The URL can be used to link to this page

CC 01-17-2023 Item No. 1 - Study Session Written CommunicationsCC 01-17-2023 Item No. 1- Study Session Consider adopting Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual Written Communications From:louise saadati To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:City Council Meeting Special Session January 17. 2023 Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 4:32:24 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. I have read through the changes proposed by the City Staff to amend our Cupertino City Council and Commission procedures and I encourage you to approve the resolution at the upcoming City Council meeting. My main additional concern is that the manual should include language stating that Councilmembers, Commisioners, Committee Members , etc as representatives of our city not be permitted to post anything on social media including NextDoor, Instagram, Facebook , etc that is unprofessional, untrue, misinformation, implied use of their power in city council to retaliate against residents who have stateddiffering opinions, stifle civil resident opinions or public discussion. Examples : “I will see you in Council” in midst of discussion of disagreement in opinion, false or misleading statement. Thank you for your service for the residents (instead of personal power), Louise Saadati Sent from my iPhone From:Rhoda Fry To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:additional comment: City Council Agenda January 17, 2022 Study Session #1 - City Council Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 4:07:25 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hi City Council, additional comment: City Council Agenda January 17, 2022 Study Session #1 - City Council Manual . . . I don’t see where I read it, but I would like to add that the Parks and Rec commission should recommend (with staff input) which fees are waived for festivals and room use. This is consistent with the Parks and Rec making community grant recommendations. The final decision should be referred to the City Council. What I had read said that staff would make a recommendation directly to the City Council. Let’s let the commissions and committees do what we’ve put them in place to do. Thanks, Rhoda Fry From:Rhoda Fry To:City Clerk; City Council Subject:City Council Agenda January 17, 2022 Study Session #1 - City Council Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 4:01:00 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council, I first started going to City Council meetings in 1987, when the City had proposed an unlawful unconstitutional tax. Fortunately, I was able to prevent it from being adopted and prevent the City from being subject to legal action. I thought those days were over and I am so very disappointed to see the proposal and the evident disdain that the staff has toward the public that it serves. It would be helpful if the document explained the motivation for the items that have been proposed and how it is different from the past. 2.1 It should be up to the City Council as to whether it wishes to have Mayors/Vice Mayors serve consecutive terms. 3. Councilmember Committees and Subcommittees - reports or minutes shall always be made in writing – regardless of whether a recommendation is made to council. It is important to have an administrative record. 4.4. This suggestion should be removed: “Former Councilmembers are not eligible for appointment to any commission or committee within four years of having served on the City Council.” If our elected officials believe that a former City Councilmember is the best suited to serve on a committee or commission, then they should be appointed to that committee. It is up to our City Council to determine who is best suited to be on a committee or commission, not City staff. 8.5 I get it. It isn’t nice for city staff to have to prepare to speak to an item on consent calendar. However, a member of the public or a city council member should be able to put an item on the regular calendar for consideration for the next meeting. It should not by default stay on consent if there is good reason to remove it. 8.6 Staff is proposing that the public speak to no more than 3 items in an agenda. This is not acceptable. The public must be allowed to speak on each agenda item. Thanks Much, Rhoda Fry --- this is part 1 --- I wanted to make sure to get this in by 4pm today!!! From:Connie Cunningham To:City Clerk; City Council; Christopher Jensen Subject:Fwd: 23-1- 17 City Council Study Session Agenda Item 1, Council Procedures Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 3:29:06 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Sending again to correct that subject line! Connie Begin forwarded message: From: Connie Cunningham <CunninghamConnieL@gmail.com> Subject: 23-27 City Council Study Session Agenda Item 1 Date: January 17, 2023 at 3:23:32 PM PST To: City Clerk Cupertino <cityclerk@cupertino.org>, "citycouncil@cupertino.org" <citycouncil@cupertino.org>, christopherj@cupertino.org Dear Mayor Wei, Vice-Mayor Mohan, and Councilmembers, City Manager and City Attorney, First, congratulations to Matt Morley as the new Assistant City Manager! I think that he will be excellent in that role. Secondly, I enthusiastically support the reform package of changes to the City Council Procedures. I have attended many Council meetings over the years. As I read the reforms I could actually feel how these changes will: 1) reduce staff work load that will allow more work to move forward on resident services 2) increase the amount of time accessible to residents to speak to Council. 