully urges the commission to recommend approval. Thank you all for your time.

Thank you, Esteban. Mayor, that concludes the speakers for this item.

All right, thank you. And now the applicant is provided two minutes to respond to public comments. There is one comment in particular I'd like to hear a response to, and that was the request for a native plant requirements and trees. If that's a possibility, if so, if not, why not, I guess.

Okay, Kevin Abrahimi, Summerhill. So I do want to clarify in respect to the number of trees. I think there was, before I answer the other question, there are 25 trees that are being removed and the requirement is to plant 34 trees, and the project is planting 55 trees. So I just wanted to make that clarification that we're planting over twice the amount of trees we're removing. So I'll try to answer this. My landscape architect couldn't make it here for tonight, but generally, What I understand from the landscaping concept is they try to provide as much native landscaping for the project, but for projects like this, you do want to have some ornamental landscaping, and that's the smaller portion of the landscape that's part of the plan set. And they're all drought tolerant.

All right, so I would wanna challenge that since I have native plants that I'm actually currently propagating and they are ornamental. So would a percentage, well, and then we can also look at the Apple headquarters campus with all the native trees that they have placed there. Would you be open to a percentage of native plants and trees?

It's harder for me because I'm not a landscape consultant, but what do you have in mind?

50 to 75%. Being? Native.

Yeah, I'm good with that. We'll make the landscape architect.

Okay. So 75% 50 to 75.

I will, as I've always tried to work with you on this, I will give the instruction to my landscape architect to try to go towards a higher, I just, I don't know if I can limit them without knowing it, but my direction is going to be to go towards the higher percentage.

Thank you, and I just wound down your time. So now the public hearing is currently closed. I'm gonna request a motion and a second. I'm actually going to make the motion on this particular item because we need to incorporate the slight adjustments that were made to the desk item. So I move the recommended action with the following motion. for item 11, the design modification. I'm gonna read the whole thing into the record. Prior to the issuance of any building permit for vertical construction, the applicant shall retain a qualified professional acoustical engineer to conduct an acoustic analysis of the project plans. The acoustical engineer must certify in writing to the Director of Community Development that the proposed building envelope design including walls, doors, and windows will achieve interior noise levels that do not exceed 50, I mean 45 decibels CNEL, the community noise equivalent level with all habitable residential rooms. This requirement and subsequent certification are mandated to ensure full compliance with the city's noise standards pursuant to Cupertino Municipal Code Chapter 10.48. The developer shall install an eight foot tall sound attenuating fence or other similar noise mitigating features along the southern property line and the remainder of this item has been crossed out and removed. And then item 17, the formation of a homeowners association at the following final bullet point, inclusion of a notice of neighboring uses I'll read the whole thing. A disclosure to residents that are going to move into the property, disclosing that the sites around them are mixed-use residential, industrial, and commercial existing areas, non-residential character, and commercial and industrial uses, including but not limited to approved trash loading areas, permitted uses, including the storage of hazardous materials, that's the addition, Delivery schedules, hours of activity that may be outside of standard business hours and associated noise levels and staff will have to help me as to where the native plants requirement of 50 to 75% is added into a condition. Or is it a fresh new condition that needs to be added at the end?

That's a new one. We do have some landscape conditions already. We can modify some of the existing ones. An example would be landscape irrigation plans. We have conditions number 26 talks about landscape projects submittal in the draft ASA. Resolution we could probably add a sentence at the end of that basically saying that 50 to 75 percent 75 percent of Landscaping should be of native I'll second that.

