CC 09-16-2025 Item No. 22 Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters_Written Communications _2CC 09-16-2025
Item No. 22
Options on Commission
Oversight of
Transportation Matters
Written Communications
From: Bill Wilson <bwilsonca@earthlink.net>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:32 AM
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.gov>
Cc: City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.gov>; Cupertino City Manager's Office
<citymanager@cupertino.gov>
Subject: Preserve the BPC
To: Mayor Chao and Cupertino City Council Members
I understand that the council is considering dissolving the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and having the
Planning Commission try to take on the work of the BPC. This would have negative impacts on many of
the residents of our city. Given my 16 years on the FUHSD Board of Trustees I would especially like you to
consider the effect on students in our local schools.
One of the things I heard most frequently from residents was a very legitimate concern about traffic
around our schools. The school district took some steps to try to address this, but the most effective was
encouraging students to walk or bike to school. To make this succeed it is important that cyclists can feel
safe. Unfortunately, it took a tragedy with a Monta Vista student to jump start the bike lanes on
McClellan, but now students can safely use those lanes and others that the city has proactively
created. With the trails and bike lanes now in place many more students can bike or walk to school with
tremendous health benefits in terms of exercise and time outside away from their phones. Plus,
residents long removed from school days can enjoy the benefit of those lanes and trails. However, much
more remains to be done.
We need a commission that continues this effort to have transportation options that enhance the
experience of living in Cupertino. That work needs to be done in a manner that addresses the needs of
all residents, and it can only be coordinated with a commission knowledgeable and focused on this
task. It cannot be done as a side hustle by a commission focused on building projects and codes. Please
preserve the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission so we can continue to make Cupertino a livable city we can
all enjoy.
Sincerely,
Bill Wilson
From: Evan Lojewski <evan@lojewski.xyz>
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:22 AM
To: City Council <citycouncil@cupertino.gov>
Cc: City Clerk <CityClerk@cupertino.gov>; Cupertino City Manager's Office
<citymanager@cupertino.gov>
Subject: PUBLIC COMMENT - AGENDA ITEM 22: Study Session on Oversight of Transportation Matters -
September 16, 2025
Please include this email in the written communication for the Sept 16, 2025 City Council.
City Council,
I'm writing to express my support for the Bike/Ped Commission as an regular user of our streets to
bike to work. I'm requesting that you maintain the Bike/Ped commotion in it's current form, or follow
option 3 in the presentation to rename the commission to the "Transportation and Mobility
Commission."
Per the charter mentioned in the previous presentation, the bike ped commission provides input on
city transportation matters, not just bicycle and pedestrian matters, and so renaming to
"Transportation and Mobility Commission" makes sense here.
As a recent resident (3 years ago now) who has started getting more active in local events and city
council, I find it disappointing that the current council has been constantly bringing up changes that
stifle public comment. By attempting to cancel the fully grant funded ATP earlier this year, after the
city already spent money that it would presumably not be getting back if canceled (removing public
comment and costing the city money) and by attempting to strip away the bike/ped commission at
11:30PM while limiting public comment to 1 minute at the last meeting, it's becoming a theme that
the current city council is trying to silence public comment so that they don't hear things that they
don't want to and can then make decision only based on one-sided viewpoints. It's clearly a problem
when residents have to resort to informal events like the Mayor's Chat in order to get their voices
heard.
I implore you to please make decision based on all residents of the city, not just one side. You can
best do this by ensuring all groups are adequately represented, and by ensuring people have time to
provide public comment at a reasonable hour.
Thank you for reading my email,
Evan Lojewski
From:Kitty Moore
To:Kirsten Squarcia; Lauren Sapudar
Subject:Written Communications for Agenda Item 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:51:43 PM
Attachments:FY 26 Budget PC BP SR2S.pdf
FY 26 Budget PC BP SR2S.pdf
20240618 Staff Report Crossing Guards.pdf
image.png
22-077 2022 Agreement Between City of Cupertino, FUHSD and CUSD for Crossing Guard Program.pdf
image.png
Dear City Clerk,
Please include the attachments and this email as written communications for Item 22.
SV Hopper Community Shuttle Budget Revenue vs Expenses (source:
OpenGov):
SV Hopper Community Shuttle is funded in part by a grant shared between the City of
Cupertino and the City of Santa Clara.
Cupertino’s SV Hopper webpage: https://www.cupertino.gov/Your-
City/Departments/Public-Works/Transportation-Mobility/SV-Hopper
Budget Data on Planning Commission, Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission, and Safe Routes to School
The first attachment shows the current budget for the Planning Commission, Bicycle
Pedestrian Commission, and Safe Routes to School.
Budget Summary:
The Planning Commission General Fund cost is budgeted at $124,073 with 0.3 Full
time employees (FTE)
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission General Fund cost is budgeted at $16,815 with 0.1
FTEs
Safe Routes 2 School (SR2S) General Fund cost is budgeted at $939,551 with 1.0
FTEs
Safe Routes 2 School is under the Public Works Department and does not report to City
Council.
Cupertino’s SR2S webpage: https://www.cupertino.gov/Your-City/Departments/Public-
Works/Transportation-Mobility/Safe-Routes-to-School-SR2S
The City, within the SR2S budget, has a Crossing Guard contract with ACMS which costs
approximately $400k per year and a bicycle pedestrian education contract with Ecology
Action which costs about $140k per year. Revenues from outside sources such as
Measure B are approximately $200k, though the current budget conservatively estimates
$90k in revenue. SR2S began in 2015 as a pilot program, and the following chart shows
how that program has trended in terms of Revenue and Expenses:
Cupertino Safe Routes 2 School Annual Budget Revenue and Expenses
(source: OpenGov)
Kitty Moore
Vice Mayor
City Council
KMoore@cupertino.gov
(408) 777-1389
1
AGREEMENT BETWEEN THE CITY OF CUPERTINO,
FREMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT AND
CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT FOR CROSSING
GUARD PROGRAM
This Agreement, dated June 7, 2022, by and between the City of Cupertino ("City"), the
Fremont Union High School District ("FUHSD"), and the Cupertino Union School District
CUSD”) coordinates efforts to improve traffic congestion and safety near various schools
throughout the City.
WHEREAS, traffic congestion and safety around public schools throughout Cupertino has
been a community wide issue for a number of years; and
WHEREAS, the City of Cupertino, FUHSD, and CUSD have a successful history of
partnership and collaboration in addressing traffic congestion and safety around public schools in
Cupertino; and
WHEREAS, partnership and collaboration between the City, FUHSD and CUSD has
resulted in safety enhancements on the public routes to school and on school property, the
distribution of safety materials to students and parents, bicycle and pedestrian education programs,
biking and walking encouragement activities, student travel counts, coordination of bell schedules,
opportunities for teens to develop leadership skills, among other achievements; and
WHEREAS, traffic congestion and safety is a concern for all parties and that various traffic
studies and recommendations to reduce congestion and improve safety in school areas throughout
the City have been completed; and
WHEREAS, the City administers a crossing guard program at locations throughout the City;
and
WHEREAS, representatives of the City, FUHSD, and CUSD desire to coordinate efforts
and share information so that the City Crossing Guard Program is responsive to community traffic
congestion and safety concerns; and
WHEREAS, a prior cost sharing agreement with FUHSD expired in June 2022, and it is
now mutually desired to enter into three-party cost sharing agreement to include both FUHSD and
CUSD.
NOW, THEREFORE, the parties agree to implement the following for the 2022/23 school
year through the 2027/28 school year:
I. CITY
1. The City will periodically conduct engineering studies, per the provisions
provided in the Manual of Uniform Traffic Control Devices (MUTCD), at
intersections and crossings near public schools.
2. The City will fund crossing guard services, subject to budget availability, at
priority intersections where engineering studies indicate that crossing guards
should be located.
3. The City will respond to requests from FUHSD and CUSD to add additional
intersections, as warranted by engineering studies at other locations.
2
4. Crossing guards at all locations will properly queue and coordinate student
crossing of the street in an efficient manner that prioritizes student safety
and vehicular traffic flow.
5. Crossing Guard locations for the start of the 2022/23 school year will be:
a) Stevens Creek Blvd. at Finch Ave.
b) Hyannisport Dr.at Fort Baker Dr.
c) McClellan Rd. at Bubb Rd.
d) N. Blaney Ave. at Forest Ave.
e) N. Blaney Ave. at Merritt Dr.
f) S. Blaney Ave. at Suisun Dr.
g) Greenleaf Dr. at S. Stelling Rd.
h) Bubb Rd. at Hyannisport Dr.
i) N. De Anza Blvd. at Mariani Ave.
j) Vista Dr. at Merritt Dr.
k) Vista Dr. at Stevens Creek Blvd.
l) McClellan Rd. at Lincoln Elementary
m) McClellan Rd. at Orange Ave.
n) Ainsworth Dr. at Bahl St
o) Barnhart Ave. at S. Tantau Ave.
6. Periodically perform walk audits to identify specific improvements, both
on-campus and off, that would improve traffic and pedestrian safety.
II. FUHSD
1. Student drop-off zones at all school’s student parking lots will be utilized to
the maximum extent practicable.
2. Coordinate the start times and end times of all schools so that the collective
number of students arriving or leaving a collection of schools is minimized.
3. Promote cell phone waiting zones at the Monta Vista High School,
Cupertino High School and Homestead High School student parking lots
where those driving can wait to get a call from their passenger before going
to pick them up.
4. Provide minimum of one district participant to monthly City Safe Routes to
School program working group meeting.
5. Timely respond and provide to City requested Safe Routes to School data.
6. Provide programs encouraging parent/student safety education, walking and
biking to school.
7. Evaluate possible capital improvements on-site such as bicycle cages, and
consider funding or contributing to the funding of City capital projects
related to transportation and safety in the vicinity of schools.
8. Cooperate, provide input and give special consideration to completion of
improvements that are identified in City performed walk audits.
9. FUHSD will share in the funding of the Crossing Guard Program with the
City for the duration of this agreement, at an annual amount of $20,000, due
to the City no later than June 30th of each calendar year.
10. Any FUHSD crossing added to the Crossing Guard Program at the request of
FUHSD will be in addition to the $20,000 cost share noted above and
reimbursed to the City at 100% actual costs per intersection added no later than
June 30th of each calendar year.
11. FUHSD shall be invoiced annually by the City at the end of each school year.
3
III. CUSD
1. Student drop-off zones at all school’s student parking lots will be utilized to
the maximum extent practicable.
2. Coordinate the start times and end times of all schools so that the collective
number of students arriving or leaving a collection of schools is minimized.
3. Provide minimum of one district participant to monthly City Safe Route to
School program working group meeting.
4. Timely respond and provide to City requested Safe Route to School data.
5. Provide programs encouraging parent/student safety education, walking and
biking to school.
6. Evaluate possible capital improvements on-site such as bicycle cages, and
consider funding or contributing to the funding of City capital projects
related to transportation and safety in the vicinity of schools.
7. Cooperate, provide input and give special consideration to completion of
improvements that are identified in City performed walk audits.
8. CUSD will share in the funding of the Crossing Guard Program with the
City for the duration of this agreement, at an annual amount of $20,000, due
to the City no later than June 30th of each calendar year.
9. Any CUSD crossing added to the Crossing Guard Program at the request of
CUSD will be in addition to the $20,000 cost share noted above and reimbursed
to the City at 100% actual costs per intersection added no later than June 30th of
each calendar year.
10. CUSD shall be invoiced annually by the City at the end of each school year.
IV. RIGHTS, DUTIES, LIABILITIES
1. Each party in this Agreement acknowledges that this Agreement does not
diminish or expand any rights, duties, liabilities, immunities or defenses any
party to this Agreement has to any third party claims, demands, or suits that
presently exist, or that may arise in the future, including, but expressly not
limited to these immunities or defenses existing under Government Code
sections 815 et.seq., Education Code Section 44808, or any other statute or
law. Each party further acknowledges and agrees that this Agreement does
not confer on any party to this Agreement any additional rights, responsibilities,
remedies, or liabilities against any party to this Agreement as to any existing or
future third party liability claim, demand, or suit.
V. NOTICES
Communications relating to this Agreement shall be in writing and shall be
delivered personally, sent by United States mail, first class postage prepaid, or by
private messenger or courier service:
To the City: Jim Throop, City Manager
City of Cupertino
10300 Torre Ave.
Cupertino, CA 95014
To FUHSD: Polly Bove, Superintendent
Fremont Union High School District
589 W. Fremont Ave. Sunnyvale, CA 94087
4
To CUSD: Stacy Yao, Superintendent
Cupertino Union School District
1309 S. Mary Ave, Suite #150, Sunnyvale, CA 94087
IV. SIGNATURES
IN WITNESS WHEREOF, the parties execute this Agreement:
CITY OF CUPERTINO
Date: By:
Jim Throop, City Manager
APPROVED AS TO FORM:
Chris Jensen, City Attorney
FREMONT UNION HIGH SCHOOL DISTRICT
Date:
Polly Bove, Superintendent
CUPERTINO UNION SCHOOL DISTRICT
Date:
Stacy Yao, Superintendent
Jun 14, 2022
StacyYaoJun15, 2022
Chris Jensen
Jun 15, 2022
5
ATTACHMENT A
School Street Street # of
Guards
Collins Elementary N. Blaney Ave. Forest Ave. 1
Collins Elementary &
Lawson Middle N. Blaney Ave. Merritt Dr. 1
Eaton Elementary S. Blaney Ave. Suisun Dr. 1
Garden Gate Elementary Greenleaf Dr. S. Stelling Rd. 1
Kennedy Middle Bubb Rd. Hyannisport
Dr. 1
Kennedy Middle &
Monta Vista High Hyannisport Dr. Fort Baker Dr. 1
Lawson Middle N. De Anza
Blvd. Mariani Ave. 1
Lawson Middle Vista Dr. Merritt Dr. 1
Lawson Middle Vista Dr. Stevens Creek
Blvd. 1
Lincoln Elementary McClellan Rd. Lincoln Frontage 1
Lincoln Elementary &
Monta Vista High McClellan Rd. Orange Ave. 1
Lincoln Elementary &
Kennedy Middle &
Monta Vista High
McClellan Rd. Bubb Rd. 1
Stevens Creek Elementary Ainsworth Dr. Bahl St. 1
Sedgwick Elementary Barnhart Ave. S. Tantau
Ave. 1
Cupertino High Stevens Creek
Blvd. Finch Ave. 2
2022 Agreement Between City of Cupertino,
FUHSD and CUSD for Crossing Guard Program
Final Audit Report 2022-06-15
Created:2022-06-13
By:Julia Kinst (juliak@cupertino.org)
Status:Signed
Transaction ID:CBJCHBCAABAA1hMbHw9jakFARxfirolvDeWmw-l0G3y5
2022 Agreement Between City of Cupertino, FUHSD and CUS
D for Crossing Guard Program" History
Document created by Julia Kinst (juliak@cupertino.org)
2022-06-13 - 3:16:14 PM GMT- IP address: 216.198.111.214
Document emailed to Polly Bove (polly_bove@fuhsd.org) for signature
2022-06-13 - 3:21:36 PM GMT
Email viewed by Polly Bove (polly_bove@fuhsd.org)
2022-06-15 - 0:25:09 AM GMT- IP address: 172.226.36.7
Document e-signed by Polly Bove (polly_bove@fuhsd.org)
Signature Date: 2022-06-15 - 0:26:12 AM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 174.194.144.205
Document emailed to Stacy Yao (yao_stacy@cusdk8.org) for signature
2022-06-15 - 0:26:14 AM GMT
Email viewed by Stacy Yao (yao_stacy@cusdk8.org)
2022-06-15 - 2:18:22 PM GMT- IP address: 54.176.163.143
Document e-signed by Stacy Yao (yao_stacy@cusdk8.org)
Signature Date: 2022-06-15 - 2:18:52 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 67.161.49.193
Document emailed to Chris Jensen (christopherj@cupertino.org) for signature
2022-06-15 - 2:18:55 PM GMT
Email viewed by Chris Jensen (christopherj@cupertino.org)
2022-06-15 - 2:31:06 PM GMT- IP address: 172.225.88.181
Document e-signed by Chris Jensen (christopherj@cupertino.org)
Signature Date: 2022-06-15 - 2:43:32 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 136.24.42.212
Document emailed to Jim Throop (jimt@cupertino.org) for signature
2022-06-15 - 2:43:35 PM GMT
Email viewed by Jim Throop (jimt@cupertino.org)
2022-06-15 - 3:24:13 PM GMT- IP address: 104.47.74.126
Document e-signed by Jim Throop (jimt@cupertino.org)
Signature Date: 2022-06-15 - 3:24:31 PM GMT - Time Source: server- IP address: 64.165.34.3
Agreement completed.
2022-06-15 - 3:24:31 PM GMT
CITY COUNCIL STAFF REPORT
Meeting: June 18, 2024
Subject
Approve a first amendment with All City Management Services, Inc. to provide crossing
guard services, for a total not to exceed amount of $1,688,800 extending the agreement
date to June 30, 2026, and approve a budget modification in the amount of $78,707.
Recommended Action
1. Authorize the City Manager to execute a First Amendment with All City
Management Services, Inc. (ACMS) to continue to provide Crossing Guard
Services, increasing the contract amount by $785,000 for a total not to exceed
amount of $1,688,800 and extending the agreement date to June 30, 2026.
