CC 09-16-2025 Item No. 22 Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters_Written CommunicationsCC 09-16-2025
Item No. 22
Options on Commission
Oversight of
Transportation Matters
Written Communications
From:Jean Bedord
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk; David Stillman; City of Cupertino Bike and Ped
Commission; City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Agenda Item #22: Study Session on Oversight of Transportation Matters, City Council, Sept. 16, 2025
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 3:37:42 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.
Please include in public comment on this agenda item
City council,
The staff report on this item was alarming. The Planning Commission and Bike Pedestrian
Commissions have functioned effectively so drastically changing their charters makes no
sense to me. The one change that does make sense is Option #3, renaming the BPC to
"Transportation and Mobility Commission", to better reflect their city charter. The
other three options have significant shortcomings:
*Eligibility for outside funding may be significantly impacted. Cupertino has
successfully competed for funding from regional transportation agencies based on the current
commission structure. Most BPC projects have been paid for by other agencies, even Apple.
*Would require CMC modifications and increased staff time.
*Does not address the overall picture of transportation matters, which are addressed at
multiple levels:
1.City council represents the city on regional transportation bodies, such as the VTA.
Our council members need to be actively engaged in regional projects - Cupertino is a small
city, lacking resources to address larger transportation issues.
2.Planning Commission has a charter to oversee land use - the big picture, not day-to-day
community transportation concerns. Development projects are reviewed, and associated
transportation impacts are addressed with that review.
3.Bicycle Ped Commission has a safety charter for all pedestrian, bicycle and multi-modal
transportation. They handle complaints about school routes, bike racks, and small resident
concerns. Even more importantly, they work on projects to educate the public on safe driving,
safe walking (connectivity), and safe bicycling for children and adults.
4.Staff should have the authority to make minor changes to respond to community
input and data collection. Modifying the right turn on red on Stelling and McClellan is an
example of responsive changes that should not have to go through the commissions or city
council.
The current commission structure isn't broken - it could use some clarification, so Option #3,
renaming the BPC to "Transportation and Mobility Commission" is the optimal choice.
Community advocate,
Jean Bedord
From:Liang Chao
To:Public Comments
Cc:Tina Kapoor; City Clerk
Subject:Fw: Agenda Item on the Transportation Matter on the 9/16 agenda
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 12:01:15 AM
Please include this for the written communication for the 9/16 council meeting, since I thought
the public and the other Councilmembers might appreciate the information.
Thanks,
Liang
Liang Chao
Mayor
City Council
LChao@cupertino.gov
408-777-3192
From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov>
Sent: Sunday, September 14, 2025 2:57 PM
To: Seema Lindskog <seema3366@gmail.com>; greenbonneville@gmail.com
<greenbonneville@gmail.com>; harryneil1102@gmail.com <harryneil1102@gmail.com>
Subject: Agenda Item on the Transportation Matter on the 9/16 agenda
Hi,
Thank you for attending the 9/8 Mayor's Chat and asking those questions.
Although some people in the meeting were concerned and multiple of them approached me
later to ask "Are you ok?"
I personally wasn't disturbed in the least bit. To me, it was a healthy interchange in my mind,
and you guys raised valid questions, the ones that I would have raised in fact if I were in your
shoes, such as why was the item the last one, why did I extend the meeting when it was
already late, why did I cut speaker time, and who decide the order of agenda items.
And there is no other venue for such an interchange, except the Mayor's chat.
Back in 2015-2017 though, when I was in your shoes and questioning the decisions of the City
Council, unfortunately many of our valid questions were ignored and some councilmembers
refused to even meet after multiple requests.
There were no Mayor's chat or other venues at that time.
Thus, I have been contemplating my actions. I've wanted to put the discussion on
transportation matter on the agenda since June. So, I was eager to discuss it on 9/8 and eager
to hear what the other councilmembers think about the issue. Now that I reflected on my
decision. I agree with you guys. I should have just ended the meeting and continued the item to
the next meeting.
So, on the 9/8 Council agenda, I will not only reopen the public hearing, as I have said in the
Mayor's chat, I will also allow anyone to speak, regardless of whether they have spoken or not.
And I will allow 3 minutes for everyone since my policy has been to not cut the speaking time
for an agenda item and I should stick to that unless there is really an extra ordinarily many
speakers.
I have included two emails sent to staff below, where I shared similar thoughts in the past few
days:
Sep. 11 email, in response to a complaint of "disruptive meeting on Monday
09/08/2015" - to express that I thought the questions were valid and the meeting went
well in my mind.
Sep. 13 email - to propose what I hope to do for the transportation matter item for the
9/16 meeting.
Feel free to forward this email to other participants of the 9/8 Mayor's chat and others who
have spoken on 9/8 or will speak on 9/16.
I am looking forward to a good discussion on the proper decision-making process for
transportation matters in Cupertino.
Regards,
Liang
Liang Chao
Mayor
City Council
LChao@cupertino.gov
408-777-3192
From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov>
Sent: Thursday, September 11, 2025 12:52 PM
To: Floy Andrews <FloyA@cupertino.gov>; Kitty Moore <kmoore@cupertino.gov>; Tina Kapoor
<TinaK@cupertino.gov>
Subject: Re: Please Address this FW: Disruptive meeting on Monday 09/08/25 during the Mayor’s
monthly meeting.
I do not think anyone was out of line or rude in their questions at the Mayor's meeting.
They were asking questions that I would have asked if I were in their shoes. I probably would be
as passionate as they were in the tone of voice if not more so. Such as why the public speaking
time was cut to one minute. Why that item was the last item. Why we voted to extend the
meeting twice and suspend the rules of the Council procedures manual. How the order of
agenda items was determined. There are all fair questions that I think the Mayor's chat is an
appropriate venue to bring up as this is the only time we can go back and forth on such issues.
