CC 05-20-2025 Oral Communications (added 5-20-25)Written Comments
received for
Oral Communications
(Non-Agenda Items)
Note: Presentations, Supplemental Reports, and Written Communications for
agenda-related items are located in the Meeting Details under the specific
Agenda Item Number.
For additional details on submitting written comments, please visit the Public
Comments on the City Council Agenda page on the City website.
From:Ping Gao
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:Concerned of Intersection Change
Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 2:48:32 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,
This is Ping, an 18-year Cupertino resident.
I'm writing to you today to express my deep concern about the potential intersection changes
of Steven Creek Blvd and Blaney, De Anza, Bandley, Stelling, Mary and Bubb which three
city council members Mohan, Kitty and Fruen have voted for:
I have witnessed the intersection change of Stevens Creek Blvd and Wolfe, where a right-turn
lane disappeared, and one lane disappeared on Stevens Creek Blvd westbound. I'm driving
through that intersection commuting to work. I know how much traffic is on that section.
Well, I get it that you want to make the intersection safer for bikers, at the cost of increased
traffic. Fine....
Last year, the same change was made to De Anza and Pacifica, and this is really causing a
traffic gridlock and I was very very frustrated every time I drove through that intersection.
Again, a right turn lane disappeared and it took forever for the cars to turn right from Pacifica
westbound onto De Anza northbound. In addition to this painful right turn experience, I didn't
see how this change would make bikers safer either. Say, if a biker is biking on Pacifica
westbound, and a car is also driving on Pacifica eastbound and wants to turn right. When the
light turns green, both drivers and the bikers will be reluctant to go because they don't know
who will go first. In the old intersection design, right turn vehicles had their dedicated lane,
and it made a very clear signal to the biker that the car wanted to turn right. Biker also
has his/her own lane moving forward. Now, the car and the biker are just sharing the same
lane without knowing who will go first and need a proper "handshake" (eye contact) to decide
who goes first. If it's a reckless driver, it could cause danger to the biker.
As I have mentioned many times before, could you please stop wasting money on changing
these intersections and cause more traffic gridlock in the city? Please go take a look at these
intersections at rush hour yourselves and make sensible decisions. Please keep the major road
as they are which is important to relieve traffic during rush hours. It is not a good idea to
change every road for bike lane use and cause more traffic, unless the road itself is wide
enough (such as San Thomas's bike lane: it is a separate bike lane because the San Thomas has
widened during the change, which makes more sense.)
If possible, I strongly encourage the city council to have a survey of the worst intersections in
the city and let residents voice their opinions, before you make any changes to the
intersections.
Thank you for your time and patience reading my email. Please keep it as a record.
Thanks and regards,
Ping
From:Venkat Ranganathan
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Stevens Creek Corridor Class IV Bikeway – Phase 2A
Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 1:42:17 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 Clerk,
Please include the below in written communications for the upcoming council meeting.
Dear City Council, City Manager, and City Clerk
As a resident, who lives on a road feeding into Steven's Creek, I oppose the current
proposal for the Stevens Creek Corridor Class IV Bikeway – Phase 2A project due to its
potential to exacerbate vehicular congestion along a critical east-west artery in Cupertino.
The proposed reduction of vehicular lanes to accommodate protected bike paths may
create bottlenecks, particularly at intersections already experiencing delays. Commuters,
parents, and school buses could face longer travel times and increased frustration.
I oppose the Stevens Creek Corridor Class IV Bikeway – Phase 2A as it impacts vehicular
lanes on one of Cupertino’s busiest corridors, worsening traffic congestion, increasing
delays for school routes and emergency vehicles, and compounding frustration for majority
who drive. While improving cyclist safety is very important, it is irresponsible to prioritize the
demands of vocal bike advocacy groups over the needs of thousands of daily commuters.
The City’s own reports cite 15 serious injuries and fatalities over a decade, yet the
response should be balanced—not punitive to drivers. Installing concrete barriers and
narrowing lanes introduce new hazards: limited turning space for buses and delivery trucks,
blind spots at driveways, and danger at merging zones. These changes may increase
accident risk rather than reduce it.
City leaders must listen to residents—not just well-funded lobbying groups—before
implementing changes that disrupt traffic and compromise road usability.