Okay. Thank you. So we have a motion in a second for purposes of deliberation. I See a hand. I don't know vice mayor if that's relic or is your hand raised? Okay, vice mayor

I believe there was a question about the architect of the project. I think public hearing is closed. When I met with the applicant, they did tell me they specifically choose this more modern style so that it's compatible with the surrounding office buildings, which I think makes sense. There are going to be different residents who like different style, some like the modern style. Then another question was about whether the site was rezoned recently and the residents were not informed, notified about it for this particular case. I think the site was rezoned at least 10, 15, 20 years ago. To be mixed use with residential permit either, right? But it's just the resident estate law change. When the council at the time adopted that, the council had the discretion to decide eventually how much residential will be allowed, but the state law changed. Now the council doesn't have that discretion, so 100% residential would be permitted, even though that wasn't the original intent of the council. maybe 20 years ago when they adopted the plan. So just wanted to clarify that. And then I have a question. Oh, there was a question. There was a comment that the project fully conforms to the city's zoning and objective standards. I think without the waivers and concessions permitted by the density bonus law, the project would not conform to the city's zoning and objective standards. But I think the state law, does try to change the concept that the state law does say, as long as they qualify for density bonus, even taking the waivers and concessions, they are considered conforming to the city standard, even when they do not. That's just catch-22 logic of the state law, unfortunately. I want to clarify that, okay. So I do think housing is important and I really like that this project does provide smaller, more affordable starter home for younger families. However, as a city, we are concerned when we do lose affordable office space, which our small businesses rely on and many of them are long time small business in our area. And once this kind of older affordable office space is lost, there won't be more coming. So there is a limited stock of naturally affordable office space as we have limited stock of naturally affordable homes. Once we replace that with new in home infield development, we will lose them forever. That's as a council, although we do want more housing, we do also need to be concerned with the lose of other intended uses. So, yeah. That's my comment, I think, okay.

thank you thank you vice mayor council member wong thank you mayor um i like the townhouses that are being built i think it's the right level density the elevations are consistent with the look in the field the area i think that was very important i'm glad that that's the architect you chose i think there was concerns in the industrial area that had that architect not been chosen we've gotten a different design i'm also glad that staff has done a good job here with streamlining the process i'm hoping to get some kind of streamlining like this in the residential renovations in the future uh but like our vice mayor i think it's important to clarify some facts from some of the folks that have been speaking here as well some of uh some of the folks that have been calling in um this is not consistent with the objective standards uh but it is because of the waivers and that's why your council is here um as for all those folks talking about affordability let's let's get a realistic conversation here um on that math 2.184 million is what we get for the square footage times about 1300 square feet that's about what the units are probably running about That's 14K and 16K. It's $14,000, $16,000 per month in mortgages. You'd have to have a $500,000 to $600,000 income to qualify. That's the top 5% of income earners in Cupertino. So anyone here coming in to talk about affordable housing, please do your math because that's not correct. It's also sad that we are not having mixed fuel systems. It was rich to have someone from the California Energy Commission lecture us on climate change. The Federal Interagency Committee on Indoor Act Quality, CIAQ, which is comprised of two dozen federal agencies, has determined it is not a public health standard, a hazard. The CIAQ has not identified natural gas cooking emissions as an important issue concerning asthma or respiratory illness. So let's clear that fact up. And of course, the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission and EPA do not present gas ranges as a significant contributor to adverse air quality or health hazard. So I want to make sure that's clear. I applaud the outreach with neighbors. I think that has been a good thing. I want to say that we should also remember that these are primarily industrial areas. And so remember that it is an industrial area first. It affects our tax base. It affects our small business base. And so if you're coming trying to take up one of those areas and put housing where it's supposed to be industrial area in the future, please understand it is industrial area first. And also hoping that there's something the city can do with regards to helping the tenants that are there with the economic development to help the existing places, existing businesses find places, maybe something we can do that. I'd like to ask staff to look into that to help De Anza Learning Center, where my kids have been in the before. There's two architects that are over there. There's an accountant that's over there. And so anything we can do to help displace businesses to find other places, I think that's gonna be useful as us. We want to be a friendly, a business-friendly city. And if we're driving out small businesses, that's an issue to me. And I'm also glad that we're helping with the housing production numbers. But these are not affordable homes, people. Please remember that. And you got $15,000 for a mortgage? That is not affordable. So I just want to be clear about that. For all those people coming here talking about affordability, you tell me you got $500,000 or $600,000 income, that is not affordable. But I am for the project. I think we need new homes, but that is not affordable, people.