3) reduce the length of meetings. Two (2) am is simply not a time when residents can attend nor is it a good time for making decisions by exhausted Councilmembers 4) clear rules make life easier for everyone—especially residents, since they less frequently interact with Council 5) take more of the politics out of day-to-day governance of the City. Good for residents who want Council to get things done. I urge you to approve Resolution No. 23-021, adopting the Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual presented by Christopher Jensen, City Attorney! Thank you for this time to comment. Connie Cunningham Housing Commission (self only) (Some edits, nice to have, but OK to do later: Suggest extending time for Oral Communications to 6-9 minutes Questions; 8.6 Are members of the public required to be residents of Cupertino for purposes of 10 minute combined time? 8.9 Define Ex Parte Contacts 9. Closed sessions: Is the public comment on the agenda items or OralCommunications? Or Both? Para 10. Censure action –is this a defined term? Also 2/3 vote is 3.35 votes. This is a little vague. Better perhaps is 3/5. Or just say a majority?)) From:Connie Cunningham To:City Clerk; City Council; Christopher Jensen Subject:23-27 City Council Study Session Agenda Item 1 Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 3:24:01 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Mayor Wei, Vice-Mayor Mohan, and Councilmembers, City Manager and City Attorney, First, congratulations to Matt Morley as the new Assistant City Manager! I think that he will be excellent in that role. Secondly, I enthusiastically support the reform package of changes to the City Council Procedures. I have attended many Council meetings over the years. As I read the reforms I could actually feel how these changes will: 1) reduce staff work load that will allow more work to move forward on resident services 2) increase the amount of time accessible to residents to speak to Council. 3) reduce the length of meetings. Two (2) am is simply not a time when residents can attend nor is it a good time for making decisions by exhausted Councilmembers 4) clear rules make life easier for everyone—especially residents, since they less frequently interact with Council 5) take more of the politics out of day-to-day governance of the City. Good for residents who want Council to get things done. I urge you to approve Resolution No. 23-021, adopting the Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual presented by Christopher Jensen, City Attorney! Thank you for this time to comment. Connie Cunningham Housing Commission (self only) (Some edits, nice to have, but OK to do later: Suggest extending time for Oral Communications to 6-9 minutes Questions; 8.6 Are members of the public required to be residents of Cupertino for purposes of 10 minute combined time? 8.9 Define Ex Parte Contacts 9. Closed sessions: Is the public comment on the agenda items or OralCommunications? Or Both? Para 10. Censure action –is this a defined term? Also 2/3 vote is 3.35 votes. This is a little vague. Better perhaps is 3/5. Or just say a majority?)) From:brkezzat@aol.com To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Attorney"s Office Subject:Seriously? Have you lost your minds? Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 3:15:28 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Council Members, I read with disbelief the proposed changes to the city council procedures and came away scratching my head believing that you must have no real notion of how democracy works. Who wrote this procedure manual, Lewis Carroll? The fundamental right of any citizen is the right to speak in a public arena voicing their views. Council members have the right to records requests-constitutional right. The public has the right to information. The only thing that this nonsense will result in is enmity, distrust, lawsuits and ridicule. Knock yourselves out. Regards, Brooke Ezzat From:Santosh Rao To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject:Written comments on 01/17 council meeting agenda #1. Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 3:12:12 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello Mayor Wei and city council, I am writing to you about agenda item 1 about Cupertino city council procedures. I note that some of the items proposed are a fairly radical overreach into the role of elected officials by un-elected city staff and administration. Specifically I write to you to request that the below items be struck out of this and the doc be re-written with these omitted. 1. Section 2.1. “The mayor and vice-mayor shall not serve consecutive terms”. 2. Section 2.2. Removal of mayor and vice-mayor from office. This should be removed. Removal is by the electorate via democratic processes not by ad hoc staff defines processes. 3. Section 4.1. Qualifications shall be set forth in municipal code. Note that commissioners are city residents. Qualifications are often learnt on the job. Requiring qualifications as defined in municipal code denies l residents the right to participate in their city democratic processes of serving on commissions. 4. Section 4.4. Former council members are not allowed to serve on commissions for upto 4 years. I request this be removed. Council members are experienced and have learnt the duties. They should be allowed to serve should they so choose. 5. Section 4.5. City clerk shall remove commission or committee members. Kindly remove this clause. It is not the job of city staff to removing serving residents of the city from appointed positions. 6. Section 4.6. Kindly remove this. There is no basis for this as there is no similar restriction on outside interests placing undue influence on city staff or council members. Commissioners should be able to exercise independent judgement while listening to input from anyone and everyone in the city. 7. Section 6.6. Kindly remove this attempt to prohibit council members from using PRA. Any and all residents of the city including council members are free to use PRA. 8. “Oral communications shall be limited to 30 minutes”. Please remove this clause. The residents have a right to speak upto 3 minutes per agenda item. 9. Section 8.5.2. Please remove this. It should be possible to remove an item from consent calendar at any time during council meeting. Thank you for taking resident input and kindly removing the above sections from the proposed draft. I further request a revised draft be shared well in advance through social media with residents and widely communicated to allow public review of the proposed changes as these affect the residents interaction with the city. Thanks, Santosh Rao From:Govind Tatachari To:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Attorney"s Office; City Clerk Cc:City Council Subject:Jan 17, 2023 Council Agenda-Item-1 : Consider adopting Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:29:14 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Management Team (City Manager Mrs. Wu, City Attorney Mr. Jensen and City Clerk Ms Squarcia), Hon Mayor Hung Wei, Vice Mayor Sheila Mohan, Council Members Liang Chao, J R Fruen, and Kitty Moore References: Staff report (including Exhibit E), Draft of the Manual and Draft Resolution No. 23-021 With utmost respect to the City Management Team and the City Council, It is very important to point out that a) Members of the public mainly focus on their family and livelihood and more so during these uncertain times. Even the voter turnout has been relatively low for many reasons. b) Members of the public have several reasons to FEAR participating in City related governing rules, meetings and matters. There are very strong reasons to refrain from and NOT provide inputs on City governance especially when it looks like a tussle between the elected council and the City management. c) It is unclear why the two page Exhibit E has ballooned into a 14-page “City Council Procedures” Manual. Due to time limitation to communicate before 3 pm today, here are my comments on Specific sections of the Draft of “City Council Procedures” Manual up to section 7.2. As time permits, I hope to send another communication with comments on the rest of the sections. (Comment and Request) 1.1 Purpose Reference Exhibit E - 2.17.0200 (Intent and Purpose) Members of the public are entitled, protected and governed by the US Constitution and prevailing Federal, State and Municipal laws. It is unclear why the phrase “Members of the public” has been included since the “City Council procedures” are designed and implemented and have always been enforced. As per constitution and prevailing laws, members of the public are entitled to and expect “communication, understanding, fairness and trust” be promoted by those who govern. (Request for change) please remove the phrase “members of the public” (Comment) 1.2 Values Those who govern must show respect to the members of the public during the conduct of the City business including oral communications and public comment period. (Few years ago, an ex-Mayor called a member of the public “Liar” from the Dais. Such behavior from those who govern is uncalled for and unwarranted). (Request for inclusion) 1.4 California Public Records Act Reference: https://www.sos.ca.gov/archives/laws