Moreover, the project's estimated cost of $1.6 million for Phase 2A, funded through the City
General Fund and the One Bay Area Cycle 2 Grant Program , raises concerns about the
allocation of resources. The city should consider whether these funds could be better
utilized to improve existing infrastructure without compromising vehicular traffic flow.
Another issue I have is that this project is funded, design complete, but no where to find the
design on the city's website.
In conclusion, while the safety of cyclists is paramount, the potential negative impact on
vehicular traffic and the broader community warrants a reevaluation of the Stevens Creek
Corridor Class IV Bikeway – Phase 2A project.
1. Grants and Contract Narrowly Approved for Next Phase of Stevens Creek Protected
Lanes
2. Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor - draft VISION STUDY
Thanks
Venkat Ranganathan
Get Outlook for Android
From:Deepa Mahendraker
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Benjamin Fu
Subject:Stop efforts to ban gas appliances in Cupertino
Date:Tuesday, May 20, 2025 12:46:05 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 Clerk,
Would you please include in written communications for the 05/20/25 city council meeting.
Dear Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I’m writing to ask the City to stop efforts to ban gas appliances in Cupertino.
The 9th Circuit Court ruled against Berkeley’s similar ban, saying federal law overrides such local ordinances.
Several cities — including Santa Rosa, Sunnyvale, and San Mateo County — have already backed off in response.
Cupertino should not waste resources on a legally risky policy. Also, gas cooking is essential to many in our
community, especially Asian and Indian households and restaurants. Banning it ignores cultural needs and everyday
realities.
Please focus instead on what residents are asking for: reducing crime, improving traffic flow and road safety,
enhancing our parks, hosting more community events and festivals, simplifying permit processes, and avoiding new
ordinances that create unnecessary burdens for residents and businesses.
Thank you,
Deepa Mahendraker
Cupertino resident
Sent from my iPhone
From:Greg Shtilman
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Benjamin Fu
Subject:Please don"t ban gas appliances in Cupertino
Date:Monday, May 19, 2025 11:07:42 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.
Dear City Clerk,
Would you please include in written communications for the 05/20/25 city council meeting.
Dear Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I’m writing to ask the City to stop efforts to ban gas appliances in Cupertino.
The 9th Circuit Court ruled against Berkeley’s similar ban, saying federal law overrides such
local ordinances. Several cities — including Santa Rosa, Sunnyvale, and San Mateo County
— have already backed off in response.
Cupertino should not waste resources on a legally risky policy.
Gas cooking is essential to many in our communities and provides a lifeline during power
outages in the days of worsening quality of service PG&E has been providing. In 2022 and
2023 we lost power for nearly 24 hours one time, and over 48 hours another time. Our friends
and neighbors were without power for over a week. This was a literal life saver for many of
them since they could cook and heat water to make tea/coffee, and even have some warm
water for washing with babies & elderly, particularly important on cold winter days.
In fact, we have considered buying a natural gas generator for my elderly parents to help them
cope on very cold and very hot days which are frequently when power outages are most likely.
Gradually removing gas appliances for everyone would replace one problem with another.
Only doing it for new homeowners won't be equitable & will discourage some from buying in
Cupertino lowering our real estate values.
Please focus on what residents are asking for: reducing crime, improving traffic flow and road
safety, enhancing our parks, building more trails, hosting more community events and
festivals, simplifying permit processes, and avoiding new ordinances that create unnecessary
burdens for residents and businesses.
Thank you,
Greg Shtilman
Long time Cupertino resident
From:Santosh Rao
To:City Council; City Clerk; Kristina Alfaro; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Cupertino Budget: Restore Fiscal Discipline, Reverse Resident Fee Increases, and Rebuild Reserves
Date:Monday, May 19, 2025 9:25:50 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 Clerk,
Would you please include the below in written communications for the 05/20/25 city council
meeting. Thank you.
[Writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident]
Subject: Cupertino Budget: Restore Fiscal Discipline, Reverse Resident
Fee Increases, and Rebuild Reserves
Dear Mayor Chao and Cupertino City Council,
I am writing as a concerned resident who has reviewed the city’s most
recent projected budgets and is alarmed by the current fiscal trajectory. The
decisions reflected in the budget show a clear and growing imbalance that
must be addressed urgently to protect the city’s long-term financial health
and fairness to residents.