Council Member Fruin.

So in particular, I just wanted to thank staff for the very significant outreach that you've done to all of the existing tenants. I'm not sure that everyone's actually seen it, but there's quite a significant desk item that details everything that's already been done, which is rather extensive, including many, many, many sets of outreach to DeAnza Learning Center, which I understand from the applicants is one of the part owners and is choosing to retire, that they do describe some interest in potential relocation assistance. A similar story with Mirai Gakuen, which has expressed interest in relocation assistance, but also expressed no particular concern at this time because it's at least a year away. So we have time. There's a lot that's out there at the moment. If you're looking for office space, now is the best market to be looking for office space. It's been pretty significantly damaged by what happened during the pandemic. Obviously, it's not the premium that it once was. And it makes it quite obvious why there are such high vacancy rates in other parts of the South Bay. I'll just note that Every home that is in Cupertino right now at one point in time was sort of top of the market item, and over time it became more affordable because it got old. That's what happens with all buildings. entropy, things fall apart. So today's market rate housing becomes tomorrow's naturally occurring affordable housing because it's old and it's not competitive anymore. If we don't build housing for all types of people, then the folks who do have the incomes that were just described, they bid up the housing prices for everyone else. And that means that all housing is more expensive. So every little project, including this one, and I'll emphasize, there are at least five that are deed-restricted affordable. And that's all pegged to area median income, what we understand to be the most common incomes in the area. You know, over time, things become better. But we have to actually put enough drops into the ocean in order to fill it.

Thanks.

All right, thank you and I would like to thank the applicant for agreeing to the adjustments to the conditions for this project and I would like to clarify with the native planting I'm hoping for pollinators, pollinators supporting plants to make that more clear. I'm not seeing any further hands raised. Madam City Clerk, will you please set the voting panel and we are going to vote.

The motion as amended carries unanimously.

Right, thank you. And we're going to take a five minute break now. Thank you.

Thank you. Thank you.

All right, next we move on to our action calendar, which is the adoption of SB 707, and we will see this repeat every six months, is that correct? Well, this is gonna come back.

The one that was on consent has to come back every six months, this one does not. Oh, excellent, good, okay.

So that one can come back on consent then, probably. Cool, okay, Madam City Manager, do we have a presentation on this item?

Thank you, Mayor. This item is a proposed council policy to outline how the city can handle disruptions to the city council's teleconferenced meetings. Adoption of a meeting disruption policy is a requirement now under Senate Bill 707, and the requirement goes into effect July 1. Interim City Attorney Floyd Andrews will present this item.

Good evening, Mayor and Council. So last year, the state legislature passed Senate Bill 707, which made substantial changes to the Brown Act, focusing largely on increasing public participation and inclusion. One aspect addresses public meeting interruptions, particularly when the audio-visual or remote participation connection is disrupted. In light of the recent Civil Grand Jury report that addresses the City's meeting interruptions and connection with alternate remote meeting locations, as opposed to the failure of the main meeting locations teleconferencing system, I would like to now note that these current updates are not connected to the Civil Grand Jury report or the City's response thereto. Those will be discussed at a different meeting. Rather, these updates are required by the new state legislation that coincidentally addresses similar issues concerning the remote access to city council meetings. So Senate Bill 707 now requires that city councils adopt a meeting disruption policy, and they're required to do so in open session, which is what we're doing now, not on consent. Here we recommend that council adopt the policy pertaining to the disruption during public meetings of telephonic or internet services. Such adoption is required to be heard in open session and not on consent. All councils of cities with populations of 30,000 or more, such as the city of Cupertino, are, as of July 1, required to provide hybrid city council meetings using a two-way phone or video platform, as we do already. And as stated, the city must also adopt a policy outlining the procedures for recessing and reconvening a meeting when disruption to the hybrid meeting service occurs. In the event of a disruption to the service during a public meeting, the mayor must announce the disruption and call a recess. Staff must take all available actions to identify and restore the service. The meeting must remain in recess for at least one hour or until the service is restored. If service is restored, the meeting must resume immediately. If service is restored, the mayor must immediately reconvene the meeting and announce that the remote access and public comment functionality has been restored. The disruption and the resolution must be documented in the meeting minutes, including the start time of the disruption, steps taken to restore service, and the duration of the interruption. IF AFTER ONE HOUR THE SERVICE HAS NOT BEEN RESTORED, THE COUNCIL MUST RECONVENE AND EITHER ADJOURN THE MEETING OR CONTINUE THE MEETING AFTER ADOPTING VIA A ROLL CALL VOTE THAT THE CITY COUNCIL HAS MADE GOOD FAITH EFFORTS TO RESTORE INTERNET SERVICE IN ACCORDANCE WITH ITS POLICY AND THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN CONTINUING THE MEETING OUTWEIGHS THE PUBLIC INTEREST IN REMOTE PUBLIC ACCESS. SO THAT IS THE NEW REQUIREMENT.