The public’s right to access public records is paramount and part of the governing law. Every council member is entitled to the same rights as “the members of the public” whom they serve. (Request for change) 2.2 Removal of Mayor and Vice-Mayor Unless in case of a criminal or highly egregious behavior or conduct, the Mayor and Vice- Mayor should be given one warning and advised of the proposed cause before considering removal. (Requests for change) 4.3 Performance Expectations Request1: Request mandatory training to include ethics and anti-harassment, Brown Act, California Public Records Act, and Rosenberg’s Rules of Order. Request2: Two different dates for mandatory training (if a commissioner is unable to attend training on one of the dates). (Request for change) 6.5 Decorum Please include “the City management and Staff, the elected Council members, Vice-Mayor and Mayor must treat all members of the public with dignity, courtesy, and respect.” (Comment and Change Request) 6.6 Councilmember Access to information Exhibit E - 2.17.0400 (Staff) Also see (Request for inclusion) 1.4 California Public Records Act Why? It is unclear how 2.17.043 is deficient. It has served the needs of California Public Records Act and has not been challenged. (Change Request) Please retain 2.17.043 ASIS. Please remove 6.6 Councilmember Access to information. (Comment and Request for Change) 7.1 Future Agenda Items * There is already a RULE on how to request and get an item to be added to a future agenda for Council action. This has been in practice for many years. (Remove) Any item may be removed for the future agenda list by a majority of the City council. (Comment and Request for removal) 7.2 Preparation of Agenda Why? The Council is elected by the public and must retain all powers accorded to them. There is no need to curtail, diminish or remove any powers accorded to them. (Request for removal) Please retain 2.17.031 ASIS. Please remove 7.2 Preparation of Agenda Thank you for your kind and thoughtful consideration. Sincerely, Govind Tatachari Cupertino Resident PS: I seek your indulgence and pardon if any part of this communication seems inappropriate. From:Caryl Gorska To:Kirsten Squarcia; Hung Wei Cc:Sheila Mohan; J.R Fruen; Kitty Moore; Liang Chao Subject:Please do not vote on items during Study Session Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 1:57:31 PM Attachments:Please do not vote on items during Study Session.msg CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. From:Peggy Griffin To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:2023-01-07 CC Meeting Agenda Item1 - Definitions of agenda section content is missing Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 12:23:42 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Reference: Att B – Draft City Council Procedures Manual Page 9, Section 8.4 Order of Business Dear City Council, This Section 8.4 of the Draft City Council Procedures Manual listed above lists the agenda sections but does not define what goes in each. Specifically: 1. What goes under Consent Calendar? a. Currently, in today’s 1-17-2023 agenda items 6-26 (20 items out of 28) are under Consent! b. 20 items is a lot of information that the public will not have the ability to pull, have discussed in public, comment on in any kind of detail if at all, etc. c. BUT your meetings will end at 11pm. In fact, you can probably go home by 9 AND if it’s not pulled you don’t have to read it. Just rubber stamp it. Gradually, since it’s not discussed/pulled/read, less and less information can be provided. 2. What goes under Action Calendar? 3. Where are first and second readings? 4. Where is the continuation of Oral Communication? Democracy takes time and effort from both the Public and those they elected. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin From:Tessa Parish To:City Attorney"s Office; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk Subject:City of Cupertino City Council Procedure Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 11:47:35 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Mr. Jensen & City Manager Wu, I am writing to you about the draft version of the proposed Procedure Manual. Purposely addressing you as the originators of the proposal according to the opening letter. 