2. Adopt Resolution No. 24-XXX approving budget modification #2324-304 and a
budget adjustment in the amount of $78,707 in the General Fund for Fiscal Year
2024-2025 crossing guard services (100-88-846 700-709).
Reason for Recommendation
The City of Cupertino has contracted with vendors to provide school crossing guard
services at intersections throughout the City for some time . The guards typically work
the morning school drop-off and afternoon school pick-up times, with hours that vary
considerably depending on intersection, schools served and day of the week. Guard
locations are determined through warrant studies that staff typically conducts every two
years, and which are based on usage and traffic patterns at the intersections. The most
recent warrant study was completed in 2022, with the next study anticipated for the Fall
2024. The Cupertino Union School District and the Fremont Union High School District
are kept informed regarding the results of warrant studies and are included in the final
determination of locations.
In August 2021, the City Council awarded an agreement with ACMS to provide school
crossing guard services at sixteen locations in the City of Cupertino for a period of three
years, expiring on June 30, 2024, with the option to extend the agreement for two
additional years. This contract was awarded as a result of an RFP that was solicited in
June 2021. Over the past three years, ACMS has met all staff expectations of
performance, and has been very responsive to staff and community feedback and
adjustments of school bell schedules. Anticipating the contract to be soon expired, in
April, staff initiated discussions with ACMS to negotiate contract pricing for the two-
year extension of the contract.
Retention of crossing guards has historically been challenging due to the limited number
of daily working hours and competition with neighboring cities that offer competitive
rates. Additionally, the recent passage of California Assembly Bill (AB) 1228, which
requires a minimum wage of $20/hour for fast food workers, has resulted in an
additional draw on the pool of potential crossing guards. Considering these factors,
contract negotiations resulted in a successful agreement on a billing rate of $38.95/hour
for the 2024/25 school year and $41.45/hour for the 2025/26 school year, resulting in a
not-to-exceed amount of $380,000 for the 2024/25 school year and $405,000 for the
2025/26 school year. There is no change in service level that is currently provided. This
pricing allows ACMS to continue to draw and retain qualified staff, which in turn, is
vital to the safety of students being able to walk or bike to school in Cupertino. This
negotiated billing rate is identical to the rates being paid under contract in the City of
Sunnyvale, the most proximate and significant competition for crossing guards.
This amendment will extend the existing agreement for a period of two years, from July
1, 2024, through June 30, 2026. The Amendment contains a provision that allows the City
to terminate the agreement at any time, for any reason.
Sustainability Impact
This contract encourages walking and bicycling by providing safe passage across streets
for students traveling to school. This is consistent with both the Mobility Element of the
General Plan, Goal M-3 (“Support a Safe Pedestrian and Bicycle Network for People of
All Ages and Abilities”) and Measure C-T-1 of the Climate Action Plan (“Encourage
multi-modal transportation, including walking and biking, through safety and comfort
enhancements in the bicycle and pedestrian environment.”). Furthermore, students
walking and bicycling to school reduces traffic congestion, which leads to reduced
vehicle emissions, helping the City achieve air quality and greenhouse gas emission
reduction goals.
Fiscal Impact
The Fiscal Year (FY) 24-25 Adopted Budget allocated $301,293 for Crossing Guard
Contract Services (100-88-846-700-709). Although this amount represents the
approximate average annual expenditure for crossing guard services over the three
years of the current contract, each year has seen an increase of approximately 5.5% over
the previous year, with the expenditure during the current and final year of the contract
being approximately $320,000. Increased costs in FY 23-24 were funded by a carryover
encumbrance for this contract. Increased costs for this contract were not known at the
time of FY25 budget development.
Due to increases in the cost of living, in addition to reasons noted earlier, the negotiated
annual cost to manage the crossing guard program is $377,456 at the billing rate of
$38.95/hour for the 2024/25 school year, and $401,580 at the billing rate of $41.45/hour for
the 2025/26 school year based upon a billing of approximately 9,690 hours per year at
current school bell schedule and guard staffing hours. A not-to-exceed amount of
$380,000 and $405,000 for the 2024/25 and 2025/26 school years, respectively, is being
proposed to allow flexibility if crossing guard working hours need to be modified due to
school bell time changes, adjustments based on field observations, etc. Consequently, an
additional allocation of $78,707 will be required in FY 2024-25 to supplement the
$301,293 currently budgeted. For FY26, if the contract is approved the base budget will
increase by $25,000 to cover contract increases in that year.
On June 7, 2022, the City entered into a five-year agreement with the Cupertino Union
School District (CUSD) and the Fremont Union High School District (FUHSD), whereby
each agreed to contribute $20,000 per year to the City to help fund crossing guard
services. This revenue will partially offset the City’s general fund allocation resulting in
estimated net costs to the City in FY25 of $360,000 and FY26 of $385,000 Considering the
increasing cost of crossing guard services compared to previous years, staff will engage
with CUSD and FUHSD to negotiate additional contributions to help offset the
increasing cost of services.
California Environmental Quality Act
Not applicable.
Prepared by: David Stillman, Transportation Manager
Reviewed by: Chad Mosley, Director of Public Works
Approved for Submission by: Pamela Wu, City Manager
Attachments:
A – Draft Contract
B – Draft Resolution
Planning Commission
Budget Unit 100-11-170
General Fund - Commissions - Planning Commission
Budget at a Glance
2026 Proposed Budget
Total Revenues $ -
Total Expenditures $ 124,073
Fund Balance $ -
General Fund Costs $ 124,073
% Funded by General Fund 100.0%
Total Staffing 0.3 FTE
Program Overview
The Planning Commission, a five-member citizen board appointed by the City Council, holds the following powers and functions:
Prepare, periodically review, and revise as necessary, the General Plan.
Implement the General Plan through actions including, but not limited to, the administration of specific plans and zoning,
subdivisions, and sign ordinances.
Annually review the capital improvement program of the City and the local public works projects of other local agencies for
their consistency with the General Plan (pursuant to Sections 65400 et seq. of the California Government Code).
Endeavor to promote public interest in, comment upon, and understanding of the General Plan, and regulation relating to
it.
Consult and advise with public officials and agencies, public utility companies, civic, educational, professional, and other
organizations and citizens generally concerning implementation of the General Plan.
Promote the coordination of local plans and programs with the plans and programs of other agencies.
Perform other functions as the City Council provides including conducting studies and preparing plans other than those
required or authorized by state law.
Advise the City Council on land use and development policy related to the General Plan.
Implement the General Plan through review and administration of specific plans and related ordinances.
Review land use applications for conformance with the General Plan and ordinances; and
Promote the coordination of local plans and programs with regional and other agencies.
The Planning Commission meets on the second and fourth Tuesdays of each month.
Proposed Budget
It is recommended that City Council approve a budget of $124,073 for the Planning Commission program. This represents an
increase of $1,663 (1.4%) from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget.
This budget is consistent with the prior year Adopted Budget.
Revenues and Expenditures
The following table details revenues, expenditures, changes in fund balance and General Fund costs by category. It includes
actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Council and Commissions 148
Category 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
Revenues
Total Revenues $ -$ -$ -$ -
Expenditures
Employee Compensation $ 33,992 $ 36,334 $ 36,723 $ 36,551
Employee Benefits $ 11,429 $ 14,893 $ 17,459 $ 15,607
Materials $ 17,600 $ 5,261 $ 4,900 $ 6,460
Cost Allocation $ 35,427 $ 40,713 $ 63,328 $ 65,455
Total Expenditures $ 98,448 $ 97,201 $ 122,410 $ 124,073
Fund Balance $ -$ -$ -$ -
General Fund Costs $ 98,448 $ 97,201 $ 122,410 $ 124,073
Staffing
The following table lists full-time equivalents (FTE) by position. It includes actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget
for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
Position Title 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 0.20 0.20 0.20 0.20
DIRECTOR OF COMM DEVELOPMENT 0.06 0.06 0.06 0.06
Total 0.26 0.26 0.26 0.26
There are no changes to the current level of staffing.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Council and Commissions 149
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Budget Unit 100-11-155
General Fund - Commissions - Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Budget at a Glance
2026 Proposed Budget
Total Revenues $ -
Total Expenditures $ 16,815
Fund Balance $ -
General Fund Costs $ 16,815
% Funded by General Fund 100.0%
Total Staffing 0.1 FTE
Program Overview
The powers and functions of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission shall be to review, monitor and suggest recommendations for
City transportation ma ers including, but not limited to, bicycle and pedestrian traffic, parking, education and recreation within
Cupertino.
To fulfill their mission, the Commission may involve itself in the following activities:
1 . To monitor and update the bicycle transportation plan and pedestrian transportation guidelines;
2 . To suggest recommendations, review and monitor the City’s general plan transportation element;
3 . To receive public input pertaining to bicycle and pedestrian transportation and infrastructure issues;
4 . To make recommendations regarding the implementation of roadway and transportation improvements as it pertains to
bicycle and pedestrian needs;
5 . To make recommendations regarding the allocation of funds for capital expenditures relating to bicycle and pedestrian
transportation;
6 . Any other activity that may be deemed appropriate and necessary.
Proposed Budget
It is recommended that City Council approve a budget of $16,815 for the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission program. This
represents a decrease of $23,606 (-58.4%) from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget.
The decrease is due to reductions in staff allocated to this program.
Revenues and Expenditures
The following table details revenues, expenditures, changes in fund balance and General Fund costs by category. It includes
actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Council and Commissions 142
Category 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
Revenues
Total Revenues $ -$ -$ -$ -
Expenditures
Employee Compensation $ 27,443 $ 26,893 $ 19,919 $ 5,139
Employee Benefits $ 9,640 $ 10,425 $ 9,654 $ 2,937
Materials $ -$ -$ 223 $ 230
Contract Services $ -$ -$ 616 $ 636
Cost Allocation $ 24,809 $ 23,773 $ 9,999 $ 7,873
Contingencies $ -$ -$ 10 $ -
Total Expenditures $ 61,892 $ 61,091 $ 40,421 $ 16,815
Fund Balance $ -$ -$ -$ -
General Fund Costs $ 61,892 $ 61,092 $ 40,421 $ 16,815
Staffing
The following table lists full-time equivalents (FTE) by position. It includes actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget
for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
Position Title 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
ADMINISTRATIVE ASSISTANT 0.05 0.05 0.05 0.05
ASSISTANT ENGINEER 0 0 0.10 0
TRANSPORTATION MANAGER 0.10 0.10 0 0
Total 0.15 0.15 0.15 0.05
Staff time is being reallocated to better reflect actual time spent in this program.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Council and Commissions 143
successful hosting of two community meetings, one stakeholder meeting and three Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC)
meetings.
Speed Limit Reductions for Bike and Pedestrian Safety - In response to recent California legislation aimed at providing greater
flexibility in se ing and adjusting speed limits, the Transportation Division has reduced speed limits on the street segments
listed below. The street segments were chosen due to their importance as a walking or biking corridor, making the reduced
speed limits a vital step towards achieving the City’s crash reduction goals outlined in Cupertino’s Vision Zero Action Plan.
11th annual Cupertino Fall Bike Fest - On Saturday, September 28, Safe Routes to School hosted the 11 annual Cupertino Fall
Bike Fest at City Hall Plaza. The plaza was abuzz with more than 30 bike-related activities organized by local bike and
environmental organizations and was attended by more than 600 people making it the most successful Fall Bike Fest to date.
Silicon Valley Hopper - Successfully integrated three new, all-electric wheelchair-accessible vehicles (WAVs), replacing the
fleet's previous gas-powered WAVs boasting an entirely all-electric lineup, ensuring all trips are zero-emission.
Additionally, in collaboration with the City of Santa Clara, secured $500,000 from the Transportation Fund for Clean Air
(TFCA) Program to help fund the third year (FY25-26) of the SV Hopper program.
Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Grant Funding – The Transportation Division received a $160,000 grant from the California Office
of Transportation Safety (OTS) to enhance its Safe Routes to School (SR2S) Bicycle and Pedestrian Safety Program. The
initiative, running through September 2025, aims to promote safe walking and biking practices and raise awareness among
drivers to be mindful of pedestrians and cyclists. The grant will fund several activities, including pedestrian and bicycle
safety training, helmet distribution and fitting, and community and school presentations on safety.
McClellan Road Separated Bikeways Phase 3 – This bicycle and pedestrian enhancement project, located at the intersection of
De Anza Boulevard and McClellan Road/Pacifica Drive, was completed and includes modification of the traffic signals,
reconfiguration of the intersection layout, and new bicycle and pedestrian facilities including a new crosswalk across De
Anza Blvd on the south leg of the intersection. The project completes the missing link between the recently completed
Phases 1 and 2, and was partially funded by $1,000,000 in Congestion Mitigation and Air Quality (CMAQ) grant funding
though the Vehicle Emissions Reduction Based at School (VERBS).
SB 1383 update - Provided SB 1383 outreach to over 100 businesses and worked with Recology, the waste hauler, to ensure
full SB 1383 compliance with the 600+ businesses and ensure proper sorting at CUSD elementary and middle schools.
Garage Sale - Hosted the Citywide Garage Sale on September 28 & 29 with over 165 homes participating, over 4,000 views on
the online map, and many buyers from all over the Bay Area
Environmental Recycling and Paper Shredding Events - Staff collaborates with Recology to host four free opportunities per year
for residents to drop off difficult-to-recycle materials such as e-waste, appliances, yard waste, and confidential documents
Coat Collection - Collaborated with Recology and the Cupertino Library to collect over 5 barrels of new and gently used coats
and jackets, which were donated to Sacred Heart Community Services to provide warmth to those in need
Community Composting Classes - Staff coordinated with the UC Cooperative Extension to host two free backyard compost
classes for residents to learn how to build compost piles, vermicompost, and apply the compost in their own garden or
landscape
Compliance activities - To comply with stormwater pollution prevention regulations, the City will conduct 78 preventative
Industrial and Commercial Site Controls (IND) stormwater inspections. So far in 24-25 staff has responded to and resolved
38 reports of discharges and threats of discharge to the storm drain system for the Illicit Discharge Detection and
Elimination (IDDE) program
Creek Cleanups - Hosted a site at Wilson Park for Coastal Cleanup Day on September 21, 2024 with over fi y-eight
volunteers and a total of 196 pounds of trash and debris removed. The next event will be National River Clean Up Day in
May 2025.
“Decarbonization” of new buildings - Following suspension of Cupertino’s all-electric reach code in response to a court ruling
in early 2024, in September 2024 the City Council approved an update to the building code to require newly constructed
residential and commercial buildings to meet stricter energy efficiency requirements.
Fleet electrification - Added two electric trucks to the fleet as required to comply with California’s Advanced Clean Fleet
Regulation
Climate Action Plan tracking - Launched an interactive climate action plan website in September 2024 to educate residents
th
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Public Works 361
Safe Routes 2 School
Budget Unit 100-88-846
General Fund - Transportation - Safe Routes 2 School
Budget at a Glance
2026 Proposed Budget
Total Revenues $ 90,000
Total Expenditures $ 1,029,551
Fund Balance $ -
General Fund Costs $ 939,551
% Funded by General Fund 91.3%
Total Staffing 1.0 FTE
Program Overview
Safe Routes to School seeks to engage local schools, school districts, parent organizations, community groups, and the Santa Clara
County Sheriff’s Office in the mission of reducing Singular Occupancy Vehicle (SOV) travel to and from school in order to reduce
carbon emission and car traffic and increase student safety. The program seeks to achieve these objectives through education,
encouragement, enforcement, and engineering infrastructure changes in and around Cupertino schools.
Service Objectives
Help to improve the health and well-being of students by increasing the number of students who walk or bike to school.
Develop partnerships with school administrators, staff, parents, and students.
Encourage and empower more students and families to walk, bike, carpool, and take alternative transit to school.
Adjust signage and infrastructure surrounding Cupertino schools to facilitate a safer environment for bicycle and pedestrian
travel.
Educate students and families about the benefits of walking and bicycling to school; health, environmental protection,
academic improvements, community building and more.
Minimize gaps in communication between City, School Districts, and Schools and collaborate on efforts to increase student
safety.
Enhance bicyclist and pedestrian student safety through coordination of skills classes and distribution of educational
material.
Proposed Budget
It is recommended that City Council approve a budget of $1,029,551 for the Safe Routes 2 School program. This represents an
increase of $160,372 (18.5%) from the FY 2024-25 Adopted Budget.
The increase is due to an increase in Contract Services for Crossing Guard and Bike and Pedestrian Education programs, as well as
increases in Cost Allocation expenses.
This program also includes a request for $25,000 one-time costs for Annual Bike Ped Education. For further detail on these
requests, please reference the Summary of Proposed Budget Requests found at the beginning of the budget document.
Revenues and Expenditures
The following table details revenues, expenditures, changes in fund balance and General Fund costs by category. It includes
actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Public Works 473
Category 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
Revenues
Intergovernmental Revenue $ 46,799 $ -$ 50,000 $ 50,000
Miscellaneous Revenue $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000 $ 40,000
Total Revenues $ 86,799 $ 40,000 $ 90,000 $ 90,000
Expenditures
Employee Compensation $ 153,328 $ 118,466 $ 153,363 $ 152,022
Employee Benefits $ 46,907 $ 43,051 $ 56,197 $ 69,740
Materials $ 33,207 $ 22,490 $ 46,831 $ 49,678
Contract Services $ 336,643 $ 400,828 $ 461,802 $ 598,100
Cost Allocation $ 68,673 $ 77,905 $ 144,628 $ 160,011
Special Projects $ 57,729 $ 10,118 $ -$ -
Contingencies $ -$ -$ 6,358 $ -
Total Expenditures $ 696,487 $ 672,858 $ 869,179 $ 1,029,551
Fund Balance $ -$ -$ -$ -
General Fund Costs $ 609,688 $ 632,857 $ 779,179 $ 939,551
Staffing
The following table lists full-time equivalents (FTE) by position. It includes actuals for two prior fiscal years, the Adopted Budget
for the prior fiscal year, and the Proposed Budget for the current fiscal year.