Thank you, Madam City Attorney. Are there any clarifying questions from the council before we go out for public comments? Vice Mayor Chao?

Yeah, I do have a question. So they are requiring us to go in recess for at least one hour. A lot of this internet interruption is like it will be back, right, pretty fast. But now we can continue the meeting, we have to wait for one hour?

No, no, if the meeting is, if the connection is reestablished, then you begin the meeting immediately. You only are required to wait the hour while staff makes every effort to reconnect the meeting. And you have to wait the full hour while they do so until And then when it's been a full hour of trying to reconnect, that's when the council can reconvene and decide which way to move forward, continue the meeting or adjourn.

That's a little confusing because it says the policy required the legislative body to take a recess, attempt to restore service for at least one hour. It just means you have to keep trying to restore for an hour. But if it's reconnected in one minute or 10 minutes, we can just continue the meeting? Absolutely. Okay, okay, good.

Okay.

Seeing no further hands raised, Madam City Clerk, do any members of the public wish to speak on this item?

Yes, Mayor, I have one member of the public requesting to speak virtually. Jennifer Griffin, welcome.

Good evening. I hope you all can hear me okay. Cold is not getting any better. Can you hear me? Yes, we can. Okay, good. I will tell you, That, okay, I was on the Zoom the entire time. We had all the city council meetings, planning commission. During pandemic, we conducted everything by Zoom. That was what we did in California. But I will tell you, You need to make sure that your public is not just hanging out there. I mean, look at me. The last several times I started using remote access, I was having trouble with Zoom. I couldn't figure out how to raise my hand. We had, thank heavens, your IT group were able to help, but you have so many people on so many different devices that we need to make sure that we're sensitive to the devices that people are coming in from if they choose to participate remotely. I have started participating remotely from Santa Cruz because my mother's age and health is very, very important to maintenance of her for the family. Sometimes I'm coming in from San Jose from my mother-in-law's house. Tonight I'm at home, but I have a horrible cold. So I don't know who wrote this bill, but I find the part about we are, okay, you get internet up, what internet are you talking about? Are you talking about internet service from DeAnza's facility to the other people that are coming in or waiting on hold. There are many different IT service providers across the city, et cetera, et cetera. So I think we need to make sure that the protocol If we're going to continue these meetings and you are not having access for your remote participants, I find that very, very upsetting. If this is the route we're going to be going, we need to have a more robust outreach to the public so that people know that in the course of trying to participate with a multi-hour city council meeting, planning commission meeting, that the public that is coming in on devices, cell phones, tablets, laptops, et cetera, et cetera, that they are taking the risk that they may not be able to participate in city executive functions if it's been deemed that they're not. They have no internet access. I find this very concerning. Thank you.

Thank you, Jennifer. Mayor, no additional requests to speak on this item.

Okay, for purposes of deliberation, do I have a motion for this item?

I'm happy to move.