1. I am deeply concerned about the power to have an ELECTED Official voted out of office. It is my understanding that any elected official cannot be removed with a vote. These were elected by the people. What if you get 4 members of opposing views and they decide to remove a good council member. The Constitution provides that “[t]he President, Vice President, and ”“all civil Officers”“ of the United States” are subject to removal from office upon impeachment and conviction.1 However, neither the text nor early historical sources precisely delineate who qualifies as a “civil officer.” ref. https://constitution.congress.gov/browse/essay/artII-S4- 2/ALDE_00000689/#:~:text=Article%20II%2C%20Section%204%3A,other%20high%20Crimes%20and%20Misdemeanors. Though this is mainly for the House and Senate, it does state "all civil officers" 2. In addition, the manual does not specify reasons for removal nor proper procedure. Nor attempt to correct the wrong. It seems to be without cause. I would like to see a list of violations that warrant removal and a list of actions to try to address them before the 72 hours of removal. Any Justice action (as this seems to be) should have proper notice, otherwise it violates the rights of the person to be given proper notice and breaks Public Confidence in the Rule of Law. "Rule of law is a principle under which all persons, institutions, and entities are accountable to laws that are: Publicly promulgated. Equally enforced. Independently adjudicated. I believe there MUST be very clear violations, warnings and gradient discipline leading to removal of an elected official. 3. The restriction on public comments is also contrary to the intention of the government to be "for the people" if the people are not allowed to speak beyond a certain time. NO other Council has had such restrictions. They limit the time under special circumstances. I urge you to remove the ability to "Vote" any public officer from officer, commissioner. 4. Likewise, I urge you to specify cause for removal commissioners and committee members. There is no job stability in a government removal without specific, written and known cause. 5. The letter states this is similar to other cities' procedures. Which cities? did they verify their actions against the Constitution and proper City Governance. Thank you for your consideration in the matter. Sorry for the short notice but on a holidays weekend, I had not read this til last night. Tessa Parish Resident of Cupertino From:Liana Crabtree To:Hung Wei; Sheila Mohan; Liang Chao; J.R Fruen; Kitty Moore Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Attorney"s Office Subject:Written Communication, 1/17/2023 Special Meeting of the City Council, Agenda Item 1, Consider adopting Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 7:33:48 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Honorable Mayor Wei, Vice Mayor Mohan, Council Members Chao, Fruen, and Moore: Please include this letter as written communication for Agenda Item 1 “Consider adopting Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual” for the 1/17/2023 Special Meeting of the City Council. The document “Council Procedures Manual” includes some unfortunate provisions that should be rejected by Council. Regrettable provisions include those intending to control people through the silence of dissent, the restriction of access to public information, and the transfer of authority from Council to city administrators. Silencing Dissent, examples 4.6 “Individual Councilmembers and commissioners shall have the right to attend meetings of commissions and other Cupertino governmental bodies but shall refrain from speaking or becoming involved in deliberations.” Unduly limits the Freedom of Speech of elected and appointed individuals who remain members of the public when not sitting on the dais. Consider that other jurisdictions exert no limitations on participation in Cupertino government. For example, council members from other cities can and do speak at Cupertino council meetings; commission members from other cities can speak at Cupertino council and commission meetings. Under Policy 4.6, it seems Cupertino would abide public comment from non-resident elected and appointed individuals, but deny public comment rights to its own residents. 7.1 “Any item may be removed for the future agenda items list by a majority vote of the City Council.” As stated, a minority of Council Members may add an agenda item to a future meeting agenda, but then a majority of Council Members may choose to remove the agenda item before it appears on an actual agenda. What would the process to a remove future agenda item look like? How would the public be noticed that a future agenda item was to be removed before the item were to appear on a meeting agenda? 8.1 “Oral communications shall be limited to 30 minutes.” An individual speaker has no control over how many others may also have items to present during oral communications. 8.5.2 “Any member of the City Council who would like to remove an item from the consent calendar shall notify the City Manager and the City Clerk prior to the meeting.” A Council Member could learn information during a Council meeting that would give them cause to pull an item from consent. Provision 8.5.2 prevents Council Members from acting on information learned during a Council meeting. 