Position Title 2023 Actual 2024 Actual 2025 Adopted Budget 2026 Proposed Budget
ENVIRONMENTAL PROGRAMS ASSISTANT 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
Total 1.00 1.00 1.00 1.00
There are no changes to the current level of staffing.
FY 2025-26 Proposed Budget Public Works 474
From:Stephanie Miller
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please Support Option 3 – Keep Transportation Advocacy Strong in Cupertino
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 5:25:03 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 Members,
I'm writing to urge you to vote for Option 3 on Agenda Item 22 at tomorrow’s meeting — to
keep the Bike Pedestrian Commission independent, and to rename it the Transportation
and Mobility Commission.
Although I can't attend in person due to family responsibilities, I feel compelled to speak up
— especially as a parent of children who walk and bike to school in Cupertino.
Here’s why I believe this decision is critical:
1. Our children’s safety is at stake.
More than one child on a bike has been hit by cars near my children’s middle school — right
here in our own neighborhoods. These are not statistics from another city. These are real
incidents, happening where our kids live, learn, and play.
A dedicated Bike Pedestrian Commission ensures that safety issues like this aren’t pushed to
the bottom of the agenda. When transportation is absorbed into the Planning Commission —
where the focus is on housing density, zoning, and setbacks — critical conversations about
safe routes to school, crosswalk visibility, and bike lane design are diluted or delayed.
We can’t afford to treat these as side issues. Our children’s lives are not an afterthought.
2. Data shows separate commissions work — and save money.
Across the Bay Area, the overwhelming majority of cities have separate Planning and
Transportation Commissions. Cupertino would be an outlier if we combined them — and
not in a good way.
Why does this matter?
Because having a focused commission makes us more competitive for grant funding. Since
2018, more than 87% of Cupertino’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure projects have
been paid for by grants — not local taxes. In fact, the city's share of costs has been less than
13%.
If you include the value of donated land, like the $7 million Linda Vista Trail easement,
Cupertino has paid less than 10% of total bike/ped project costs.
This is a huge win for residents. Why jeopardize that by weakening our transportation
advocacy?
3. Transportation belongs in the hands of people who live it.
There are over 40,000 students in Cupertino across CUSD, FUHSD, and De Anza College.
15% of our residents are 65 and older, a number that's growing every year. These are the
people who rely most on safe sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps, and protected bike lanes.
These groups show up and speak out when there’s a commission that represents their needs —
not when they’re competing with zoning maps and density bonuses.
Combining the commissions sends a clear message: transportation safety isn’t a priority.
But it should be.
4. Let the Planning Commission focus — and let transportation thrive.
The Planning Commission already has its hands full with complex housing mandates,
development proposals, zoning updates, and state requirements. Transportation needs a space
of its own.
A standalone Transportation and Mobility Commission will:
Prioritize safe routes to school
Align us with VTA, Caltrans, and regional funding goals
Keep community voices front and center
Allow for deeper, more informed discussion on transportation design and safety
5. This decision reflects who we are as a city.
Cupertino has always prided itself on being forward-thinking, inclusive, and safe for families.
Eliminating an independent commission dedicated to transportation is a step backward — and
it’s out of step with the values we share.
This is not just a procedural change. It’s a statement of priorities. And I hope we can all agree:
keeping our residents safe — especially our children — should be at the top of that list.
Please vote for Option 3, and let’s strengthen, not weaken, our city’s commitment to safe,
sustainable, and inclusive transportation.
Thank you for your service to our community.
Sincerely,
Stephanie Miller, Cupertino resident since 2011
From:Stephanie Miller
To:City Clerk
Subject:Fwd: BPC
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 4:20:38 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.
To whom it may concern,
Could you please enter my email to Mayor Chao below into the public record?
She very kindly and respectfully replied to me, however I forgot to cc: the email to the city
clerk when I sent it.
Thank you for your time,
Stephanie
---------- Forwarded message ---------
From: Stephanie Miller <stephsmith97@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, Sep 15, 2025 at 3:14 PM
Subject: BPC
To: Liang Chao <LiangChao@cupertino.org>
Dear Ms. Chao,
I am writing to express my frustration with the current handling of the very important
topic of the transportation being moved from under the BPC to under the PC. I
appeal to your sense of what is truly best for and supported by the residents of the
city of Cupertino as I write this letter to you. You may not recall, but we met once
while discussing the Carmen Bridge project with residents, and when I asked how you
handle when it gets heated, you said the most important thing is to listen because
people just want to be heard and understood. I hope that you will hear me now.
First, I'm disappointed that this very important topic was glossed over in the late hours
of the evening at the council meeting and that it was not given the time and
discussion it deserves. This behavior flies in the face of the claim that this council
values resident input and its goal to be transparent. Ten residents spoke in support
of the BPC, 2 against. The fact that you limited discussion by residents to 1 min (vs
the standard 3 minutes) and then ended the agenda item and declared that no public
comments will be allowed when the agenda item resumes at a future meeting was
shocking. To my knowledge this is unprecedented and is completely contradictory to
your stated goal of "encouraging open dialogue between residents and local
leadership," a phrase taken directly from your "Mayor's Initiative." If I'm totally honest,
this feels like the weaponization of public comments (something no mayor has done
before) and strikes me as an abuse of power. At a time in this country when our
freedoms are being put at risk at the national level, I would've hoped that I had
chosen to live in a community and elected leaders who would continue to promote
and encourage democracy and freedom of expression.
Secondly, transportation does not belong under the purview of the PC. The BPC
should own all of the transportation topics, as those on the commission have the
expertise and experience walking and biking our city and know and understand the
necessary standards and best practices. The Planning Commission has looked at
transportation matters previously, but only ever as part of large construction projects,
never for stand-alone street projects. This change is unprecedented. The Planning
Commission's focus should remain on land use and zoning law. The BPC is an entity
chartered to ADVOCATE for pedestrians and cyclists and those on it should have
extensive experience as a pedestrian or cyclist. Can those on the PC, Mr. Rao
included, make this claim?
Thirdly, as a city that I repeatedly hear about struggling with finances, why would the
council consider voting in such a way that would risk the city losing eligibility to tens of
millions of dollars in grant money? This makes absolutely no sense to me fiscally -
grant money is free money! Why would we make a decision that would turn that
down?? In addition, this move to disband the BPC will likely lead to confusion and
more costs as bike/ped issues will now have to go through two commissions, one of
which does not specialize in these issues.
Finally, and most importantly, a vote against the BPC is a vote against our children
and seniors. Think of who spoke at the meeting in support of maintaining the BPC -
it's our youth, students and young adults, who have the most to lose if this transfer to
the PC succeeds. I have 3 children and they are frequent walkers (two walk to school)
on our city streets. I think you would agree that their safety is of the
utmost importance. I myself walk nearly every day. I watch the students walk and
bike to school each morning and afternoon, hoping that they stay safe. Our most
vulnerable residents deserve to be heard at a dedicated commission, not a
commission dedicated to land use and building development. They deserve to have a
commission dedicated to their safety. It’s harmful and misguided to not have one.
I hope you take these points into strong consideration. We residents want safety,
transparency, and the opportunity to be heard. This council was elected to
represent us, and if I'm honest, I do not feel that I, nor the youth of this community,
are being represented at this time.
On Tuesday, please choose Option 3 for Agenda item 22. Keep the BPC intact,
and rename the Commission to the Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Sincerely and with Hope,
Stephanie Miller, 13+ year resident of Cupertino
From:Matt Miller
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please choose option 3 for Agenda Item 22
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 5:47:50 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 Council Members,
I’m writing to respectfully urge you to vote for Option 3 on Agenda Item 22 at tomorrow night’s meeting.
Although I won’t be able to attend in person due to family commitments, I still want to make sure my voice is heard.
I strongly support keeping the Bike Ped Commission separate from the Planning Commission, and I’d like to explain why:
1. Combining the commissions doesn’t make sense.
Nearly every city in the Bay Area has a separate Bike/Ped or Transportation Commission alongside their Planning
Commission. These two bodies serve very different purposes. Rolling them into one isn’t just unnecessary — it weakens our
focus on transportation issues like pedestrian safety, cycling infrastructure, traffic flow, and street design. These are
complex topics that deserve full attention, not just a footnote in broader planning discussions.
2. It silences important voices.
When there’s a dedicated commission for walking and biking, more people feel empowered to speak up — especially
parents, students, seniors, and people who walk or bike every day. Those voices can easily get lost when transportation is
lumped in with land-use and zoning issues. Why make it harder for our community to weigh in on the everyday challenges
they face getting around safely?
3. It’s a bad financial move.
Cities that prioritize transportation planning are better positioned to receive state, federal, and regional grants. In fact,
nearly 90% of Cupertino’s bike/ped projects have been paid for by grant funding, not local tax dollars. We’ve benefited
enormously from this — and a dedicated commission helps keep us competitive. Why risk giving up free money??
On top of that, Planning Commission meetings demand significantly more staff time and resources than Bike Ped
Commission meetings. Why should we spend more money to give residents less of a say?
4. It doesn’t reflect Cupertino’s values.
As a parent of two kids who walk to school — and someone who walks daily myself — I care deeply about safe streets. A
separate commission ensures that transportation issues like signal timing, crosswalk safety, parking, and speed limits stay
front and center.
In contrast, the Planning Commission is focused on land use, zoning, and state housing mandates. These are important,
but they shouldn't overshadow the daily transportation needs of our residents.
5. It overlooks who Cupertino is.
We have thousands of students in CUSD, FUHSD, and De Anza College, and over 15% of our population is 65 or older.
These are exactly the people who rely on safe sidewalks, accessible crossings, and protected bike lanes. Their needs
deserve focused attention — not to be buried under other planning issues.
In closing, I urge you to vote for Option 3 and preserve the Bike Ped Commission. Renaming it to the Transportation and
Mobility Commission makes sense — it reflects its purpose and our community’s priorities.
Thank you for your time and service to our city.
Sincerely,
Matt Miller, 13+ year Cupertino resident
From:Griffin
To:Public Comments
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:2025-09-16 City Council Meeting Agenda Item #22 Transportation Matters under PC
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:18:50 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 Council and Staff,
Of the options presented, I’d prefer to see Option 2 implemented with the following modifications:
1-do not include transit as part of Bike/Ped. Just keep it bike and Ped issues.
2-eliminate the wishy-washy “little or no potential impact to vehicular modes…” and make it definitive I.e. NO
potential impact to vehicular modes”.
Thank you for studying this issue and helping bring visibility and transparency to potential changes that impact a
large portion of Cupertino on a daily basis!
Sincerely,
Peggy Griffin
From:Jim Bodwin
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:27:58 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.
Unfortunately, I will be out of town and will not be able to attend tomorrow's City Council
meeting. But I strongly support option 3 to KEEP the Bike/Ped Commission in its current
form.
I have been a Cupertino resident since 1989 and I have seen many changes but one thing has
stayed the same - everybody complains about traffic. The Bike/Ped commission has been an
advocate of safe, low-cost improvements that have relieved traffic by getting people out of
cars.
Please respect the progress that this group has made by supporting option 3.
Jim Bodwin
Palm Avenue
Virus-free.www.avg.com
From:Siva Annamalai
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:28:05 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.
Hi Cupertino City Council members and Officials of Cupertino City,
I learnt that the council in the next city council meeting will make a decision by picking an
option from the various ones discussed earlier for the oversight of transportation matters. I am
a resident of the city of Cupertino and have been a resident for the last 29 years and feel the
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission of the city has done a great job of highlighting the needs of
ensuring the development in the city is done taking into consideration the safety needs of
pedestrians and bicyclists in the city.
I commute to work on a bicycle at least 3 times a week and have experienced first hand the
spectacular work done by this commission and would strongly recommend that the city vote to
preserve this commission. Considering the options on the table for the council to vote on I feel
option 3 - continue with BPC oversight, rename to 'Transportation and Mobility commission'
makes the most sense and I would urge the council to vote for this option.
Please take into consideration the safety of the students, youth and seniors when you vote.
Regards,
Siva Annamalai.
From:Phyllis Schmit
To:City Clerk
Subject:Get rid of bike commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:28:10 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.
We support getting rid of the bike commission
Phyllis Schmit
Mike Schmit
From:Pam Hershey
To:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Council; City Clerk; City of Cupertino Planning Commission
Subject:Bike Ped Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:32:45 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 , City Manager and City Clerk:
I am recommending that the council keep the BPC and
let BPC review projects and send its recommendations
to the planning committee on all transportation
projects. Projects that impact roadways,
intersections, parking, or any turn lanes. The planning
commission should have the final quasi-judicial
body that will make the decision on transportation
projects.
A provision to appeal the PC decision to City Council can
also be provided. This keeps the BPC existing charter
bits add accountability and
oversight with PC as quasi-judicial final decision making
body so that staff don't make their own decisions.
Regards,
Pamela Hershey
From:Eric Schmidt
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Maintain Bike Ped Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:37:00 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.
City Council Members,
I would strongly encourage you to keep the Bike Ped Commission as a separate commission. I appreciate how
Cupertino works to keep bicyclists and pedestrians like me safe. We need a separate commission dedicated to
ensuring everyone's safety as we plan the community's future transportation needs.
I ask you to support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact.
Thank you,
Eric Schmidt
From:Nitin Shah
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:39:47 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.
To: the City Council of Cupertino,
As a Cupertino resident, I urge you to support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped
Commission intact.
Please choose Option 3-keep the BPC intact, and rename the Commission to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission.
The safety of pedestrians and bicyclists is very important. The volume of traffic and
the speed of traffic continues to increase.
There are numerous "hot spots" where the City needs to act and protect the safety of
citizens.
If you as a body make a different choice, it is a direct attack on the safety of Cupertino
residents and
you take on the responsibility for any accidents and injuries as a result of your
choices.
Nitin J. Shah
From:Tara C.
To:City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Keep the Bike Ped Commission intact
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:42:10 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.
To the City Council of Cupertino -
My son just started as a 9th grader at Lynbrook and joined the marching band. He loves it, but
next month practice will be at Monta Vista, which is on the other side of town for us (we live
near Bollinger/Lawrence). Unfortunately, there's no way I feel comfortable having him bike to
Monta Vista as it's just too dangerous.
That said, I have been very happy to see more and more biking safety features going up all
around Cupertino. After getting a chance to visit Europe this summer and seeing all of their
beautiful bike lanes (and many more bikers), I see that we still have a long way to go here to
make Cupertino truly "bike friendly" -- but at least we're making progress.
That is why I was dismayed to hear that you are considering gutting the Bike Ped
Commission. Why?? So that we can prioritize cars? I commute daily to Palo Alto and yes, the
traffic is bad, but I'm willing to sacrifice if it will make our streets safer.
Let's keep the progress going to make it safer to walk and bike in Cupertino.
Thank you.
Tara Chang
Cupertino resident
From:Rob Tsuk
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Cupertino Needs a Transportation and Mobility Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 7:48:10 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.
Greetings,
I'm writing to you today as a concerned constituent to urge the continuation of the Bike Ped Commission in
Cupertino. As a Cupertino resident for 30 years and an avid cyclist, I've seen firsthand the challenges and
opportunities our city faces regarding active transportation. While our Bicycle and Pedestrian Master Plan is a great
start, I believe a dedicated commission is essential to truly prioritize and advance the safety and accessibility of
walking and biking in our city.
I feel the dedicated Bike Ped Commission provides an invaluable forum for residents, experts, and city staff to
collaborate solely on improving our infrastructure for active transportation.
Imagine a Cupertino where more children can safely walk or bike to school, where residents can easily access
businesses without relying on a car, and where our streets are designed with all users in mind.
This isn't just about convenience; it's about public health, environmental sustainability, and enhancing the overall
quality of life in our community.
I strongly believe that Bike Ped Commission provides the necessary leadership and advocacy to make these visions
a reality. I urge you choose option three, to keep the BPC intact, and rename it to the Transportation and Mobility
Commission.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
Rob Tsuk
Dexter Drive, Cupertino
From:Javed
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:BPC should remain independent
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 8:20:55 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 Cocil Members!
I am and old resident of Cupertino for the last 30 years.
I love biking and when city made some changes to make bike lane separate
from the main road, by putting barriers, it was a very good thing for bikers
of all ages.
Most of the countries in the world encourage people to use bike. It helps in
less traffic congestions due to autos and promote healthy life style.
BPC is one of the organization to look into the issues of the bikers and pedestrians.
So I very humbly request to please keep BPC as as with option #3 for the sake of
students, seniors and other bikers.
Thanks,
Javed
From:Kellee Noonan
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; citymanager@cupertino.com
Subject:Bike Ped Commission on Sept 16 City Council agenda
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 8:24:09 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 Members,
The Bike Ped Commission has been a powerful advocate for citizens who prefer not to drive
cars in Cupertino, especially students & seniors. We want to let you know for your vote that
we support Option 3-keep the BPC intact, and rename the Commission to the Transportation
and Mobility Commission.