Yeah, second. The recommended action. Okay, so the Vice Mayor moved and Council Member Wong seconded.

Yeah, second. I do have a clarifying question. Is that okay to do now?

Absolutely. I've ordered Council Member Wong, Vice Mayor Chau, Council Member Fruitt.

I believe our caller, Jennifer Griffin, was asking about her internet service. And if a system-wide service went out, this bill only applies to our broadcast. Is that correct? I just wanted to get a clarification. Like our ability to broadcast, not anyone else's ability to receive.

That's true.

Okay, cool. Just wanted to clarify that. So hopefully Jennifer's listening.

Thank you, Vice Mayor Chao. So yeah, I see that the policy does say the meeting shall remain in recess for at least one hour or until the service is restored, whichever occurs first. Yeah, that makes sense. I have a question about 4.1.3 regarding the closed session. It says the legislative body may convene in closed session during recess if otherwise authorized by law. So this means if we are having closed session which has a hybrid public comment and then that somehow was interrupted the legislative body can continue that closed session?

That's not how I read that. I don't think it applies to... Basically what it means to me is if the service goes out during the period of time that we're waiting while staff is attempting to reconnect, the council can have a closed session meeting, which seems odd to me because you either plan a closed session or you don't plan a closed session.

That's why I read it as... If otherwise authorized by law means if the matter is authorized by law to be permitted in closed session, we can have that closed session meeting.

That's if we needed a closed session and we had agendized a closed session, let's say for later at the end of the public session meeting and all of a sudden the public session meeting had to be paused, then we could conduct

The agenda is the closed session items. Correct. Oh, I see. This is a little confusing here. I wonder if we might clarify that. Another comment is. Oh, you mean in the policy? Yeah, the policy, yeah. And another comment is I hope to amend the policy to say that we will post a message on the city homepage about the status of any remote meeting that's interrupted, so that the public can easily check the city homepage. Okay, council meeting is reconvened, and in case they still couldn't get out, might be their own internet issue, because how would they know, right? It could be an area-wide internet issue that maybe the city has recovered, but not them, and they can easily check the homepage to know the status.

So I would want to check in with the city manager whether that's something that can be done.

My first initial thought on this is because it's something that we're not planning for We could probably put a notice on the YouTube channel where people are watching. It's going to take I'm not sure if we can do it live during a meeting because web page updates are done by my communication team I'll have to have them on on call basically more convenient, but I

an easy location for people to find.

I understand, but yeah, that's gonna require a lot of staff time to be present and watching every meeting to be able to put it on our website.

No, I think what I mean is every meeting usually has a city clerk or the staff liaison, right? So as long as, in case of any interruption, maybe IT can provide an easy way to update

I can ask if there's an easy way to update, but I know we still.

Maybe someone just need to fill out a Google form or something. I'll look into it. Yeah, you can come back with some suggestions. That would be nice.

Yeah. I'll look into it. I just, it doesn't sound easy right now in my mind, but I'll check with IT. Yeah.

Council Member Schoon.

So I don't know if SP-707 requires it, but we do have a rather lengthy series of admonitions at the very beginning of our agendas. Could we add to the agenda at least a synopsis of how this is intended to work in the event that we do lose the service? That way, at least in the agenda, it's there. you're on notice as a member of the public, hey, this connection could be lost and council might choose to continue moving forward with the meeting. It seems to do.

Yes, we could do that. Okay. Yeah. Okay.

And my only comment is that currently when we've had a break in the transmission, it's been posted by staff on the YouTube feed, so people are able to see that. And I think most people, that would be where they would look if they're trying to watch the council meeting. And I see next, Council Member Hwang.

Yeah, I was just going to add, I mean, we have emergency broadcast things. When we have an emergency, it's the same thing. We just use the same mechanism. And I see Terry in the back nodding her head. That might be a way to do that. So just save you some time. Don't need additional staff time for that.

Can you call a question? Yeah, I'm still seeing some. Are these relics? Yeah, you can take. All right. Thank you. Yeah. Thank you. Madam City Clerk, will you please set the voting panel lights and conduct the vote?