8.6 “No member of the public may be allocated more than a combined total of 10 minutes to speak during a Council meeting.” The public has no control over how many agenda items the Mayor and City Manager choose to include on a meeting agenda. If the meeting agenda includes oral communications and two agenda items, then 10 minutes of public comment per person is sufficient. But for longer agendas, people may have more items that may compel comment. Who benefits when people are prevented from speaking publicly by arbitrary rules? Restricting Access to Public Information, example 6.6 “No Councilmember shall circumvent the City Manager’s direction regarding a request for information by seeking information through a Public Records Act request.” It seems this policy proposal is explicitly unlawful according to CA Gov Code 7921.305.: “(a) Notwithstanding the definition of "member of the public" in Section 7920.515, an elected member or officer of any state or local agency is entitled to access to public records of that agency on the same basis as any other person. Nothing in this section shall limit the ability of elected members or officers to access public records permitted by law in the administration of their duties.” Transfer of Power from Council to City Administrators, examples 2.1 “The Mayor and Vice Mayor shall not serve consecutive terms”. Weakens the authority of the mayor and vice mayor relative to the city manager, who serves at will, possibly for years, and can only be removed through a majority vote by Council. 2.2 “The Mayor or Vice Mayor may be removed from office, for cause, by a 4/5ths affirmative vote of the members.” Who determines which mayoral actions are sufficient “for cause” justification for removal from office? The title “Council Procedures Manual” is unassuming relative to the chilling content of the document itself. Few scanning the meeting agenda would expect to see a proposal to transfer significant power from the people, including Council, to city administrators in an agenda item entitled “Consider adopting Cupertino City Council Procedures Manual”. Council Members, your terms will end. Are you prepared to have these provisions of the 2023 Cupertino Council Procedures stand as your legacy for the City and the people you represent? Sincerely, Liana Crabtree Cupertino resident From:Peggy Griffin To:City Council Cc:City Clerk Subject:2023-01-17 City Council Agenda Item1 - City Council Procedure Manual Date:Tuesday, January 17, 2023 2:29:52 AM Attachments:2023-01-17 CC Study Item1-Council Procedure Manual PG Comments.pdf CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council and Staff, I’ve spent way too much time looking at Agenda Item 1 – City Council Procedure Manual but attacking Constitutional rights hits home. This agenda item is misleading because this “City Council Procedure Manual” impacts the public tremendously and its ability to comment during City Council meetings and obtain information! The description of the agenda item gives NO CLUE this will happen – that the public will lose all these rights! I’ve attached my detailed notes but some of the very important issues are below. Impacts to the PUBLIC directly are: 1. Oral Communications will only be allowed for 30 minutes. It’s not clear that the leftover people will be allowed to speak at all. 2. Public limited to a TOTAL MAX of 10 minutes to speak during a meeting. If you use 3 minutes on an agenda item then it means you can only speak on 2 more plus 1 minute for say maybe Oral Communications. 3. Public can no longer combine their minutes except if there are 5 or more people then you can have 10 minutes. If you have 2, 3 or 4 people – tough. You all will have to use your individual time. 4. Public can no longer pull a Consent Item and there is a lot placed under Consent these days! It’s unclear when you would be allowed to speak on a Consent item. It appears you might have “some time” but you’ll have to speak to all the consent items you’re interested in, all at once, but no additional information or discussion will happen. They will just pass them all. 5. Staff Reports will no longer have “Background” or “Discussion” sections to provide an overview/context and history. 6. Generic agenda formats will no longer have “FIRST READING…”, “SECOND READING…” sections Impacts to what an individual Council Member can do: 1. There’s the ability to remove a Mayor or Vice Mayor without giving them 1 official warning. Seems very threatening. 2. It prevents a City Council Member from doing a Public Records Request. 3. Council Members no longer can pull a Consent Item during the meeting. It must be done in advance of the meeting. 4. Any 2 Council Members can put an item on the agenda but then both the majority council or the City Manager can come back and remove the item from ever appearing on the agenda! So, allowing 2 members to attempt to put an item on the agenda is a moot point. 