We need to keep a strong discourse on topics like bike paths and walking trails that affect the
safety of citizens & improve the quality of life in our city & world. Absorbing the BPC into
another commission dilutes the due diligence in these important areas of consideration.
Thank you for representing your constituents views on this matter.
Kellee Noonan & Douglas Lee
10290 Farallone Drive
Sent from my iPad
From:mmalik1@comcast.net
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:Walk Bike Commision
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 8:37:01 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.
Hello All,
I support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact.
These dedicated individuals have made a tremendous impact on Bike
Lanes and trails in our City.
Let’s keep them motivated.
Mike Malik
mmalik1@comcast.net
Cell: 408.464.1039
From:Chris Feng
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike and Pedestrian Comission Decision
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 8:39:48 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 Cupertino City Council,
I am a long time resident of Cupertino writing to request that the council pursue Option 3-to
keep the Bike and Pedestrian Comission intact, and rename to the Commission to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission. I've seen first hand the great progress the
Comission and city have made in changing the makeup of local transportation. Every person
that feels empowered to make their day to day travel by alternative transportation is a car off
the road, which improves traffic and safety for everyone.
I grew up seeing only the occasional rider with most residents including students traveling by
car, but have seen the proportion rise over the last decade. Having a Comission dedicated to
identifying potential safety concerns and enabling users of any ability to feel safe on the road
is essential furthering adoption of safe and low impact transportation options. I hope the
council sees the value in continuing to emphasize the safety and ability of all residents.
Best,
Chris Feng
From:Venkat Ranganathan
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Cc:Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Re: Agenda Item 22 – Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 8:55:22 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 Chao and Councilmembers,
Further to the email, I have updated the email to provide more claity on the option I have chosen. please see below
The staff report lays out four options for restructuring commission review of transportation projects. Of these, I
believe Option 2 provides the best balance. This approach would place review of major projects with citywide
impacts — such as lane removals or intersection reconfigurations — under the Planning Commission, while the Bike
Pedestrian Commission (BPC) would continue to review multimodal projects that have little impact on vehicular
travel.
This model respects the expertise of the BPC while ensuring that decisions with broader implications are reviewed
through a wider planning lens. Other cities, such as Palo Alto and San Carlos, successfully use similar structures,
where advisory input on bicycles and pedestrians is preserved but final oversight rests with the broader planning
body.
Retaining the BPC in an advisory capacity also ensures Cupertino meets MTC’s requirements for a BPAC-equivalent
body, keeping the City eligible for active transportation grantsSupplemental Reports.
I urge Council to adopt Option 2 — strengthening oversight, balancing input from all road users, and ensuring fair,
community-wide transportation planning.
Thank you for your consideration.
Venkat Ranganathan
From: Venkat Ranganathan <n.r.v@live.com>
Sent: Monday, September 15, 2025 8:48 PM
To: citycouncil@cupertino.gov <citycouncil@cupertino.gov>; Cupertino City Manager's Office
<manager@cupertino.org>; City Clerk <cityclerk@cupertino.gov>
Cc: Chad Mosley <chadm@cupertino.gov>; David Stillman <davids@cupertino.gov>;
TinaK@cupertino.gov <tinak@cupertino.gov>
Subject: Agenda Item 22 – Oversight of Transportation Matters
Dear Mayor Chao and Councilmembers
I am writing to provide input on Agenda Item 22 regarding commission oversight of transportation matters.
While the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC) plays an important role in representing the needs of cyclists and
pedestrians, its influence has grown in a way that often sidelines the broader interests of the community. Using
“active transportation” as a sole framework, lane closures and dividers have been advanced on busy streets,
frequently to the detriment of the majority of road users. These impacts deserve balanced study, especially when
alternative bike routes exist that could achieve safety without disproportionately burdening drivers and transit
circulation.
As the staff supplemental notes, many comparable cities—such as Palo Alto, San Carlos, Walnut Creek, and Mission
Viejo—have successfully centralized land use and transportation under their Planning or Planning & Transportation
CommissionsSupplemental Reports. In those cases, bike and pedestrian input is preserved through advisory
committees but final oversight resides with the broader planning body. This ensures that transportation decisions
are evaluated in the full context of land use, traffic flow, and citywide mobility goals.
I strongly urge Cupertino to adopt a similar model:
Retain the BPC as an advisory body to provide valuable input on bicycle and pedestrian priorities.
Place final oversight and recommendations for active transportation projects under the Planning
Commission (or a combined Planning & Transportation Commission if established).
Ensure compliance with MTC requirements for a BPAC-equivalent body while guaranteeing that decision-
making authority rests with a commission capable of weighing all modes of transportation
fairlySupplemental Reports.
This structure respects the voices of cyclists and pedestrians while also ensuring balanced decision-making that
reflects the needs of all Cupertino residents.
Thank you for considering this approach that brings accountability, broader oversight, and fairness to transportation
planning.
Thanks
Venkat Ranganathan
From:Paul Murdock
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:Support option 3!!!
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:06:11 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.
To Cupertino City Council members,
I have been a resident of Cupertino for the past 8 years. My wife and two daughters frequently walk, bike and run on
the streets and pathways such as the Regnart trail. We love how Cupertino has been developing more street
pathways dedicated for cyclists. We certainly feel much safer with them.
We highly encourage you to support Option 3 to keep the Bike Ped Commission intact!!
Thank you, Paul and Ming Hui Murdock
Sent from my iPhone
From:Paula Wallis
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:10:09 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 am writing to kindly request that on the issue of the Bike Ped Commission, that you vote for
option 3 to keep the BPC intact, and rename the commission to the Transportation and
Mobility Commission.
It has been wonderful to see the visible bike safety improvement made in recent years to our
local streets and bike paths. The Bike Ped Commission is doing a fabulous job and I would
love to see this commission continue its work and expand bike and pedestrian safety on our
streets.
Our city is far too car centric. No one likes to walk or bike with cars whizzing by. It would be
great to see more bike paths and trails to encourage more people to leave the car behind and
walk or ride.
Please keep this commission in tack and put the City's full support behind it.
Kind Regards,
Paula Wallis
From:Trent Poltronetti
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please keep the Bike Ped committee intact
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:18:49 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 Cupertino City Council,
Our son rides his bike to Monta Vista High School every day - and we feel strongly that is better for him, the
community and the environment than us driving him.
We worry every day about his safety though. Cupertino has made solid progress in pedestrian and cyclist safety in
the last few years - please don’t lose that momentum by disbanding the Bike Ped Committee and vote for Option 3.
Thanks,
Trent
__________________________________
Trent Poltronetti
10201 Hillcrest Rd, Cupertino
Cell 650 799 5009
From:Marilyn Beck
To:City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Re: Please keep the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:23:55 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,
I emailed you previously but here's another plea.
Please choose "Option 3-keep the BPC intact, and rename the Commission to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission" at the next meeting.
Since my last email, a neighbor was struck by a car and seriously injured while crossing
Stevens Creek Blvd at a lighted crosswalk near Phar Lap. This is the sort of thing that I would
expect the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission to investigate and see if something could be
done to improve the infrastructure in the hopes of preventing this terrible thing from
happening again.
Please vote to save the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission. That would show that you care
for the safety of those of us, of all ages, who walk and bike in Cupertino. We need a dedicated
team who can advocate for our safety and find ways to improve the city infrastructure to
accommodate us.
Thank you,
Marilyn Beck
On Tue, Sep 2, 2025 at 7:45 PM Marilyn Beck <beck1739@gmail.com> wrote:
Dear Council Members,
Cupertino has a dedicated Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission where the members
can focus on how to improve safety and functionality for pedestrians and cyclists.
Please keep this dedicated group!
Almost everyone walks in Cupertino, and many people would walk more (or to new areas) if
they felt it was safer. And we want everyone to walk more! Walking has health benefits, but
not if you are get hit by a car.
Many people ride bikes in Cupertino, including kids, students, commuters, people who ride
for pleasure, and people who ride to do their errands. People who ride also face hazards, and
an unfortunate mindset, common among Americans, that only cars belong on the roads.
The dedicated Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission advocates for this large group of
Cupertino residents and workers. Adding this work to the Planning committee doesn't make
Thank you,
Marilyn Beck
From:balaji gururajan
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Cc:srividhya venugopal
Subject:Input on Agenda Item 22 regarding commission oversight of transportation matters
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:29:45 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 Chao and Councilmembers,
We are writing to provide input on Agenda Item 22 regarding commission oversight of
transportation matters.
The staff report lays out four options for restructuring commission review of transportation
projects. Of these, I believe Option 2 provides the best balance. This approach would place
review of major projects with citywide impacts — such as lane removals or intersection
reconfigurations — under the Planning Commission, while the Bike Pedestrian Commission
(BPC) would continue to review multimodal projects that have little impact on vehicular
travel.
This model respects the expertise of the BPC while ensuring that decisions with broader
implications are reviewed through a wider planning lens. Other cities, such as Palo Alto and
San Carlos, successfully use similar structures, where advisory input on bicycles and
pedestrians is preserved but final oversight rests with the broader planning body.
Retaining the BPC in an advisory capacity also ensures Cupertino meets MTC’s requirements
for a BPAC-equivalent body, keeping the City eligible for active transportation grants.
We urge Council to adopt Option 2 — strengthening oversight, balancing input from all
road users, and ensuring fair, community-wide transportation planning.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Balaji Gururajan & Srividhya Venugopal
10212 Denison Ave
Cupertino CA 95014
From:Aaryan Doshi
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Keep the Power with the Bike Ped
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:52:43 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,
For years the BPC has played an absolutely essential role in the safety of bikers and walkers
alike. From creating barriers on Stevens Creek to adding bollards and reducing speed limits ---
the impact really cannot be overstated.
I know countless people who started to bike again after the BPC took action into its own
hands. Students, children, and the elderly of Cupertino rely on the BPC for safe, sustainable
transportation.
It would be a disgrace to strip them of safe transportation. We must ensure that the BPC has
power. On this end, I strongly urge you to choose Option 3 -- keep the BPC intact and
rename it to the Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Thank you and please don't let us down.
Best,
Aaryan
From:Frank Yang
To:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Council
Subject:Support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact & Please build
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 9:53:15 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 Chao and City council member:
This is Frank Yang, I am a resident in cupertino, and I am representing my family and many
of my neighborhood to ask you kindly to keep the bike ped commission intact, and more
importantly, we need you to help us build a safety bridge to allow children, students, bikers,
hikers and pedestrian safely across stevens creek blvd near blackberry farm entrance area.
The Bike Ped Commission is the only commission that is dedicated to looking out for the
safety of our children, youth, and seniors on our city streets. It must stay independent. We vote
Option 3!!
We not only need the city to keep the Bike Ped Commission intact, we also need the city to
revisit the two existing solutions to improve the safety of our community near stevens creek
blvd.
1. Carmen Bridge project
https://www.cupertino.gov/Your-City/Departments/Public-Works/Transportation-
Mobility/Projects/Carmen-Road-Bridge
2. City takes over the private lot at 10112 Crescent Ct and builds a pathway across stevens
creek blvd under the bridge, connecting the varian park, blackberry farm, McClellan Ranch
and Linda Vista Park.
https://www.cupertino.gov/files/assets/city/v/1/your-city/documents/press-releases/press-
release-linda-vista.pdf
As a dad with one middle-schooler and one elementary-schooler, mornings and afternoons
along the Kennedy MS and Monta Vista HS corridors can be chaos — 30–40 minutes of
creeping traffic, last-second drop-offs, and near-misses that spike your heart rate before
coffee. It’s stressful for working parents, frustrating for neighbors boxed in by queues, and
honestly scary for kids on bikes or scooters trying to cross Stevens Creek Blvd.Here’s what
the City’s own programs tell us:A lot of families live close enough to walk/roll. Safe Routes to
School says ~40% of Cupertino students live within 1 mile — a 5–10 minute bike trip in
normal conditions. Yet single-family car trips are trending up, while walking is down —
meaning more cars in front of our schools at peak hours. Parents and grandparents tell me the
same thing: “If there were a truly safe, car-free way to get across Stevens Creek Blvd near
Cupertino Rd/Blackberry Farm, I’d let my middle-schooler bike. I’d take my grandkids to the
park without white-knuckling the crosswalk.” That one fix unlocks hundreds of daily trips:
kids to Kennedy and Monta Vista, families to Blackberry Farm and McClellan Ranch,
weekend riders to the Stevens Creek Trail — all without feeding the gridlock.
Below are the evidence of many tragedies that have happened in our neighborhood, we
need the city to act soon to provide the very safety that we are crying for...
What’s been happening (last 10 years), starting with 9/5/25
Sept 5, 2025 — near Blackberry Farm side entrance (Cupertino Rd / Stevens Creek
Blvd)
Community-reported collision involving a person injured and a missing dog (“Bella”). No
official bulletin or press write-up yet; neighbors described the scene and shared search posts. I
could not find an agency report to cite yet — note this as community-reported, pending Sheriff
confirmation.
Nov 29, 2024 — Multi-vehicle/pursuit crash near SR-17 & Stevens Creek (corridor east
end)
A CHP pursuit ended in a violent rollover; a teenage passenger died and three others were
hurt. (Not a ped/bike crash, but it underscores corridor risk/exposure at Stevens Creek’s east
end.)
Sept 19, 2024 — Stevens Creek Blvd & Hanson Ave (West San José border of the
corridor)
A woman crossing was struck and killed in the Hanson/Stevens Creek area (near Santana
Row). Police kept eastbound Stevens Creek closed for hours; driver stayed on scene.
Apr 27, 2024 — Foothill Blvd at Stevens Creek Blvd (Cupertino)
Pickup truck jumped the curb and hit four children walking home from Monta Vista Park; 11-
year-old later died. The Sheriff’s Office summary, subsequent coverage and memorial stories
are unequivocal.
The bigger picture (patterns & data)
Cupertino’s public collision dashboard catalogs 1,950 crashes (2018–2024) with 47
severe injuries and 10 fatalities, concentrated on major corridors including Stevens
Creek and Foothill/De Anza.
City-adopted Vision Zero work identifies “Cupertino Rd & Stevens Creek
Blvd” and nearby nodes among its high-concern intersections; Stevens Creek is
repeatedly flagged across City planning documents.
Earlier analysis (2012–2021) counted 1,157 crashes, 9 deaths, 74 severe injuries—
again concentrated on corridors like Stevens Creek.
--
Best Regards
Frank Yang
From:Sonal
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike Ped Commission Vote
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:05:51 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 manager and city clerk,
I am writing to let you know that I support the continuation of the bike ped commision.
I feel it is of the upmost important to provide an independent body to study bike and pedestrian safety, and assure
that our citizens can soundly utilize their bikes or walk.
Please pick option 3 when you vote on this matter.
Kind regards,
Sonal Abhyanker
Sent from my iPhone
From:Jian He
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Don"t Abolish the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission - Keep it Intact!
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:09:21 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 Cupertino City Council and City Staff,
I am writing to urge you to vote to keep the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission (BPC) intact at
your meeting on Tuesday, September 16. I am aware of the proposals to either eliminate
the commission entirely or strip it of its authority, and I believe that doing so would be a
significant disservice to our community, particularly to our most vulnerable residents.
The BPC is the only city commission dedicated to the safety of our children, youth, and
seniors on Cupertino's streets. It provides an essential, independent voice for pedestrians
and cyclists. Abolishing it would silence this voice, which is unacceptable.
Please choose Option 3, which keeps the BPC intact and renames it the "Transportation
and Mobility Commission." This option recognizes the commission's long-standing role in
transportation matters, as defined in the municipal code (2.92.080 Powers and Functions).
The code clearly states, "The function of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission is to review,
monitor and make recommendations regarding City transportation matters including but not
limited to bicycle and pedestrian traffic, parking, education and recreation within Cupertino.”
Moving the BPC's authority to the Planning Commission is a misguided and harmful
decision. The Planning Commission's expertise is in land use, zoning, and large-scale
development, not the specific safety needs of active transportation users. This change is
unprecedented, and it would effectively allow the safety of our most vulnerable residents to
be ignored.
Recent tragedies in our city highlight the urgent need for a dedicated body focused on
pedestrian and cyclist safety. Just ten days ago, there was a significant accident at the
Phar Lap crossing on Stevens Creek Boulevard, which required a multi-agency response
from fire engines and sheriff cars. This incident underscores the ongoing safety concerns at
a known pedestrian crossing.
In 2024, a devastating accident on Foothill Boulevard near Monta Vista Park resulted in the
death of a young girl and severe injuries to several other children. The lack of
sidewalks in that section of the busy road was a major contributing factor. These incidents
are not isolated; they are symptoms of systemic safety issues that require dedicated
attention. The BPC is vital for promoting and overseeing projects that would make the
necessary infrastructure improvements to prevent future tragedies.
Please do the right thing and support the safety of our community. Vote to keep the Bicycle
Pedestrian Commission intact and independent. Our residents deserve a dedicated
commission that prioritizes their well-being.
Sincerely,
Jian He
A concerned Cupertino Resident near Blackberry Farm for 20 years
From:Mohan Sharma
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike Ped Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:11:35 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 Cupertino City Council,
Public transportation plays a critical role in the daily activities of every resident in Silicon Valley as well as protects
our only planet against harmful emissions from the millions of motorists who use Silicon Valley roads every day.