Can I ask one more question? So because I got this comment from the public about whether SB 707 is applicable to school district or community college board. I believe they are not eligible. they called eligible legal body.

Eligible subsidiary bodies or perhaps eligible legislative bodies. The statute applies to both.

Only city council with population over 30,000.

For this part of 707, yes, but 707 does a lot of different things with the Brown Act and some apply much more broadly, but for this section, it's only city councils.

Okay, thank you. Madam City Clerk, have we all voted? Vice, yeah. Okay. Motion carries unanimously. All right, thank you. Now we move to items removed from the consent calendar, item 13. And let's go back to that. Item 13, reappointment of the City of Cupertino's Bike Ped Commission representative, Hervé Marcy, to the Santa Clara County VTA BPAC, Bike Ped Advisory Committee. Do we have a presentation, Madam City Manager?

No, Mayor, we don't have a presentation, but we have Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works, available if there's any questions on this item.

Okay, and the recommended action is to reappoint Bicycle Pedestrian Commissioner Hervé Marcy as the city's representative to VTA BPAC for the upcoming term. So, Council Member Hwang, you pulled the item. Would you like to discuss it?

Yeah, we've been talking to a number of residents over the last two to three months about how we're getting comments about ATP, comments about bike ped, comments about where we are with bike lanes in general. And I was curious to understand why this individual was chosen again to represent ATP. the city and the BPAC because based on the votes, based on the voting records, based on the comments that we've seen in some of those meetings, it may not necessarily represent all of the city's views and where we are today. So I was kind of curious as to why the staff made that recommendation.

THE RECOMMENDATION WAS MADE BY THE BICYCLE PEDESTRIAN COMMISSION THROUGH A UNANIMOUS VOTE. MY UNDERSTANDING IS FOUR OF THE FIVE COMMISSIONERS ARE NOT AVAILABLE TO BE ABLE TO ATTEND THOSE MEETINGS FOR THE FORESEEABLE FUTURE. AND HARVEY WAS ABLE TO ATTEND THOSE. SO HE DID SAY HE COULD DO THAT.

THAT'S GREAT. I THINK THE CLARIFICATION IS IMPORTANT BECAUSE SOMEONE ON THE PUBLIC WANTED TO PULL THAT.

So I'm not seeing any further hands raised by members of the council Vice mayor Yeah, thank you I do see that it's a unanimous vote by the backpack Commission to appoint a B pack just trying to understand what does a What does this representative do? What kind of things they vote on? Does that have to be something the council or the commission has taken a position on for them to be able to vote?

Not necessarily. The purpose of the VPAC is to provide expertise and guidance to the board on promoting and enhancing non-motorized transportation opportunities throughout Santa Clara County and serves as a liaison between the VTA and the Member Agency Bike Ped Commission. So basically, they provide expertise and guidance and they're a liaison between the VPAC and our Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.

Okay, so it's therefore the backpack commissions choose the representative.

Per the VTA bylaws, it must be a member of the bicycle pedestrian commission if the city has a bicycle pedestrian commission.

So do we currently have any policy on whether someone representing the bicycle backpack commission can vote on in case they have to take position on any policy issue? Is there, for example, I see it on the Legislative Action Committee of Cities Association, right? So a lot of times, some of the representative from a certain city says, oh, they have to recuse under a certain state bill that we are looking at because their legislative platform does not cover that particular bill. Or they, yeah, so I do wonder for BPAC, I don't know what kind of things that they vote on with BPAC.

Yeah, I can't provide you all a list of all the items that they vote on, but again, the point of the BPAC representative is to provide some guidance and general expertise, their expertise on the subject matter.

So these are not staff members. So these are community members from commission. Are they providing expertise or are they providing their representation for Cupertino residents? I'm confused here. Are they supposed to represent themselves as an expert or they should represent the Cupertino residents?