5. Provides more power to the City Manager to not provide information requested by a Council Member. Eliminating rights, reducing transparency and censoring both the public and Council Members is not the legacy you want for your term in office! Please correct these issues. Remember, one day you’ll be “the Public”! Attached are my section-by-section details. Sincerely, Peggy Griffin From:Peggy Griffin To:Christopher Jensen; Pamela Wu Cc:City Clerk; City Council; City Attorney"s Office Subject:2023-01-17 City Council STUDY SESSION Re-notice Agenda Item 1 - Misleading the public! Date:Monday, January 16, 2023 12:44:18 PM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Attorney Jensen, City Manager Wu and Mayor Wei, I have regularly attended City Council meetings and commission meetings for over 10 years (probably 20) and I find the 1-17-2023 City Council Study Session Agenda for Item 1 extremely misleading and should be re-noticed to clarify what is actually being done for the following reasons: REASON 1 - Item #1 is listed under STUDY SESSION, not a regular meeting. Study Sessions have been items where a topic or proposed action is presented by the staff then discussed and input provided by the Council and the Public with the understanding that NO OFFICIAL ACTION will be taken by Council. The Council gives direction and the item comes back later as a regular meeting agenda item. There is not voting. YET, this agenda item says the Council’s action is to APPROVE the Resolution! Many people skip attending a Study Session due to work, time commitments, etc. knowing that ACTION WILL NOT BE TAKEN during these sessions. Below is the wording of this agenda item – It’s misleading! Agenda items need to be clear so the public is noticed properly. REASON 2 – Attachment A – Draft Resolution states that this has been “…duly noticed regular meeting…” This is really confusing. The agenda item text says the Council will approve…adopting. It is not clear what the action is from the City Council! J Is it to vote to pass it? Is it to review the proposed draft resolution and provide input? Whatever it is, it’s NOT CLEAR! REASON 3 – There is a contradiction in the material and the agenda item. The agenda item says the Council will “approve”…”adopting”. In the Regular Meeting agenda items “approve” is used meaning a vote to do it! SUMMARY: The Council and Staff are trying to make rules clear. Please start by making the noticing of this agenda item clear to the public. Clear noticing of Council actions is required by the Brown Act. PLEASE clarify what exactly is being done during this Study Session Agenda Item Thank you, Peggy Griffin From:J Shearin To:City Clerk; City Council Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office Subject:Study Session Item 1, City Council meeting January 17: Council and Commission Procedures Date:Monday, January 16, 2023 11:10:59 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear Honorable City Council Members, Mayor Wei, with a copy to City Manager Wu: I have read through the changes proposed by the City Staff to amend our Cupertino City Council and Commission procedures and I encourage you to approve the resolution at the upcoming City Council meeting. There are three areas in which I have minor concerns, and I encourage you to address them. (1) Section 4.2 Attendance at Council Meetings states, “At least one commission member must attend City Council meetings when the commission has an item of interest on the Council agenda, so as to be available to answer Council questions.” I support this section, but I ask that the appropriate Staff Liaison notifies—via email—the entire Commission when an item of interest is placed on the City Council agenda. This will facilitate the commissions meeting this requirement. (2) Section 4.5 Removal states, “The City Clerk shall remove commission or committee members for failure to comply with attendance policies adopted in the Commission and Committee Handbook. Council retains full discretion to review commission and committee member performance and may take disciplinary action as needed, including removal from the commission or committee.” This is indeed an important consideration, but I find the word “performance” of a commission or committee member to be vague. It seems better to state this performance evaluation would be based on the requirements found in the Commissioner’s Handbook and our Ethics Code as the preceding attendance statement does. (3) Section 8.6 Public Comment states in part, “…Members of the public wishing to speak regarding an item shall submit a request to comment to the Clerk (“blue card”) or, where applicable, raise their hand in Zoom within five minutes of the time the Mayor opens public comment…” Five minutes seems too short, especially for those residents that are new to the process of speaking at City Council, are a bit reticent, or perhaps have stepped away for a moment. Nine minutes—the time for the first three speakers—would be a reasonable amount of time to end requests yet still discourage “rebuttal” speaker cards. I would also recommend that if no speaker cards are submitted at the beginning of public comment, then the public comment period should be closed at that point and should not be left open for a designated portion of time. Section 8.6 as currently written does not make that