However, to maintain the viability of transit and safety of riders, there must be a body dedicated to serving our
interests as humans.
I ride transit on a near-daily basis and have been to & through Cupertino many times by transit. The city is in
desperate need of pedestrian-, transit- and bike-oriented development.
Please vote for option 3 to maintain the commission that is dedicated to serving every person, regardless of their
ability or choice to own/use a car.
Thank you very much for voting for option 3 and helping protect our home,
Mohan, resident
From:Robin Chen
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please keep the BPC intact
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:25:02 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 there,
I am from a family of bikers, including two young kids who I hope will eventually be out of
the bike trailer and on their own bike as they get to and from school, friends' houses, etc. My
80+ year old mother in law also often uses her bike to travel places within Cupertino. I would
like to respectfully ask you to consider choosing "Option 3-keep the BPC intact, and rename
the Commission to the Transportation and Mobility Commission". It is important that any
transportation committee consider the needs of bikers and pedestrians in addition to the needs
of drivers.
Thanks for your time,
Robin
From:Pete Letchworth
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact.
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:35:14 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.
As a resident of Cupertino since 1973, and a cyclist for the whole time since, I would
like to urge you to vote for Option 3 at the City Council meeting Tuesday night.
Nothing is worth more than the safety of cyclists and pedestrians on our streets, and
to cut back on the City support would be a step backwards. There have been many
changes and improvements in our roads and pathways over the years, and it is
imperative that those efforts continue for the current and future non-car people on our
streets.
Regards,
Pete Letchworth
905 Rose Blossom Drive
From:David Greenstein
To:City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Do not get rid of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:36:50 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 Council,
I made a case for the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission over twenty years ago and I still see
its importance today. I was chosen as one of the first to sit on the commission, and we
accomplished a lot during my tenure.
The BPC pushed for and got funds from the VTA for the Don Burnett/Mary Avenue Bridge
and numerous other high ticket items. Now we are more walkable and bikeable than ever
before. These projects have improved the health of our citizens and increased the value of our
community.
No other commission has been as effective at getting these infrastructure projects done. No
other commission is laser focused on improving the walkability and bikeability of Cupertino.
No other commission is focused on walking and biking for children and the elderly. I teach at
Monta Vista High School and I walk to school. I personally know students that walk and bike
to school. I walk my dogs and see elderly people using our walkways. We need advocates for
all of them and that is the role of the BPC.
I enthusiastically endorse keeping the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.
Regards,
David Greenstein
Former Bicycle/Pedestrian Commissioner
From:Anne Ng
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:oversight of transportation matters
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:37:34 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.
Honorable Councilmembers:
Concerning your Study Session on Commission oversight of transportation matters,
please support Option 2 to best include consideration of the safety of those who
transport themselves by bicycle. Cyclists don't pollute, take up little space on the
road, and should be encouraged.
Anne Ng
6031 Bollinger Road
Cupertino
From:Tristan Lê
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Keeping a Bike Pedestrian Commission in Cupertino
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:38:23 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 Cupertino City Council,
I am a student at Homestead High School who commutes to school by bicycle every day, and I
cycle as both a sport and a hobby. The city of Cupertino has an astonishing number of cyclists
who often commute or exercise on a bicycle in comparison to many other cities in California.
Please preserve this trend of safe active transportation by preserving the Bike Ped Commission
in Cupertino.
Thank you,
Tristan Le
From:Brandon Too
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:I support keeping the Bike Ped Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 10:49:24 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.
Dear City Council Members,
As a father, husband, and active cyclist living in Cupertino; it is imperative that the Bike Pedestrian
Commission (BPC) remain intact as no other organization can truly replace what BPC does when
it comes to pedestrian and cyclist safety. My entire family actively walks and bikes around our
beautiful city and part of the allure is the accessibility of getting around with our own feet from
Blackberry Farm to Main St. I've seen over the years positive improvements to our roadways and
greenbelts that better the health, safety, and community engagement of our residents and visitors,
because of BPC's involvement. While the improvements have been wonderful, there is still much
to improve in the future as interactions between pedestrians/cyclists and motorists are still
concerning with personal accounts of dangerous or distracted drivers endangering my family. I
want the city of Cupertino to continue improving itself and to not simply focus on major
construction/roadway projects with a disregard for how to make our city more accessible and
safer. Many other cities within the Bay Area maintain a BPC and provide tremendous value in
linking cities together and improving lives. Why make Cupertino an exception?
I urge the council to keep the BPC intact.
Sincerely,
Brandon
From:Yuvaraj Athur Raghuvir
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Request for review and dissolution of Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:06:57 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 communication for the upcoming city council meeting.
Dear Mayor Chao and Council members,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 on how Cupertino commissions should oversee
transportation projects.
The current approach to transportation needs to revised. Existing structure has failed our
residents. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission was allowed to move projects forward with
very little accountability, and the result was the loss of lanes on De Anza Boulevard. This
caused frustration for drivers, longer travel times, and more congestion, especially for families
and seniors who rely on cars.
Cupertino cannot afford more mistakes like this.
Transportation decisions that affect thousands of people every day must be reviewed by the
Planning Commission, not left to an advisory body that has narrow focus.
Option 2 provides this necessary oversight. It makes sure that large-scale projects with
citywide impact are reviewed in a broader planning context, not only from the perspective of a
single group.
Other cities like Palo Alto and San Carlos have shown that this structure works. Cupertino
should learn from them and restore balance to our process. Residents deserve a system that
looks at the whole picture, not just bicycles and pedestrians, before making changes that affect
everyone.
Fiscal Concerns and Power Dynamics
Critics, including some council members and planning officials, have raised concerns that:
• The Bike & Pedestrian 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
and fair representation for all road users.
Sincerely,
Yuva Athur
Cupertino Citizen
From:Alvin Yang
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:15:39 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 am writing again to urge you to not eliminate the Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission's responsibilities by moving them towards the Planning Commission and instead
take up option 3 from the staff report and designate the BPC as the Transportation and
Mobility Commision.
The BPC provides an important avenue for people who use alternative means of transportation
whether because they are unable or prefer not to drive. These people include the disabled,
children too young to vote, elderly who are unable to drive anymore, and even people who
simply prefer to use other means of transportation. It is important that these people are
properly represented through the BPC. The Planning Commission primarily deals with zoning,
permitting, land use, etc and does not have the specific expertise on transportation that the
BPC has. Furthermore by moving more responsibilities to the Planning Commission you
dilute the amount of time and resources that can be committed to transportation. The Planning
Commission would have less time to both take public comments/input and discuss
transportation issues.
Having a separate transportation commission is a standard practice all around the Bay Area.
Cities all across the Bay Area including Cupertino's immediate neighbors have separate bike
pedestrian commissions or transportation commissions because they recognize the importance
of transportation for their citizens and city. Cities also recognize that having a separate
transportation commission allows for eligibility for grant funding from the County, State, and
Federal Government. Eliminating the BPC would cut off chances of receiving these grants.
Just last year Cupertino adopted a Vision Zero plan with a goal to eliminate traffic fatalities
and severe injuries by 2040. I do not see a way towards this plan if the BPC, with it's unique
expertise, is dismantled. The safety and lives of your citizens are at hand here, and I implore
you to choose correctly.
Regards,
Alvin Yang
From:Brian Beck
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please Keep Bike Ped Commission in Cupertino
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:20:01 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.
Folks:
I'm a long time Cupertino resident who values the work of the Bike Ped
Commission and the cycling infrastructure that the city has installed.
I am strongly in favor of keeping this commission intact and continuing
to support it's mission in watching out for pedestrian and cyclist
safety in our city.
Thank you.
Brian Beck
From:Peter Murray
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike Committee
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:41:28 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.
I am an active cyclist. We have lived in Cupertino for over 40 years. The car traffic has greatly increased, especially
the commuters cutting through our neighborhoods. The Walk Bike committee has been instrumental in improving
safe cycling in Cupertino. I Totally Support the committee remains intact going forward.
Peter Murray
21742 Columbus Ave
From:Teresa Olson
To:City Clerk; City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bicycling and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:43:21 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 and Mayor Liang Chao,
Thank you for reopening the public hearing.
I hope that you decide to keep the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission. Over the
years, it has made a lot of good recommendations that led to projects that have
improved the quality of life here in Cupertino. For example, the Regnart Creek Trail,
the class IV bike lanes on McClellan, and the Lawson Middle School on-street bike
lane have been wonderful additions!
Important bicycle and pedestrian safety issues and improvements will get a lot less
attention if these matters are handled by the Planning Commission. Good ideas may
never be presented to the City Council.
Having a dedicated Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission means that important ideas,
to improve safety and increase alternative transportation use, have a chance of being
presented at the City Council meetings, and voted on and potentially turned into
projects which benefit citizens.
Thank you for reading.
Sincerely,
Teresa Olson
Cupertino Resident
From:Arushi Gehani
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please Support Option 3 – Keep Transportation Advocacy Strong in Cupertino
Date:Monday, September 15, 2025 11:48:44 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 Members,
I'm writing to urge you to vote for Option 3 on Agenda Item 22 at tomorrow’s meeting —
to keep the Bike Pedestrian Commission independent, and to rename it the
Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Although I can't attend in person due to family responsibilities, I feel compelled to speak up
— especially as a parent of children who walk and bike to school in Cupertino.
Here’s why I believe this decision is critical:
1. Our children’s safety is at stake.
More than one child on a bike has been hit by cars near my children’s middle school — right
here in our own neighborhoods. These are not statistics from another city. These are real
incidents, happening where our kids live, learn, and play.
A dedicated Bike Pedestrian Commission ensures that safety issues like this aren’t pushed to
the bottom of the agenda. When transportation is absorbed into the Planning Commission —
where the focus is on housing density, zoning, and setbacks — critical conversations about
safe routes to school, crosswalk visibility, and bike lane design are diluted or delayed.
We can’t afford to treat these as side issues. Our children’s lives are not an afterthought.
2. Data shows separate commissions work — and save money.
Across the Bay Area, the overwhelming majority of cities have separate Planning and
Transportation Commissions. Cupertino would be an outlier if we combined them — and
not in a good way.
Why does this matter?
Because having a focused commission makes us more competitive for grant funding.
Since 2018, more than 87% of Cupertino’s bike and pedestrian infrastructure projects
have been paid for by grants — not local taxes. In fact, the city's share of costs has been
less than 13%.
If you include the value of donated land, like the $7 million Linda Vista Trail easement,
Cupertino has paid less than 10% of total bike/ped project costs.
This is a huge win for residents. Why jeopardize that by weakening our transportation
advocacy?
3. Transportation belongs in the hands of people who live it.
There are over 40,000 students in Cupertino across CUSD, FUHSD, and De Anza College.
15% of our residents are 65 and older, a number that's growing every year. These are the
people who rely most on safe sidewalks, crosswalks, curb ramps, and protected bike lanes.
These groups show up and speak out when there’s a commission that represents their needs
— not when they’re competing with zoning maps and density bonuses.
Combining the commissions sends a clear message: transportation safety isn’t a priority.
But it should be.
4. Let the Planning Commission focus — and let transportation thrive.
The Planning Commission already has its hands full with complex housing mandates,
development proposals, zoning updates, and state requirements. Transportation needs a
space of its own.
A standalone Transportation and Mobility Commission will:
Prioritize safe routes to school
Align us with VTA, Caltrans, and regional funding goals
Keep community voices front and center
Allow for deeper, more informed discussion on transportation design and safety
5. This decision reflects who we are as a city.
Cupertino has always prided itself on being forward-thinking, inclusive, and safe for
families. Eliminating an independent commission dedicated to transportation is a step
backward — and it’s out of step with the values we share.
This is not just a procedural change. It’s a statement of priorities. And I hope we can all
agree: keeping our residents safe — especially our children — should be at the top of
that list.
Please vote for Option 3, and let’s strengthen, not weaken, our city’s commitment to safe,
sustainable, and inclusive transportation.
Sincerely,
Arushi Gehani, Cupertino resident since 2009
wife to Samir Gehani who bikes everyday
Mom to Dsughter who bikes to school everyday
From:S H
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Cupertino Bicycle Pedestrian Commmission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:05:46 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 Mayor Chiao, Councilmember Fruen, Councilmember Mohan, Councilmember Moore,
and Councilmember Wang,
I am writing to urge the Cupertino City Council to retain the Bicycle and Pedestrian
Commission (BPC) as an independent advisory body, and to move forward with Option 3:
Renaming the Bicycle Pedestrian Committee to the Transportation and Mobility Commission
while keeping the commission's full authority intact.
Cupertino has long prided itself on being a forward-thinking, family-oriented, and affluent
community. With that privilege comes the responsibility to ensure that our streets are safe,
sustainable, and accessible for all users—children, seniors, pedestrians, cyclists, and drivers
alike. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission has been instrumental in guiding projects such
as the McClellan Road bicycle lane, a critical improvement that came only after years of
advocacy.
We must also remember the tragic death of the Monta Vista High School student who was
struck and killed while biking to School, a loss that still weighs heavily on our community.
Evidence shows that dedicated bicycle infrastructure, like protected lanes, significantly
reduces crashes and saves lives. That tragedy might have been prevented had stronger
measures been in place sooner. This is why retaining a commission focused on bicycle and
pedestrian safety is not optional—it is essential.
Most of the most forward-thinking and affluent cities in the United States and internationally
have dedicated Bicycle and Pedestrian Commissions. Cupertino should be leading this trend,
not questioning or moving away from best practices. Advisory commissions like these are
proven to improve street safety, reduce crashes, guide efficient staff decision-making, and
foster community trust in city planning.
Unsafe driving behaviors are the norm in Cupertino with rushed, distracted, or aggressive
driving remaining a persistent danger. Streets designed and monitored with active
transportation in mind are safer for cyclists, pedestrians, and drivers alike. Eliminating or
weakening the BPC would risk reversing our progress. Cupertino should instead build on its
legacy of innovation by keeping the Commission intact, modernizing its scope, and
empowering it to continue shaping a healthier, safer, and more connected community.
Thank you for your service to Cupertino and for considering the voices of residents who value
safety, sustainability, and long-term quality of life.
Respectfully,
Susan Hansen
From:Yoon Choi
To:Liang Chao; City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please Do Not Keep the Bike Ped Commission (Oppose Option 3)
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:16:13 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 Mayor Chao and Cupertino City Council Members,
I am writing to express my opposition to keeping the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission intact
(Option 3). While I strongly value safety for all residents-especially students, youth, and
seniors-I believe the current Bike Pedestrian Commission is not the right structure for
addressing these concerns effectively.
1. Duplication and Inefficiency
We already have the Planning Commission, which has the responsibility and expertise to
review transportation matters in the broader context of city planning. Creating a separate
commission just for bicycles and pedestrians fragments oversight, slows progress, and creates
unnecessary duplication.
2. Broader Transportation Perspective is Needed
Transportation in Cupertino must be considered holistically, balancing cars, public transit,
bicycles, and pedestrians. The Planning Commission is better equipped to make those
balanced decisions, rather than a narrowly focused commission that advocates only for certain
modes of travel.
3. Fair Representation for All Residents
Most Cupertino residents rely primarily on cars for daily transportation. Giving
disproportionate weight to a commission focused almost exclusively on bicycles and
pedestrians creates imbalance in decision-making. Residents deserve fair representation that
reflects the majority’s needs.
4. Streamlined, Accountable Government
Streamlining commissions reduces bureaucracy and makes city government more effective
and accountable. The proposal to fold responsibilities into the Planning Commission ensures
transportation issues are reviewed with proper context and expertise, without adding another
layer of process.
For these reasons, I urge you to reject Option 3 and instead move toward a more streamlined,
efficient structure that places transportation oversight under the Planning Commission. This
will ensure decisions reflect the needs of the entire community, not just a subset.
Thank you for your time and consideration.
Sincerely,
10531 N Portal Ave, Cupertino CA 95014
From:Anne Ng
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:CORRECTION: Re: oversight of transportation matters
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:33:08 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.
Sorry! As you may have guessed from the context, I typoed the Option number in my
email below. Please, please support Option 3!
Anne
On Monday, September 15, 2025 at 10:37:19 PM PDT, Anne Ng <anneng@aol.com> wrote:
Honorable Councilmembers:
Concerning your Study Session on Commission oversight of transportation matters,
please support Option 2 to best include consideration of the safety of those who
transport themselves by bicycle. Cyclists don't pollute, take up little space on the
road, and should be encouraged.
Anne Ng
6031 Bollinger Road
Cupertino
From:Dennis Park
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Support for "Option 2" on Commission Oversight of Transportation matter
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 1:19:22 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 Mayor and Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of Option 2 for defining commission roles in the review of
transportation matters.
Option 2 provides the right balance between the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission’s specialized
expertise and the Planning Commission’s broader citywide perspective. Transportation policy
should consider all modes—cars, transit, bikes, and pedestrians—without allowing any single
perspective to dominate. Under this approach, the Planning Commission would review
projects that could affect vehicular travel, ensuring transportation policies align with land use
and citywide goals, while the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission would focus on multimodal
projects where their expertise is most valuable. This structure preserves specialized input
while avoiding situations where the bike-ped commission’s opinions could outweigh impacts
on drivers or broader mobility needs.