It's true that these questions on Bike Ped Commission were taking up a significant portion of
the time. We realized that and gave chances for others to bring up their issues too, but there
were few others with issues to bring up. So, we went back to the people who wish to comment
on the responsibility of the Bike Ped Commission.
Maybe people observing from the side has different perspectives. But I really didn't mind those
questions. I did remind them to not bring up the same point someone else has brought up so
we don't waste time debating the same issue. And they accepted that rule.
From: Liang Chao <LChao@cupertino.gov>
Sent: Saturday, September 13, 2025 8:54 PM
To: Tina Kapoor <TinaK@cupertino.gov>
Cc: Kirsten Squarcia <KirstenS@cupertino.gov>; Floy Andrews
<fandrews@awattorneys.com>; Kitty Moore <KMoore@cupertino.gov>
Subject: Fw: 9/16/2025 Council agenda packet - Agenda Attached
I just realized that the transportation matter item is the last item again, even though it was
continued feom the last meeting and should go first.
I apologize that I didn't get time to consider the order on Monday before I had to leave at 10am.
Then, I didn't double check the draft agenda sent out.
I'm thinking that I will propose to swap the transportation matter item with the council
procedure item.
And I will reopen the public hearing and also allow anyone to speak for 3 minutes.
I thought we had moved the transportation matter item to the 9/3 agenda from the 9/16 agenda
because the 9/16 agenda was too full. But now I found that the 9/16 agenda only has 3 items,
besides the Consent calendar. Then, we actually have time to accommodate more public
comments for the transportation matter.
Liang
Liang Chao
Mayor
City Council
LChao@cupertino.gov
408-777-3192
From:Mahesh Gurikar
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; Tina Kapoor; David Stillman
Subject:Review and Dissolution of Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Sunday, September 14, 2025 8:29:13 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 following in the written comments section for the upcoming City Council Meeting.
Thank you.
Dear City Council Members,
It’s deeply disappointing to see that someone in the City appears intent on spending taxpayer money on niche
projects that offer little to no benefit to Cupertino residents.
We respectfully request the City Council to:
1. Conduct a performance audit of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission’s spending, impact, and project outcomes
2. Consider consolidating its duties under the Planning Commission to reduce redundancy and improve oversight
3. Suspend further commission-led proposals until a full review is completed and community alignment is restored
Cupertino deserves infrastructure planning that is transparent, data-driven, and responsive to all residents—not just
niche advocacy groups. I appreciate your attention to this matter.
Sincerely,
Mahesh Gurikar
Shrividya Gurikar
From:Theresa Horng
To:City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman
Subject:Subject: Request for Review and Dissolution of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Sunday, September 14, 2025 7:14:55 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, City Staff, Interim City Manager Tina Kapoor, Manager of
Public Works Chad Mosley, and Manager of Transportation David Stillman,
Subject: Request for Review and Dissolution of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
I am writing to formally request a performance review and reconsideration of the continued
role of the Cupertino Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission. While I support thoughtful
infrastructure planning and pedestrian safety, I believe this commission has become fiscally
inefficient, duplicative in function, and increasingly misaligned with broader community
needs.
Fiscal Accountability and Spending Transparency
To date, the commission has overseen or influenced spending on:
• Consultant contracts for traffic stress studies and origin-destination analysis
• Outreach campaigns including pop-up events, signage, and comment processing
• Infrastructure proposals that often conflict with vehicular flow and safety data
I respectfully request a full itemized breakdown of public funds allocated to the commission
since the launch of the Active Transportation Plan, including all studies, outreach efforts, and
capital recommendations. Taxpayer dollars must be spent with measurable impact and clear
justification.
Fiscal Concerns and Power Dynamics
Critics, including some councilmembers and planning officials, have raised concerns that:
• The commission diverts city funds toward niche infrastructure (e.g., protected bike lanes,
floating bus stops) that may not serve the broader population
• It duplicates efforts already covered by the Planning Commission, creating inefficiency
• It promotes ideologically driven projects that conflict with practical traffic needs or safety
data
These concerns reflect a growing disconnect between commission priorities and the lived
realities of Cupertino residents who rely on safe, efficient, and balanced transportation
systems.
Redundancy and Planning Overlap
The commission’s scope significantly overlaps with the Planning Commission, which already
reviews transportation infrastructure, land use, and capital projects. Maintaining a separate
body for bicycle and pedestrian issues creates inefficiency and dilutes accountability. A
consolidated approach would streamline decision-making and better align with citywide
priorities.
Community Impact and Policy Misalignment
Recent proposals—such as floating bus stops and lane reductions—have sparked widespread
concern among residents. These projects often emerge from commission recommendations
without sufficient vetting or alignment with actual safety data. Notably, there have been no
publicly reported accidents caused by right turns on red along De Anza Boulevard in recent
years, yet the commission continues to support restrictive policies that reduce traffic efficiency
without demonstrable benefit.
Rather than blanket bans, I urge the city to invest in active safety enhancements—such as
flashing crosswalk signals with audible alerts—to improve pedestrian visibility while
preserving mobility.
Recommendation
I respectfully recommend the following actions:
1. Conduct a performance audit of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission’s spending, impact,
and project outcomes
2. Consider consolidating its duties under the Planning Commission to reduce redundancy and
improve oversight
3. Suspend further commission-led proposals until a full review is completed and community
alignment is restored
Cupertino deserves infrastructure planning that is transparent, data-driven, and responsive to
all residents—not just niche advocacy groups. I appreciate your attention to this matter and
welcome further dialogue on how we can restore balance and fiscal discipline to our
transportation planning process.
Sincerely,
Theresa Horng
Cupertino Resident