I think it's a bit of both but mostly of themselves as an expert I think is part of it but they are required to be a member of the agency the lead agency which is a in this case a member of Cupertino whether a resident or somebody works in Cupertino.

Are they required to represent for example a majority opinion of the BPAC on certain matters or there is no.

I can't get into every subject that they've talked about typically they're providing guidance and expertise.

For example, I think we had the issue of the bus stop in the middle of the floating islands, right? Then I think there is dividing opinion, even for bicyclists, every bicyclist on the floating island. So how would a representative take a decision, make a recommendation on this particular issue? I'm not sure that that issue would be coming up to the be back now not coming up but then as an example what they then vote based on. They bring the issue back to the back of had commission to have a discussion before they make a remain recommendation for the circumstances of Cupertino or would they just represent their own personal opinion based on. which may or may not be applicable to Cupertino.

I think we're talking about a hypothetical, and I could try and get some, we could go through old agendas to see what the topics are, but typically their responsibilities provide expertise and guidance.

I think this is a pretty practical example, which VTA has given the CT recommendation on, and then they, I heard they were that recommendation, but I haven't seen any written records that they are not recommending anymore, so this is, I think, an issue. It's a good example on trying to understand the process or the decision-making process of this representative.

Yeah, and keep in mind the BPAC is an advisory committee to the board, so they do not have, they are not voting on anything. They're providing advice, I should say.

But they still vote on their advice, just like commission. They still vote on the recommendation to the board.

Correct. They vote on the advice, yes.

Yeah, so I'm trying to understand how a representative, are they representing the city or themselves as an expert?

They are representing the city and providing expertise and guidance.

Okay, thank you. Council Member Wong?

Yeah, I was wondering if there's a way that we can stipulate that any votes actually do reflect the city's opinion or the loyalties do sit with the city as opposed to the individual's opinion. Is there a way to do that? Or is that the way the committee set up? Just a clarification of Vice Mayor Chow's question.

I'm not sure that that person would necessarily know the position of the city because the city would need to take action on it. I mean the council. So it's difficult.

I think in that case in the person to use that's usually what the council member did and at the city's Association we if the city doesn't have a clear position on the issue. They recuse or is this the issue might be have completely opinion from the city you recuse. But then it seems we don't have a clear guidance. Thank you, Vice Mayor.

You're out of turn. Council Member Wong has the floor.

I'm done. Sorry. I'll clear it up.

Okay. Thank you. Vice Mayor?

Sorry. Yeah. All yours. Yeah. I was just trying to clarify.

Okay. I'm done. Yeah. Thank you. Madam City Clerk, do we have any members of the public who'd like to speak on this item? No, Mayor. I see no requests to speak. All right. Thank you, so do we have a motion on the recommended action?

I'll move the recommended action.

Moore second. Seeing no request to speak, Madam City Clerk, will you please set the voting lights and we will prepare to vote.

The motion carries with Wong voting no.

Okay, so we have finished all of our action items. We have informational items which you may peruse on your own. We will be looking at the TBD items in the upcoming meetings, so please, if you have some other agenda TBD items that you would like added, please do so. And before we conclude tonight, I would like to honor a very important figure in American history and a Cupertino resident, Dr. Clarence B. Jones. As the personal attorney and speechwriter to Martin Luther King, Jr., Dr. Jones helped craft the opening paragraphs of the I Have a Dream speech, When Martin Luther King, Jr. was jailed in Birmingham in 1963, it was Dr. Jones who smuggled his handwritten notes out of that cell, giving the world the letter from Birmingham jail. In his later years, he continued to serve as a scholar in residence at Stanford University's Martin Luther King, Jr. Research and Education Institute, sharing his witness to history with the next generation. In 2024, President Biden awarded him the Presidential Medal of Freedom, the nation's highest civilian honor. Yet through it all, he chose to spend his final years right here as our neighbor, passing away peacefully in Cupertino on May 22nd at the age of 95. His legacy is immortal, as is his impact. This meeting stands adjourned in honor of Dr. Clarence B. Jones.

Thank you.