By adopting Option 2, the Council can ensure that transportation planning remains inclusive,
balanced, and representative of the full community’s needs rather than being shaped by a
single mode of travel.
Thank you for your leadership on this important issue.
From:dianeliz1@yahoo.com
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Item #22 on Agenda for 16 Sep 2025 - Choose option #3
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 2:10:38 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.
As a Santa Clara resident, bicyclist, and long-time member of or attendee at my city's
BPAC, I was appalled to learn of this effort in neighboring Cupertino to quash the
effectiveness of your own bicycle-pedestrian commission by swallowing it into your
planning commission or elsewhere. While I often complain about a lack of
effectiveness of our BPAC, a total elimination in any city in this current climate crisis
seems completely absurd. The voices of your citizens who ride their bikes and/or
walk need to continue to be heard by commissioners sympathetic to their concerns
because they also cycle/walk in Cupertino. (In my experience, planning
commissioners rarely do.)
Were you aware that some grants for bicycle & pedestrian projects require a city to
have a functioning BPAC? So, taking it away could reduce your grant money. In fact,
I'm not sure that this new name will be acceptable either. It would be best to call it a
BPAC, like every other neighboring city.
Yes, I do occasionally ride my bike in Cupertino. But, if it's a chain store that has an
option in my city or Sunnyvale or San Jose, I'm more likely to head to one of those. I
prefer to do business in a bike-friendly city.
Please also accept the Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study as Santa
Clara, San Jose, and other jurisdictions have done (item #19).
Sincerely,
Diane Harrison
3283 Benton St.
Santa Clara, CA 95051
(land of the Ohlone and Muwekma Ohlone people)
408-246-8149
dianeliz1@yahoo.com
Member: Santa Clara County Green Party County Council
From:Deepa Mahendraker
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Agenda item 22: Transportation project oversights
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 6:24:55 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.
Please include this communication in city council meeting today for agenda topic 22
Dear Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 on how Cupertino commissions should oversee transportation projects.
The current structure has failed our residents. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission was allowed to move
projects forward with very little accountability, and the result was the loss of lanes on De Anza Boulevard. This
caused frustration for drivers, longer travel times, and more congestion, especially for families and seniors who rely
on cars.
Cupertino cannot afford more mistakes like this.
Transportation decisions that affect thousands of people every day must be reviewed by the Planning Commission,
not left to a narrow advisory body.
Option 2 provides this necessary oversight. It makes sure that large-scale projects with citywide impact are reviewed
in a broader planning context, not only from the perspective of a single group.
Other cities like Palo Alto and San Carlos have shown that this structure works. Cupertino should learn from them
and restore balance to our process. Residents deserve a system that looks at the whole picture, not just bicycles and
pedestrians, before making changes that affect everyone.
I strongly urge Council to adopt Option 2. Cupertino needs stronger oversight, accountability, and fair representation
for all road users.
Sincerely,
Deepa Mahendraker
Sent from my iPhone
From:tscannell01@earthlink.net
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please keep the Planning and Bike-Ped Commissions Separate -Choose Option 3
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 6:29:06 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.
To the members of the City Council
My name is Tom Scannell and I have been a resident of Cupertino since 1980. I have been a long time supporter of
safer streets for bikers and pedestrians in Cupertino having spoken before you on many occasions. More recently, I
have become concerned about implementation of the mandatory housing unit plan for Cupertino.
I am opposed to the plan before the council to combine the Bike-Pedestrian Committee with the Planning
Commission and urge you to choose Option 3. Each of these committees have their own areas of expertise and
should be independently staffed. A committee focused on pedestrian and cycling street safety for our Seniors and
school children should a key priority for the City. Second, and equally importantly, the Planning Commission is
facing a large workload over the next few years given the new housing plan for Cupertino. They should focus their
attention and expertise exclusively on that issue
Please choose Option 3
Tom Scannell
From:Ram Sripathi
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Agenda item 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 7:14:51 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 Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 on how Cupertino commissions should oversee transportation projects.
The current structure has failed our residents. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission was allowed to move
projects forward with very little accountability, and the result was the loss of lanes on De Anza Boulevard. This
caused frustration for drivers, longer travel times, and more congestion, especially for families and seniors who rely
on cars.
Cupertino cannot afford more mistakes like this.
Transportation decisions that affect thousands of people every day must be reviewed by the Planning Commission,
not left to a narrow advisory body.
Option 2 provides this necessary oversight. It makes sure that large-scale projects with citywide impact are reviewed
in a broader planning context, not only from the perspective of a single group.
Other cities like Palo Alto and San Carlos have shown that this structure works. Cupertino should learn from them
and restore balance to our process. Residents deserve a system that looks at the whole picture, not just bicycles and
pedestrians, before making changes that affect everyone. We should make Cupertino a resident focused city, that
makes Cupertino residents feel valued and come to love their city even more.
I strongly urge Council to adopt Option 2. Cupertino needs stronger oversight, accountability, and fair representation
for all road users.
Sincerely,
Ram Sripathi
Sent from my iPhone
From:Vidya Gurikar
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Chad Mosley; David Stillman
Subject:: Agenda item 22 in today’s Council Meeting
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 7:27:38 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 Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 on how Cupertino commissions should
oversee transportation projects.
The current structure has failed our residents. The Bicycle and Pedestrian
Commission was allowed to move projects forward with very little accountability,
and the result was the loss of lanes on De Anza Boulevard. This caused frustration
for drivers, longer travel times, and more congestion, especially for families and
seniors who rely on cars.
Cupertino cannot afford more mistakes like this.
Transportation decisions that affect thousands of people every day must be
reviewed by the Planning Commission, not left to a narrow advisory body.
Option 2 provides this necessary oversight. It makes sure that large-scale projects
with citywide impact are reviewed in a broader planning context, not only from
the perspective of a single group.
Other cities like Palo Alto and San Carlos have shown that this structure works.
Cupertino should learn from them and restore balance to our process. Residents
deserve a system that looks at the whole picture, not just bicycles and pedestrians,
before making changes that affect everyone.
I strongly urge Council to adopt Option 2. Cupertino needs stronger oversight,
accountability, and fair representation for all road users.
Sincerely,
Shrividya Gurikar
From:Carol Mattsson
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Keep the Bike Ped Commission intact: support Option 3 at tonight"s City Council Meeting
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 7:35:24 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 Cupertino City Council,
Please stop the plan to destroy the Bike Ped Commission at tonight's City Council meeting.
Choose "Option 3-keep the BPC intact, and rename the Commission to the Transportation
and Mobility Commission."
I'm a Cupertino resident who enjoys safe and healthy bicycle riding throughout Cupertino and
neighboring cities. In recent years I've ridden more miles on my bicycles than in my car. I
want MORE people to join me by choosing bicycles (and public transportation) over fossil
fuel powered cars that contribute to climate change. Even the less-polluting electric vehicles
require electricity generated elsewhere and need rare metals and create more emissions to
manufacture than fossil fuel powered cars.
I appreciate Cupertino's scenic and citizen-friendly bike/pedestrian paths, like the new Regnart
Trail and the Mary Ave. Bridge route over I-280. Such pleasant routes for transportation
don't happen by chance: they happen through a commission that is dedicated to looking out
for the safety of our children, youth and seniors on our city streets. Cupertino's Bike Ped
Comission must stay independent.
I urge you to support Option 3, to keep the Bike Ped Commission intact.
Sincerely,
Carol Mattsson
Cupertino Resident
--
Carol Mattsson
Web Developer
(408) 309-8314
mattsson@surfpix.net
www.surfpix.net/web Web Solutions from Essential Bits, Inc.
From:Kristina Pistone
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike Ped Commission - Support Option 3 at council meeting tonight (item 25-14276)
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:02:50 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.
Hello,
I’m writing to strongly encourage you to select “Option 3: Continue with BPC oversight,
rename to ‘Transportation and Mobility Commission’” on the issue of Commission Oversight
of Transportation Matters.
Options 1 and 2 limiting BPC’s purview to issues with “little or no impact on vehicular
traffic” is far too limiting so as to render them effectively powerless, and Option 4 to outright
disband BPC would be even more outrightly short-sighted and dangerous for anyone not in a
vehicle. I’ve walked and biked around multiple cities in this area and the number of times I’ve
almost been hit by a car is too many to count, because a large number of people don’t know or
don’t care if they injure or kill a pedestrian. It’s obvious that a dedicated commission of
people with specific knowledge of bike/ped matters is necessary to provide input on these
matters; having exclusively Planning deal with this would be like asking a landscaper to also
build your second-story deck. Sure, they *might* do an okay job, it’s in the same general area
of the house, but do you *really* want to risk that with such high stakes?
As a Sunnyvale Sustainability Commissioner (speaking here on my own behalf, of course) I
understand how such city commissions work and the need for dedicated expertise on them.
Eliminating Cupertino’s BPC would make you stand out in the area in a bad way, as most
every other city around here has a BPAC in some form, and connectivity across the region is
essential for going places and accomplishing everyone’s Active Transportation Plans and
other (climate and otherwise) goals. I like to be able to bike south to De Anza, your library, or
further, but only when you have reasonable infrastructure for it (and I assume others will
speak to the importance for students and others in the area, many of whom do not have cars
but still need to safely get around, i.e. SR2S).
Finally, the staff report on the alternatives indicating “no sustainability impact” is not correct:
as I’ve stated, if you remove the BPC expertise in favor of cars, your greenhouse gas
emissions will go up (or, at least, not go down per capita nearly as fast as they need to),
running counter to the city’s stated sustainability goal of net-zero by 2040. You even have a
webpage on it (https://www.cupertino.gov/Your-City/Divisions/Environment-
Sustainability/Transportation-Alternatives), stating your transportation is 75% of the city’s
emissions, with a very appropriately-ranked list of alternatives to fossil-fuel based transport.
You cannot EV your way out of those statistics, especially in the present national climate: you
need to increase biking and walking for that, and you need dedicated infrastructure and
expertise for them, not folding it into another entity as a low-priority afterthought.
Thanks for your attention.
Kristina Pistone, PhD
she/her/hers
From:Ruiguo Yang
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:support Option 3 - keep the Bike Ped Commission intact
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:16:15 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 Cupertino City Council members,
As a long-time city resident, I strongly support keeping the Bike Ped Commission intact. Making the city walkable
and safe for all is important for all especially for the vulnerable people like seniors and kids. Encouraging people to
walk is also good for the health and environment.
Best regards,
Ray
From:Brian Strom
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:BPC topic
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:28:21 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 Council,
On the topic of how to organize transportation Please approve Option 3, to retain focus and independence of the
BPC.
The BPC and its function are ever more important to guide transportation planning and decisions. It doesn’t make
sense to weaken or dilute its role, when so many of our citizens rely on walking and riding to move through our fine
city.
Brian Strom
From:Richard Blaine on behalf of Richard A. Blaine
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Bike Ped Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:23:40 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.
Please keep the Bicycle, Pedestrian committee intact. It provides a valuable service to
Cupertino.
--
Dick Blaine, Cupertino, Ca.
From:Mark Hlady
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:In support of a Cupertino BPC
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 8:33:23 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.
Council members:
In my position as head coach of the Black Mountain Composite middle school and high school
cycling team, covering Cupertino schools and neighboring cities, I have seen the full range of
kids' cycling abilities in my 8 years of coaching. Designing infrastructure to keep school kids
safe is a challenge that needs empathy and a solid understanding of their varied abilities. Our
cycling team uses Cupertino streets as part of our team riding and we want a BPC looking out
for our safety.
As a Sunnyvale resident I have seen the benefits of our BPAC in working with the City
council and staff to recommend changes based on the BPAC's expertise and the
BPAC's consultation with other experts and residents.
I support option #3 to keep the Bike Ped Commission intact.
--Mark Hlady, Sunnyvale
From:Helene Davis
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:City Council Agenda Study Session Item 22 - Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:38:38 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 members,
Re: Study Session Item 22 - Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation
Matters
I am writing to express my support for Option 3 - continue BPC oversight and rename
to Transportation and Mobility Commission.
I'm especially concerned about the possible loss of grant funding for any future
projects and the measured increase in staff resources if oversight is transferred to the
Planning Commission.
The BPC gives voice to underrepresented constituencies in our community - cyclists,
pedestrians and other active transportation users. In recent years I have seen more
youth and seniors engage in active transportation thanks to improved infrastructure
that makes them feel safe. The city has made tremendous strides in this area and it is
important to sustain this momentum. Not only does this infrastructure make its users
feel safe but it makes for a healthier more vibrant community.
Thank you for your consideration.
Helene Davis
Long time resident
From:Tim Oey
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Cupertino"s BPC saves lives, especially kids lives!
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:46:49 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 Cupertino City Council,
I live in Sunnyvale near Cupertino and shop, work, eat, and visit friends in Cupertino.
Please keep your Bike Ped Commission intact or rename it to the Transportation and Mobility
Commission.
Merging it into the Cupertino Planning Commission does not make sense as the Planning
Commission already has a full load. It is well worth having a separate commision focus on
transportation.
Transportation is responsible for over 50% of the greenhouse gases in California. Climate
change is a serious concern for us -- remember all the fires we have had locally and elsewhere
in California? Biking and walking instead of driving dramatically reduces climate change.
Even electric cars create huge amounts of climate change compared to biking and walking.
EVs are huge amounts of metal, plastic, and rare earths and need huge amounts of asphalt
pavement to park and move.
Lack of exercise is a huge public health emergency that is greatly reduced by making biking
and walking safer, easier, and more attractive than driving everywhere. The majority of trips
in our area are less than 6 miles -- a very easy bike ride for most.
Cupertino's award winning Safe Routes to School program and progress in improving
biking and walking have made Cupertino the envy of many neighboring cities -- often
matching Palo Alto in how attractive it is.
Motor vehicle crashes kill over 40,000 people a year in the US. Bicyclists and walkers rarely
kill anyone. Cupertino needs to continue to encourage safer transportation options.
Do you really want a lot more car traffic in Cupertino? Think about what that does to the
quality of life in Cupertino -- especially for your kids. Do you want your kids to be able to
move around your neighborhoods safely? Able to get to schools, parks, the library,
and friends' houses on their own? Or do you want Cupertino to become a concrete and asphalt
desert where people are too afraid to walk and bike so instead they only drive in ever larger
and heavier armored tanks to get around?
Transportation AND Land Use are both important for making Cupertino a more attractive
place to live, work, and visit but they are also large and complicated subject areas. It is well
worth having separate commissions to address each of these areas and advise the Cupertino
City Council with their respective expertise.
Thank you for your consideration.
Sincerely,
Tim Oey
Sunnyvale, CA 94087
http://www.timoey.com/
"Knowledge is Power"
From:jim@crewdavis.com
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Cc:Jim Davis
Subject:Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 9:59:46 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 and City Manager,
I am a long-time resident of Cupertino who drives, bikes, and walks our streets and those of our
surrounding communities. I believe it would be a mistake to fold the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission into
the Planning Commission. Planning has it hands full with the current charter of advising the council on
land use matters such as specific and general plans, zonings, and subdivisions. Broadening that charter
will cause transportation advocacy to be reduced in importance and focus. It will be better to maintain a
separate commission responsible for reviewing, monitoring, and suggesting recommendations for city
transportation matters including, but not limited to, bicycle and pedestrian traffic, parking education and
recreation within Cupertino.
After reading the September 3rd staff report on this topic, I recommend the council adopt Option 3 -
Continue with BPC oversight, rename to “Transportation and Mobility Commission”. This will allow focus
on transportation topics as a priority and continue the good work that Cupertino has done in the areas of
advocacy for safety and consideration of the needs of all users of our streets.
Thank you for your consideration.
Jim Davis
From:Andrew Cosand
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please keep the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:14:26 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.
Hello,
as a Sunnyvale cyclist who likes to visit friends, parks, and businesses in Cupertino, I'd like to
ask you to preserve the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission (option 3 on agenda item 22).
Thank you
Andrew Cosand
From:Ian M
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Keep the Bike Ped Commission Intact
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:34:58 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.
Hello,
I'm writing because I'm extremely concerned for the Bike Ped Commission. I urge you to
choose Option 3: Keep the BPC intact, and rename the Commission to the Transportation and
Mobility Commission. The BPC has the right experience and skills to handle the safety and
transportation needs for all residents. Taking power from the BPC will put the lives of
residents in danger and that is entirely unacceptable. Please, choose Option 3. Thank you.
- Ian M
From:J Shearin
To:City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Choose option 3 for Agenda item 22 | City Council September 16, 2025
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:32:31 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.
Please include this as part of Written Communication for this meeting.
Dear Mayor Chao and City Councilmembers,
I ask you today to give direction to pursue option number 3 for Agenda item 22 if you must
make changes to the setup of our Cupertino commissions. Renaming the Bike Ped
Commission to the “Transportation and Mobility Commission” is the least disruptive of all
options and most closely aligns with our Municipal Code.
Nearly every city in the Bay Area has separate Bike/Ped and Planning Commissions with
separate mandates. There’s good reasons for that.
It’s more transparent and lets residents have more input.
Instead of burying safety and access issues for pedestrians and cyclists under a ton of building
and planning issues, there is an official venue for residents to share their concerns. Most of
the people who walk or bike in Cupertino are students or elderly people—our most
vulnerable. Silencing their voices by burying their input under land use issues gives us
less transparent government, and reduces engagement.
It’s a good idea for financial reasons.