clear. (The Mayor could have the option of opening up public comment again later during the item.) As I stated above, I am greatly in support of these changes to the procedures. The changes will help to make sure that: City Council meetings are run in an efficient and responsible manner, respecting the time of all participants; Those with the power to make decisions do not have undue influence on independent commissions or staff; Everyone gets a chance to be heard, and a single person won’t dominate a discussion at City Council meetings; and Everyone, regardless of position, whether staff, council member, commissioner, or resident, is afforded proper respect for their opinion, time, and work. I appreciate your consideration of these issues I have raised and my input. Thank you for all your work on behalf of the residents of Cupertino. It is truly appreciated. Sincerely, Jennifer Shearin Cupertino resident From:Jenny Griffin To:City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com Subject:Fwd: Consent Calendar Items Date:Monday, January 16, 2023 8:53:19 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. FYI. Thank you. -------- Original Message -------- Subject: Re: Consent Calendar Items From: Jenny Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023, 8:45 AM To: hwei@cupertino.org CC: Christopher Jensen <christopherj@cupertino.org>,pamelaw@cupertino.org,Debra Nascimento <debran@cupertino.org> Thank you very much for your response. After looking at the information about the proposed City Council handbook which is being introduced in the Study Session, I am not sure what was in it originally And what was added. There probably needs to be a version that shows the difference between the Old text and the new text. Anything that was added or changed should probably be indicated With cross outs and over writing so that one can see the differences between the different versions If text. Thank you very much. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin On January 16, 2023, at 8:03 AM, Hung Wei <hwei@cupertino.org> wrote: Dear Jennifer , Thanks for your input. I'm connecting you with City Attorney Chris Jensen to respond to you on your concerns. Best regards, Hung Get Outlook for iOS Hung Wei Mayor City Council HWei@cupertino.org (408) 777-3139 From: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Sent: Monday, January 16, 2023 1:47:39 AM To: City Council <CityCouncil@cupertino.org>; City of Cupertino Planning Commission <PlanningCommission@cupertino.org>; City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.org> Cc: Jennifer Griffin <grenna5000@yahoo.com> Subject: Consent Calendar Items CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council: I am concerned that changes are being made so that the public cannot request that items on the Consent Calendar of City Council Meetings be pulled for public discussion. This ability to ask that items on the Consent Calendar be able to be discussed by the public has been a hallmark of the Cupertino public process since 2000 or before. Any attempt to take away that right could be construed as trying to eliminate the ability of the public from participating in their city government process. I am concerned that too many changes are being made in the City Council meetings in 2023. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin From:Jennifer Griffin To:City Council; City of Cupertino Planning Commission; City Clerk Cc:Jennifer Griffin Subject:Consent Calendar Items Date:Monday, January 16, 2023 1:47:49 AM CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Dear City Council: I am concerned that changes are being made so that the public cannot request that items on the Consent Calendar of City Council Meetings be pulled for public discussion. This ability to ask that items on the Consent Calendar be able to be discussed by the public has been a hallmark of the Cupertino public process since 2000 or before. Any attempt to take away that right could be construed as trying to eliminate the ability of the public from participating in their city government process. I am concerned that too many changes are being made in the City Council meetings in 2023. Sincerely, Jennifer Griffin From:Cathy Helgerson To:City Clerk Subject:Draft City of Cupertino Special Meeting Procedures Manual Draft Date:Friday, January 13, 2023 10:46:24 AM Attachments:City of Cupertino Special Meeting Procedures Manual Draft Comments.docx CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender and know the content is safe. Hello, I have attached my comments regarding the Draft on the City of Cupertino's Special Meeting Procedures Manual please see that the Council members and Staff receive my comments. Please review them and let me know if the comments will be put up on the City of Cupertino's web- site for the public to view. It would be nice to know if any of the suggestions made by me or the public have been used to and added to the Manual. Thanks, Cathy Helgerson 408-253-0490