Declining General Fund Reserves
Cupertino’s General Fund reserves have been shrinking—a sharp departure
from the strong fiscal position the city historically maintained. These
reserves are essential for stability and risk management, yet they continue
to erode without a comprehensive plan to rebuild them. I find this deeply
troubling.
Expenses Now Exceed Revenues
The budget shows that the city is spending more than it is bringing in. This
is a fundamental red flag. While revenue has risen on paper, it appears to be
propped up by questionable policies rather than sustainable growth. At the
same time, special project funding continues to expand, even as the city’s
fiscal foundation weakens.
Resident Fee Hikes Mask Deeper Budget Issues
I am particularly concerned that revenue increases mat potentially be the
result of the user cost recovery policy, enacted by the prior council majority
last year, which has led to steep increases in permit and service fees for
residents, ranging from 10% to 75%, while some business-related fees have
been reduced or waived entirely. This shift is unfair, regressive, and out of
line with Cupertino’s values. The budget should not be balanced on the
backs of residents.
My Requests to the City Council
1. Reverse the User Cost Recovery Policy
I strongly urge the Council to immediately reverse this policy and
reject any additional fee increases on residents this year. Burdening
homeowners with rising costs while reducing costs for businesses is
inequitable and shortsighted.
2. Make Deeper Cuts in the Capital Improvement Plan (CIP). I ask that
the Council conduct a second round of deep cuts to the CIP to
preserve core services and rebuild General Fund reserves to
responsible levels.
3. Reduce Expenses to Fall Below Revenues Without Relying on
Resident Fees. I request that the city develop a revised budget that
shows expenses coming in below revenues, excluding the artificial
revenue boost from increased resident fees. This will provide an
honest picture of the city’s financial structure.
4. Provide a Revenue Forecast Without the User Fee Hike Policy. I ask
that the Council direct staff to provide a transparent forecast of
revenues assuming the user cost recovery policy is rolled back. This
forecast should also factor in an expected decline in Transient
Occupancy Tax (TOT) revenue due to weakening demand in the
hospitality sector. The city must prepare for reduced hotel tax income
and avoid overestimating future revenues.
5. Reduce Non-Critical Staffing and Limit Long-Term Liabilities. I
encourage the city to reduce headcount in non-critical, non-
community-facing departments, such as in the City Manager’s Office
and Economic Development, and to replace some roles with contract
staff where appropriate. Contract roles do not carry the same long-
term pension and healthcare obligations and can help control costs.
6. Strengthen Staffing for Critical Community Services. Conversely, I
urge the city to increase staffing for key community-facing roles such
as planners, inspectors, and permit processors, and to reduce reliance
on outside contractors in these areas. These functions are essential to
both residents and developers and deserve investment.
Cupertino is at a crossroads. I believe it is time to take clear, decisive action
to correct course: stop overspending, rebuild reserves, eliminate regressive
fee policies, and prioritize services that directly benefit the community.
Please bring these concerns into public discussion and provide residents
with an honest and responsible plan for Cupertino’s fiscal future.
Sincerely,
San Rao (on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident, voter and
taxpayer)
From:Santosh Rao
To:City Clerk; City Council; Tina Kapoor; Benjamin Fu
Subject:Request to Halt Gas-to-Electric Appliance Ordinance Effort
Date:Monday, May 19, 2025 8:16:52 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.
[Writing on behalf of myself, as a Cupertino resident, voter and taxpayer.]
Dear City Clerk,
Would you please include in written communications for the 05/20/25 city
council meeting.
Dear Mayor Liang Chao and Cupertino City Council Members,
I respectfully request that the Council and Mayor direct staff to halt the initiative
on electrification and attempts to ban gas appliances in Cupertino.
I would like to remind the Council that the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth
Circuit has already ruled against a similar ordinance passed by the City of
Berkeley, citing federal preemption under the Energy Policy and Conservation
Act. Pursuing a similar path in Cupertino could expose the City to unnecessary
legal challenges.
It is also important to consider the unique demographic needs of Cupertino.
Nearly 70% of our residents are of Asian descent, and gas appliances are essential
for traditional Asian and Indian cooking methods, both in homes and in our
restaurants. Attempts to limit or ban gas usage do not reflect the cultural realities
or culinary practices of a significant portion of our community.