Staff was clear that it will cost more of our taxpayer dollars if some or all of the work of
the BPC is moved to under the Planning Commission. It costs a lot more to bring projects
to both commissions, if Transportation is moved under Planning and the BPC is left as a small
shell. Even if all items are moved under Planning, it will still cost us more. Plus, nearly 90%
of all of Cupertino’s Bike Ped projects have been paid for by grants. VTA/MTA is just one
body that has already signaled that we will not be eligible for grants if the change is
made to strip the BPC of its duties.
It makes sense to have two separate commissions, as they have different mandates.
The Planning Commission focus is on building, zoning and state housing mandates, with any
transportation issues considered in the context of land use only. Adding transportation
issues unrelated to building to the Planning Commission means that complex issues such
as pedestrian safety, street design, traffic flow, and cycling infrastructure are not given
any focus. This very reason is why the Cupertino Municipal Code states,
"The function of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission is to review, monitor and make
recommendations regarding City transportation matters…” (2.92.080 Powers and Functions).
I don’t need to tell you that the residents of this city matter—whether they are students who
are biking to school, older people who rely on having safe places to walk across our streets, or
drivers that just want to get where they are going safely. Their concerns should be discussed in
one place by the commissioners that most care about these issues. The best way to do that is to
either keep our current structure or to rename the Bike Ped Commission to the Transportation
and Mobility Commission.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Shearin
Cupertino resident
From:chitrasv@yahoo.com
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Agenda Item 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:49:58 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 Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 of the Cupertino City Council meeting on September 16, 2025.
The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission has failed our community by pushing a one-sided agenda. The lane
removals on De Anza Boulevard are a clear example of what happens when a commission focused almost entirely
on bike lanes is allowed to influence projects that impact the daily lives of thousands of drivers.
The result has been more congestion, longer commutes, and frustration for families, seniors, and working residents
who depend on cars.
This lack of balance is why Cupertino needs stronger oversight.
I support Option 2, but with critical modifications:
1. Transit should not be included under the Bike/Ped Commission. Keep it limited to bicycle and pedestrian issues.
2. Eliminate the vague wording about “little or no potential impact to vehicular modes.” It must be definitive —
projects reviewed by the BPC should have NO impact on vehicular modes.
Only by making these changes will Cupertino prevent another failure like De Anza Boulevard. Major projects with
citywide consequences must be reviewed by the Planning Commission, which can take into account the needs of all
residents, not just a small group of cycling advocates.
I urge the Council to adopt Option 2 with these modifications to restore accountability, balance, and fairness to
Cupertino’s transportation planning.
Sincerely,
Chitra Iyer
Cupertino Resident
From:Hervé Marcy
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:City Council 9/16 item 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:52:45 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.
Mayor Chao and esteemed Councilmembers,
I am part of the Bicycle pedestrian commission of the City of Cupertino, but am writing in
my name only.
98% of all Bay Area cities have a separate Bike Ped/Transportation Commission and
Planning Commission. And there are good reasons for that: the planning commission
has a very specific mission -land use- which is vastly different from the BPC. Planning
commissioners are not nominated for their knowledge of biking and pedestrian
infrastructure. They do not know in depth the challenges that vulnerable groups, such as
seniors and people with disabilities, face when using the city infrastructure and nor
should they, because the BPC is here for that! It allows an increase in community
feedback and input from pedestrians, cyclists and residents impacted by projects.
No later than a few weeks ago, a group of residents came to the BPC to ask for a raised
table and flashing lights on Torre Avenue, right next to City Hall. If the BPC were to lose
its oversight of transportation projects, this infrastructure project, which would impact
car traffic, would hence fall under the preview of the planning commission, making it
harder for residents to express themselves. Does this council want to make it easier or
harder for residents to speak up and give feedback?
I believe that decentralizing power is healthy. If you believe in the fact that "powerful
interest groups" can manipulate decisions, then you should be worried about
concentrating power into the hands of a single commission. You may be in power today,
but if you are not tomorrow, the agenda of your opponent may be much easier to
implement with a single commission. It is not a matter of policy; it is a matter of good
city governance. For this reason, I am humbly asking you to vote for Option 3 - Continue
with BPC oversight, rename to “Transportation and Mobility Commission” on item 22 on
the agenda.
Best regards,
Hervé Marcy
From:Wei Lynn Eng
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Council Meeting Tonight: Bike Ped Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:55:50 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 Members,
I am writing to ask you to please choose Option 3 for Agenda Item 22 to be addressed at the
council meeting this evening. Although I am unable to attend in person due to family
obligations, I would like my voice to be heard. Here are my reasons for supporting a separate
Bike Ped Transportation Commission from the Planning Committee.
1. My children bike to school. The Bike Ped Commission is central to their safety. They are
responsible for a comprehensive approach to mobility that promotes safety, accessibility, and
efficiency for everyone who uses the city’s roads. They address a complete range of
transportation-related issues, including safe pedestrian, cyclist, and car driver traffic flows and
much more. WIth the Bike Ped Commission, I know that deeper conversations about driving
speeds, parking spaces, crosswalks, signal times, curb ramps, protected bike lanes, and Safe
Routes to School will be prioritised.The Bike Ped Commission will consider all users of our
streets including car drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchair users, children walking and
biking to school, and seniors going to the grocery store.
2. The Bike Ped Commission is lower cost than the Planning Committee. Eighty-seven of all
bike/ped projects in Cupertino are paid for by grant money!! Since 2018, Cupertino has only
paid less than 13% of the cost of all the new pedestrian and bike infrastructure built in the city,
with grant funding and gifts paying the rest. This low percentage doesn’t even factor in the
land donated for the Linda Vista Trail in 2019, which was worth at least $7M. If that land is
included, the percentage would dip below 10%. The Planning Commission also requires
significantly more staff resources (our tax dollars) for their meetings than Bike Ped
Commission meetings. It’s irresponsible to make the residents pay more to be heard less.
Transportation does not belong under the purview of the PC.
3.The Bike Ped Commission supports Cupertino demographics. There are over 13,000 K–
12 students in CUSD, around 9,000 students in FUHSD high schools, and around 18,000
students at De Anza college. Cupertino residents 65 and older represent about 15% of our
population — and rising. These are the people who need crosswalks that feel safe, bike lanes
that are protected, and sidewalks that are complete. A dedicated Bike Ped Commission ensures
that their needs aren’t pushed to the bottom of the agenda.
I hope that you take all these very important points into consideration and vote to choose
Option 3 for Agenda item 22. I implore you to keep the BPC intact, and rename the
Commission to the Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Sincerely,
Wei Lynn Eng
Cupertino Resident
From:JQ Shearin
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Agenda Item 22 — Support Option 3
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 10:55:52 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 Councilmembers,
I am reaching out to urge you to preserve the current function of the Bike-Ped Commission. Having a commission
dedicated to transportation, rather than splitting a commission which splits its time between planning/development
codes and transport, is vital to the continued transportation health of our city. We need separate commissions with
specialized experts for these two extremely large areas of action — it is simply not feasible to expect people to be
highly informed about both transportation (including street use, traffic flow, safety, and many kinds of specialized
infrastructure) and planning (including zoning, business concerns, building regulations, and much more).
Maintaining the current commission arrangement will result in a more livable city for everyone.
I ask that you support option 3 and preserve the current functioning of the Bike Ped Commission. Thank you for
your consideration.
Sincerely,
JQ Shearin
From:Jim Meyerson
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please keep the Bike-Pedestrian Commission (BPC) for Cupertino"s own good
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:27:48 AM
Attachments:FOSCT email logo.png
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.
Ms. Mayor and Distinguished Cupertino Council,
I am from the neighboring city of Sunnyvale where we have a healthy and progressive Bike
and Pedestrian Commission ("BPAC" in local terms). Our BPAC has been a key focal point
for discussions on traffic safety, safe passage to schools for youngsters, proper road signage,
and creation and maintenance of trails. It is the primary contact point for non-motorized travel
within Sunnyvale.
While I am not intimately familiar with Cupertino's BPC, I am sure it provides a similar
function within your fine city. Cupertino has a large population of students through the CUSD
schools and DeAnza College who deserve a dedicated forum for discussing safe non-
motorized travel in and through your city. Likewise for the many citizens throughout the
South Bay who want a balanced transportation option. And it is my understanding that
California state law requires a BPC or equivalent as a prerequisite for many grants and
funding efforts. In short, the BPC as constructed today serves a worthwhile function that
should be cherished, not abolished.
Best Regards,
Jim Meyerson
--
Jim Meyerson
Board Member, Friends of Stevens Creek Trail
jim_meyerson@stevenscreektrail.org
http://www.stevenscreektrail.org/
From:Debbie Anderes
To:City Council
Cc:Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Cupertino City Bike Ped Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:33:01 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 Cupertino City Council Members,
I just learned that the City Council is scheduled to decide on the fate of the Bike Pedestrian
Commission at tonight's Council Meeting.
First of all, I am highly disappointed to find our City Council making such an important
decision without more prior notice and outreach to the community. This is a decision that
will have significant consequences and should be made with transparency and thoughtful
input from all affected residents.
Primarily, I am very disturbed to learn that the City Council is even contemplating this
move, given the deadly events that have occurred in the past and will almost certainly occur
in the future if we do not prioritize the safety of our non-drivers. Disbanding the Bike
Pedestrian Commission and moving the entire purview of traffic safety to the planning
commission will effectively relegate the safety of our non-drivers to bureaucratic oblivion.
Our city has a long-standing commitment to walkability and rideability and it makes our city
a desirable place to live. The Bike Pedestrian Commission has initiated many
improvements that have benefitted drivers and non-drivers. This focus and all of the
progress we have made will be lost if we do not continue to have a commission solely
devoted to it.
Bike and pedestrian safety is a matter that requires constant vigilance and on-going
development. The introduction of motorized bikes and scooters emphasizes the complexity
of evolving threats to safety. As car and truck traffic continue to increase, our need to
develop innovative solutions will demand focused determination.
This a test of our commitment to our most vulnerable, our children and seniors. These
groups deserve to move about our city with confidence and independence. It is a matter of
importance for drivers as well. As a careful driver, I am concerned that I could encounter a
bike or pedestrian in an unsafe manner that results in tragedy. Efforts to protect non-
drivers benefit everyone.
Cupertino is distinguished by its overall safety and livability as well as its progressive
planning and management. The Bike Pedestrian Commission is the embodiment of our
desire for a safe place for ourselves and our families. I urge the City Council to retain the
independence of the Bike Pedestrian Commission.
With appreciation,
Deborah Anderes
Cupertino resident since 1992.
From:Connie Cunningham
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:2025-9-16. CC Agenda Item 22 STUDY SESSION Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:35:15 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.
2025-9-16. CC Agenda Item 22 STUDY SESSION
Subject: Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters (Continued from
September 3, 2025).
Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, Councilmembers and City Manager:
My name is Connie Cunningham, 38 year resident and, currently, Chair, Housing Commission,
writing for myself only. I was pleased to read Mayor Chao’s Written Communication that she
plans to move Agenda Item 22 to an earlier spot on the Agenda, and to allow all speakers
who would like to speak to have 3 minutes.
I urge Council to choose Option 3 Continue with Bicycle Pedestrian Commission oversight;
rename to “Transportation and Mobility Commission”.
Option 3: Continuity of expertise and continuity on BPC for people who walk and ride
bicycles: these are often youth, seniors, and others that do not drive for mobility
reasons.
Any other Option will kill the purpose of the BPC which is to provide data and
recommendations about traffic projects for the City Council. Seniors and students are
specifically helped by having a Commission that understands their needs as bicyclists
and pedestrians. Cupertino’s overarching goal for residents is safety! Traffic safety is
a big need for our suburban, car-centric city. Bicyclists and pedestrians need this
special commission to provide information and recommendations for Council
consideration.
As a senior, and a frequent pedestrian, who also drives, it is clear that the Bicycle
Pedestrian Commission plays a critical role in our city’s adaptation to safe streets.
Drivers are not always happy with these changes, although, as a driver, I am happy
with them. I do not want to hit a pedestrian or bicyclist. I know that it would be a
much worse collision for either, than it would be for my car. Cars are bigger and more
powerful these days. Drivers are the same people as before their cars got bigger and
more powerful.
Comments provided by the Staff Report bring up issues for Options 1, 2 and 4 that will
complicate, and slow, the review of topics now considered under BPC.
<!--[if !supportLists]-->A. <!--[endif]-->Option 1: Overlap and confusion of
responsibilities; increase in staff resources
<!--[if !supportLists]-->B. <!--[endif]-->Option 2: BPC not having input on
projects that affect bicycles & pedestrians if the projects also impact
drivers.; increase in staff resources
<!--[if !supportLists]-->C. <!--[endif]-->Option 4: Loss of specialized bicycle and
pedestrian advisory body; increase in staff resources, and impacts
budget: loss of grant funding for transportation projects; loss
estimated at $5,000 to $30,000 per project.
Mayor Chao’s comments about the Sep 8 Mayor’s meeting were helpful. I have
attended other Mayor’s meetings. These meetings, also, included many residents
with issues they cared about deeply. Mayor Chao listened and people were respectful of her
leadership. The Sep 8 meeting she described sounds the same. I am deeply concerned that
Chair Rao of the Planning Commission is making unfounded statements about that Sep 8
Mayor Meeting, and also, about a fellow Planning Commissioner. Unfounded accusations are
beneath the dignity of any Commissioner. The Commissioner’s Handbook clearly states how
Commissioners are supposed to conduct themselves, and their meetings. I assume this
behavior is expected at other meetings they attend since they are seen as leaders in the
community.
Sincerely,
Connie L Cunningham
From:Seema Lindskog
To:City Council; City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Cc:Info Walk Bike Cupertino
Subject:Agenda Item 22: Please Choose Option 3 - Keep the BPC Intact and rename it to the Transportation and Mobility
Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:36:21 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.
City Clerk, please include this email as part of the written communication for this evening.
_______________________________________________
Dear Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am a member of the city's Planning Commission, but I am writing today only as a resident of
our city and the Chair of Walk Bike Cupertino.
On Agenda Item 22, I urge you to choose Option 3 - Keep the Bike Ped Commission's scope
and authority intact and rename the commission the "Complete Streets Commission" or the
"Transportation and Mobility Commission" to more accurately reflect its charter.
A transportation commission dedicated to and focused solely on creating safe streets for
all residents is critical to the liveability of Cupertino. Every single resident uses our city
streets every day. Our students, youth, and seniors walk, roll, and bike on our streets more
than any other age groups. They are vulnerable minorities because most of them don't vote, so
it is critical to have a commission whose sole focus is on their safety and whose
commissioners are their voice to the council.
The Planning Commission has a huge role as well. It oversees all land use, zoning, special
districts, housing law implementation, and sign ordinances. With all the rapid changes in
housing laws coming from the state and the very aggressive housing mandate that Cupertino
has to fulfill, the Planning Commission has a tough task in ensuring our city is able to
maintain its quality of life, housing developments are integrated appropriately into residential
neighborhoods, and housing developments are spread out evenly across all neighborhoods.
That is another vital part of the liveability of our city.
Nothing good will come of trying to combine these two huge goals into one commission. It
will only ensure neither goal gets the focused attention it deserves.
The Bike Ped Commission meets once a month in a public setting. It is fully transparent and
publicly accessible, especially with all commission meetings now going to a hybrid format.
Residents can and should engage with the commission to make sure their individual needs are
being listened to and considered.
The MTC requires that in order to be eligible for grants, cities must have a dedicated Bike Ped
Commission advising the council which is primarily composed of active and experienced
pedestrians and cyclists who advocate for pedestrians and cyclists. Moving Transportation
under the Planning Commission will put at risk tens of millions of dollars of potential
grants. A steep cost to pay as a city for some perceived "efficiencies" that have not been
substantiated or proven in any independent analysis. The staff report itself lists more
cons than pros to anything but Option 3.
The Supplemental Report cites MTC staff as saying "In the interest of consistency, we would
recommend following the TDA-3 supplemental guidance for the BPAC provisions of the Complete Streets
Policy. Cupertino would need to demonstrate how a successor body contains the necessary
pedestrian and bicyclist expertise and representation to review Complete Streets checklists and TDA-
3 projects. Without a specific proposal from Cupertino on how a successor body would satisfy the TDA-3
BPAC requirements, we are unable to advise further at this point in time but would be happy to sit down
and discuss further with VTA and Cupertino. Lastly, I would emphasize that without a compliant BPAC or
equivalent body, Cupertino would not be able to seek regional discretionary funding or TDA-3 funding for
its projects. So it is advisable for Cupertino to discuss a proposal with MTC prior to implementing a
change in order to fully consider the potential impacts of those changes.”
This proposal was put forward without justification based on political ideology and perceived
grievances. It has no rational benefits and creates significant negatives for the safety of
residents and the fiscal health of the city. Please do the right thing and vote for Option 3
- Keep the Bike Ped Commission's scope and authority intact and rename the commission the
"Complete Streets Commission" or the "Transportation and Mobility Commission" to more
accurately reflect its charter.
Thanks,
Seema Lindskog
Chair of Walk Bike Cupertino
Cupertino Resident
___________________________________________________________________
"You must be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
This message is from my personal email account. I am only writing as myself, not as a
representative or spokesperson for any other organization.
From:Balaram Donthi
To:Tina Kapoor; David Stillman; Chad Mosley; City Council; City Clerk
Subject:Agenda Item# 22 Cupertino City council meeting
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:39:28 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 Mayor Chao and Councilmembers,
I am writing regarding Agenda Item 22 on Cupertino City Council Meeting, on how
Cupertino commissions should oversee transportation projects.