Given that this effort was not approved through the CWP process, I urge the
Council to cancel it immediately and focus on initiatives that reflect Council
direction and community priorities.
Thank you for your attention to this matter and for your continued commitment to
thoughtful governance and cultural inclusivity.
Sincerely,
San Rao (Cupertino resident and voter)
——————————
Court ruling:
California Restaurant Association v. City of Berkeley (2023): On April 17,
2023, the 9th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals overturned Berkeley's 2019 ordinance
that banned natural gas piping in new construction. The court ruled that the
federal Energy Policy and Conservation Act preempts local regulations that
effectively ban gas appliances.
Sonoma County's Suspension of Natural Gas Ban (2024): Following the 9th
Circuit's decision, Sonoma County suspended its prohibition on natural gas
appliances in new construction in August 2024, acknowledging that federal law
overrides such local bans.
Santa Rosa: In May 2024, Santa Rosa suspended enforcement of its all-electric
code for new residential constructions.
Sunnyvale: In May 2024, Sunnyvale suspended its natural gas ban to avoid
potential litigation, acknowledging that its regulations were structured differently
from Berkeley's.
San Mateo County: In May 2024, San Mateo County paused its efforts to
promote all-electric buildings in response to the legal developments.
San Luis Obispo:
April 18, 2023: The City Council voted unanimously to suspend its natural
gas ban for new construction in response to the appellate court's ruling
against Berkeley's similar ordinance. Cal Coast News
July 18, 2023: The city announced a pause in enforcing its all-electric new
buildings ordinance, allowing permits for mixed-fuel buildings until further
notice.
——————————-
City communications on the project:
“
The City of Cupertino is considering a policy to transition home appliances
and equipment that use natural gas to those that use electricity. This
transition is essential for fighting climate change.
To help inform and guide this draft policy, we invite you to share your
knowledge, experience, and opinions on home electrification. This refers
to using electric appliances and equipment, such as electric panel
upgrades, induction cooktops, heat pump water heaters, and heat pump
air conditioning and heating systems.
What could this policy look like?
The City is carefully considering options for what is best for our
community and is limited on what we can do legally. Here are a few
concepts:
Option 1: (most ambitious) Require homes to meet a whole-house
energy efficiency standard.
Option 2: (somewhat ambitious)Require an “electric-ready” home
(panel upgrade and wiring) and allow for the switch from gas to
electric to happen as appliances need replacing.
Option 3: (least ambitious) Phase in requirements over time, e.g.
require “electric-ready” homes now and a stricter energy efficiency
standard in a few years.
Option 4: (not ambitious) Support the policies and programs created
by state and regional districts and consider local policy at a later
date.
Each of these options comes with some concerns and challenges to
overcome. We need your help planning the best path for Cupertino.
“
https://engagecupertino.org/goelectricsurvey?tool=survey_tool#tool_tab
From:Santosh Rao
To:City Clerk; Liang Chao
Subject:Fw: Written communications not consolidated.
Date:Monday, May 19, 2025 8:08:20 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 Clerk,
Would you please include the below in written communications for the 05/20/25 city council
meeting. Thank you.
Thanks,
Santosh Rao
Begin forwarded message:
On Wednesday, May 14, 2025, 11:14 PM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear All,
Please do not change long standing practices around how council (and
commission) materials are posted. Please maintain expiring practices. Please past
the consolidated written communications. It is too cumbersome and too many
clicks to view all written comments when posted by agenda item. A single
consolidated written communications has been a long standing practice. Please
continue the same.
Thanks,
San Rao (Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident)
On Tuesday, May 6, 2025, 4:42 PM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote:
Dear Mayor Chao and Council, City Clerk, City Manager, City CIO,
The written communications for the 05/06/25 council meeting
have not been consolidated into a single document and posted to the
city calendar.
Instead a placeholder document states that comms are under each
individual agenda item.
This change makes it extremely cumbersome to navigate even for the
most informed residents. For the rest it is a hopeless exercise.
Please revert this change. Please post consolidated written
communications as has been done for years.
Thank you.
Thanks,
San Rao (Writing on behalf of myself only, as a Cupertino resident)