The current structure has failed our residents. The Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission was
allowed to move projects forward with very little accountability, and the result was the loss of
lanes on De Anza Boulevard. This caused frustration for drivers, longer travel times, and more
congestion, especially for families and seniors who rely on cars.
Cupertino cannot afford more mistakes like this.
Transportation decisions that affect thousands of people every day must be reviewed by the
Planning Commission, not left to a narrow advisory body.
Option 2 provides this necessary oversight. It makes sure that large-scale projects with
citywide impact are reviewed in a broader planning context, not only from the perspective of a
single group.
Other cities like Palo Alto and San Carlos have shown that this structure works. Cupertino
should learn from them and restore balance to our process. Residents deserve a system that
looks at the whole picture, not just bicycles and pedestrians, before making changes that affect
everyone.
I strongly urge Council to adopt Option 2. Cupertino needs stronger oversight, accountability,
and fair representation for all road users.
Sincerely,
Balaram Donthi
From:Anand D"Souza
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Council Meeting Tonight: Bike Ped Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:42:48 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.
Dear City Council Members,
I am writing to ask you to please choose Option 3 for Agenda Item 22 to be addressed at the
council meeting this evening. Although I am unable to attend in person due to family
obligations, I would like my voice to be heard. Here are my reasons for supporting a separate
Bike Ped Transportation Commission from the Planning Committee.
1. My children bike to school. The Bike Ped Commission is central to their safety. They are
responsible for a comprehensive approach to mobility that promotes safety, accessibility, and
efficiency for everyone who uses the city’s roads. They address a complete range of
transportation-related issues, including safe pedestrian, cyclist, and car driver traffic flows and
much more. WIth the Bike Ped Commission, I know that deeper conversations about driving
speeds, parking spaces, crosswalks, signal times, curb ramps, protected bike lanes, and Safe
Routes to School will be prioritised.The Bike Ped Commission will consider all users of our
streets including car drivers, pedestrians, cyclists, wheelchair users, children walking and
biking to school, and seniors going to the grocery store.
2. The Bike Ped Commission is lower cost than the Planning Committee. Eighty-seven of all
bike/ped projects in Cupertino are paid for by grant money!! Since 2018, Cupertino has only
paid less than 13% of the cost of all the new pedestrian and bike infrastructure built in the city,
with grant funding and gifts paying the rest. This low percentage doesn’t even factor in the
land donated for the Linda Vista Trail in 2019, which was worth at least $7M. If that land is
included, the percentage would dip below 10%. The Planning Commission also requires
significantly more staff resources (our tax dollars) for their meetings than Bike Ped
Commission meetings. It’s irresponsible to make the residents pay more to be heard less.
Transportation does not belong under the purview of the PC.
3.The Bike Ped Commission supports Cupertino demographics. There are over 13,000 K–12
students in CUSD, around 9,000 students in FUHSD high schools, and around 18,000 students
at De Anza college. Cupertino residents 65 and older represent about 15% of our population
— and rising. These are the people who need crosswalks that feel safe, bike lanes that are
protected, and sidewalks that are complete. A dedicated Bike Ped Commission ensures that
their needs aren’t pushed to the bottom of the agenda.
I hope that you take all these very important points into consideration and vote to choose
Option 3 for Agenda item 22. I implore you to keep the BPC intact, and rename the
Commission to the Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Sincerely,
Anand D'Souza
Cupertino Resident
From:Babu Srinivasan
To:City Council; City Clerk; Chad Mosley; David Stillman; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Request for Review and Dissolution of the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 11:53:21 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 Clerk,
Please include the below in written communication for the upcoming city council meeting
today.
To: Cupertino City Council and City Manager
From: Babu Srinivasan Cupertino Resident
Date:16-sep-2025
Dear Councilmembers and City Staff,
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.
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,
Babu Srinivasan
From:louise saadati
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:Keep the Bike Ped Commission as a separate entity from the Planning Commission AND keep all transportation
topics with the BPC
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:02:52 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.
Please include this email in the written communications for
the Sept 16, 2025 City Council Meeting.
Regarding Item 22, I’m respectfully asking you to keep the
Bike Ped Commission as a separate entity from the
Planning Commission AND keep all transportation topics
with the BPC. I support Option 3. Do not eviserate the
Bike Ped Commission by taking responsibilities from the
Bike Ped Commission and transferring them to the
Planning Commission.
There are many important reasons for this including:
It is a requirement for grant funding and application for a
city to have a separate Bike Ped Commission. Essentially
all the surrounding cities have a separate Bike Ped
Commission. Since 2018 more than 87% of Cupertino Bike
Pedestrian Infrastructure has been from grants. Why
jeopardize our ability to receive grants for Bike Pedesteian
Projects? The city council needs to be fiscally responsible.
The Planning Commission's mission is land planning. The
Bike Ped Commission’s is safety for bicycle, pedestrian and
vehicle safety. Safety should be a core issue with the city.
Please allow the most vulnerable, walkers and bikers
(which include children and seniors), to have their safety
closely reviewed and protected by a separate Commission
whose core mission is their safety.
The vast majority of the surrounding cities have a separate
Bike Ped Commission. Why would Cupertino want to be
the only city who would rid itself of the Bike Ped
Commission? It sends a very poor signal to everyone of
the lack of importance this city council places on the safety
of those who travel through our streets.
As the staff report states, folding the Bike Ped Commission
into the Planning Commission will significantly increase the
staff time. Staff time has been decreased because of our
fiscal constraints. Please do not unnecessarily burden the
staff with unnecessary responsibilities.
The council has received 2 letters with an identical copy-
pasted call for “performance audit of the Bicycle and
Pedestrian Commission’s spending, impact, and project
outcomes” …and to ”suspend any further Bike Ped
Commission recommendations until this is done”. This is
an obvious ploy to obstruct and eviscerate the Bike Ped
Commission and its ability to be effective. If this measure is
applied to every commission, no progress nor action will be
possible throughout all the city commissions .
I support renaming the “Bike Ped Commission” to “Mobility
and Transportation Commission" which more aptly reflects
its important mission.
Please Choose yes on Option 3 on Agenda 22. Show you
care and give a high priority to safety for everyone who
travels on our roads by voting Yes on Option 3.
A stand alone Transportation Commission will:
1-allow for a commission focused on transportation
including pedestrians and bikers (not the Planning
Commission with all its vast and disparate responsibilities).
2-allow us to apply for grants and be in alignment with
MTV/VTA, and Caltrans.
3-include the voices of our entire community including our
seniors, students, bikers and pedestrians.
4-prioritise safe routes to schools.
Thank you,
Louise Saadati
39 year resident of Cupertino
Sent from my iPhone
From:Cate Crockett
To:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Council
Subject:City Council Meeting today AGENDA ITEM 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:11:15 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.
City Council Members,
I urge you to continue to consider ALL members of the Cupertino community as is your
charter.
Please choose OPTION 3 in order that the BPC can continue their work to meet the needs of
both the current and future mobility needs of our city.
Thank you,
Cate Crockett
From:John G
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:Retain the Bike Ped Commission, Support Option 3 for Agenda item 22
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 12:46:24 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.
Hello Council Members,
I am a long time resident of Cupertino.
The BPC is working fine as is. There is no problem to solve by changing anything. Please just
keep the status quo.
Cupertino already follows the best practices of most Bay Area cities in having a separate BPC.
Once again, there is no reason to change anything.
I have seen letters about eliminating BPC and none of them offer fact based reasons to make
changes.
So please don't waste more time on this item and select Option 3 to retain BPC.
Thanks
John
John Geis
408-209-6970 mobile
jgeis4401@gmail.com
From:Andrea Lund
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Fwd: Please continue with BPC oversight
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 1:03:24 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.
Dear City Council,
I am writing to reiterate my support for the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and urge the
Council to adopt Option 3.
I was disappointed at how rushed deliberations were at the September 3 Council meeting and
hope that the Council will grant proper time for public comment and discussion of this
important issue at tonight’s meeting.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best,
Andrea
Begin forwarded message:
From: Andrea Lund <andrea.janelle.lund@gmail.com>
Date: September 3, 2025 at 9:27:30 AM PDT
To: citycouncil@cupertino.gov
Cc: cityclerk@cupertino.gov, citymanager@cupertino.gov
Subject: Please continue with BPC oversight
Hello,
I’m a resident of Cupertino writing in strong support of Option 3 regarding Item
No 19 on tonight’s City Council meeting agenda. I urge the Council to continue
with Bicycle Pedestrian Commission oversight, renaming it to the Transportation
and Mobility Commission. This option ensures that the transportation needs of all
Cupertino residents are considered, regardless of their ability to own and operate a
motor vehicle, while minimizing disruption to existing structures within the city’s
government. I am concerned that Options 1, 2 and 4 will marginalize the needs of
children, the disabled and the elderly.
Multimodal transportation options, including active transportation on foot and
bicycle, vastly improve the quality of life in our city. The integration of bicycle
and pedestrian projects into the Planning Commission would further our city’s
dependence on motor vehicles. The proximity of my home to the highways that
cut through Cupertino already make me feel as if I have no choice to use my car,
though my family and I prioritize walking and biking when we can. We value the
health benefits (both mental and physical) of walking and riding bikes and aim to
reduce our carbon emissions by making as many short trips through town as we
can on foot and bike. We benefit from many of the bicycle and pedestrain
infrastructure projects that have been completed over the last decade, but we still
see many opportunities for further improvement of our quality of life through
active transportation.
As a mother to small children who are approaching school age, I am also
concerned about the safety of streets and availability of walking and biking paths
for children to get to and from school. The motor vehicle traffic around the
schools in our neighborhood is awful at drop-off and pickup times, and would be
made worse if motor vehicle infrastructure is further prioritized over active
transportation.
Many opportunities to further improve bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and
quality of life in our city would be threatened if Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
oversight is somehow split, shared or taken over entirely by the Planning
Commission. In the interests of all residents of Cupertino, regardless of mode of
transportation, please vote for Option 3 to continue with Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission oversight.
Thank you for consideration and for keeping the interests of all residents of
Cupertino at the forefront of your deliberations.
Sincerely,
Andrea Lund
From:Jen Kwee
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:BPC Independence
Date:Tuesday, September 16, 2025 1:27:36 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 Members,
As a resident of Cupertino for the last 15 years, I would like to express my strong desire to maintain an
independent commission tasked with overseeing bicycle and pedestrian traffic. If combined under the
purview of the Planning Commission, I believe that future plans and solutions put in place for "people
moving" will inevitably be designed to benefit vehicular traffic above all else. Maintaining independence
between the the BPC and the Planning Commission is the best way to ensure that all citizens (drivers,
walkers, cyclists, bus riders, etc.) are properly accounted for and represented fairly in projects. It is also
the only path that I see towards addressing traffic congestion, parking congestion, and traffic safety
issues. Because if you don't provide residents with good, safe alternatives to driving, then you will not be
able to get drivers off the road to make headway on congestion and accident prevention.
Thanks for you time and attention.
Jennifer Kwee
CC 09-03-2025
Item No.19
Options on Commission
Oversight of
Transportation Matters
Written Communications
From:Connie Cunningham
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:2025-09-03 CC Agenda Item 19 Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 3:56:13 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.
2025-09-03 CC Agenda Item 19 Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Dear Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, Councilmembers and City Manager,
My name is Connie Cunningham, a 38 year resident of the community and currently Chair, Housing Commission,
speaking for myself only.
I urge the Council to select Option 3 to keep transportation related topics with the Bike Ped Commission. It has
been my observation over the past several years, that bicyclists and pedestrians, who are a minority of our traveling
residents, suffer from a lack of being heard. Many residents dismiss their concerns. It has been mentioned that
there are “drivers' rights". Left out of that phrase is “drivers' responsibilities.”
I have taken the bicyclist class that is intended to help bicyclists learn all the rules of the road and to become more
aware of specific problems: intersections is a major one. Driver’s who do not understand how to drive with cyclists
is another. Cyclists who do not know how to cycle safely is another.
I was surprised by many things in the class. My own, (even with a bicyclist in my family that I love dearly) and
other drivers’, lack of awareness of anything except cars on the road.
I have learned over time that in order to get federal, state and county grant funding, the City needs to have action
items in place.
An active Bike Ped Commission is a big part of that list of action items.
Our city prizes safety and environmental improvements. Keeping a Bike Ped Commission will continue the City’s
work on Transportation that is Safe and Environmentally friendly.
Sincerely,
Connie Cunningham
From:Santosh Rao
To:City Clerk; Tina Kapoor; Liang Chao
Subject:Fw: Questions for staff on existing CMC rules and regulations on changes to streets.
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 1:50:20 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 upcoming city council
meeting. Thank you.
Thanks,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident)
Begin forwarded message:
On Wednesday, September 3, 2025, 1:48 PM, Santosh Rao <santo_a_rao@yahoo.com> wrote:
[Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident]
Hi David, Chad,
I have a few questions and would appreciate if you or someone in staff could help
with these.
1. When was Bike Ped Commission first formally created. Which commission
covered roads and transportation or related transportation master plans prior to
that.
2. Assuming it was planning commission that might have covered for these, when
the Bike Ped commission was formed was the charter of planning commission
modified to shift charter from PC to BPC. Can we see redline versions of the
changes that were made.
3. If charter changes did not occur how did the city assume charter shift to BPC
when there was a time that no BPC existed and we still had these types of projects
in the city.
4. Would the road improvements to introduce bike lanes or lane removals count as
or meet the definition of road diverters per CMC 14.04.125?
If so CMC 14.04.125.C(2) implies the item must be deliberated on by city
council. If these road changes to divert traffic away from a lane as done on
DeAnza are technically diverters should the above CMC have been followed.
Dear Mayor Chao, Council Members,
Please refer the above CMC.
https://codehub.gridics.com/us/ca/cupertino#/ff2020ef-ed71-490f-93f8-
3cd17cf0c716/4b4fb49f-c031-45ee-ac71-9d23572ec56f/9a2621bb-6320-4b26-
b735-39f3d79dd806
It defines what the public would like to see. It can be extended to cover all road
improvements that involve modifications to lanes, removal of parking, removal of
right turns and any other lane changes and council may choose to have these
reviewed at PC and CC or PC only with appeal to CC.
Note that only PC has rights to approval besides CC. BPC is advisory only and
cannot be an approval commission. Therefore given the nature of public impact
these road changes have caused I ask that you enhance the above CMC to include
all road changes and consider hearing at PC and CC or optionally PC only with
appeal to CC.
Thank you.
—————
Each request for installation, removal or modification of a diverter shall be
reviewed by staff, who shall prepare a written report containing the following
information to be submitted to the City Council:
The actions proposed and the reasons for support of the request For
existing diverters, the report shall include the history of the diverter,
including the date of installation, reason why it was installed, complaints
received, if any, and statements of support received, if any;
Existing conditions in the area which would be affected by the proposed
installation, removal or modification include, but are not limited to:
Traffic volumes, patterns and speeds,
Existing traffic control and traffic-control and traffic-management
devices,
On-street parking levels and patterns,
Accident data, and
Emergency-vehicle access routes, public transit and school bus
routes, and other public service and delivery routes.
Both the streets directly affected by the diverter and the streets
which would be expected to handle diverted traffic shall be
considered. For existing diverters, the accident data should include an
assessment of the role, if any, that the diverter may have played
(both positive and negative);
Design options of the diverter or diverters;
Probable impacts of the proposed installation, removal or modification,
including but not limited to impacts on the conditions described under
subsection C2b of this section; on air pollution, fuel use, and noise; on
transit service; on emergency-vehicle access times; on residential quality
of life, and estimated costs. Both streets directly affected by the diverter
or diverters and the streets which would be expected to handle diverted
traffic shall be considered;
Staff shall request comments on the proposed diverter from the
Departments of Public Safety and Community Development and the
County Transit District if any routes are impacted, and shall attach these
comments to the report;
Alternatives to the proposed action;
Statements or findings necessary to comply with the California
Environmental Quality Act;
Staff recommendation.
In addition to transmitting the staff report to the City Council, staff shall also
send copies of the report to the initiator of the request, to neighborhood
organizations in the area of the proposed action, to individuals who have
stated an interest in such matters, and to the County Transit District if any
bus routes are impacted.
Notice of a public hearing shall be given pursuant to the manner set forth in
Chapter 19.116 of the Cupertino Municipal Code.
After the close of the public hearing, the City Council may order a report
recommending that a diverter or diverters be installed or removed or
modified, or that no change be made. The report shall contain written
findings that the proposed action meets each of the requirements set forth in
subsection B of this section, shall specify the effect of the proposed action on
traffic volume and on the health and safety of Cupertino citizens as outlined
in subsection B4 of this section, and that the action complies with CEQA. The
City Council may adopt the staff report as the findings in support of its
decision.
The Public Works Department shall process the appropriate environmental
—————————-
Thanks,
San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident)
document.
The Director of Public Works shall submit all reports generated pursuant to
these regulations to the City Council.
The City Council shall by resolution authorize the installation, removal or
modification of any diverter. If the proposal is for the installation of a new
diverter, then the Director of Public Works shall review the diverter after six
months of operation concerning any and report the conclusions of operation
concerning any impacts as outlined in subsection C2b of this section and
report the conclusions of such review to the City Council.
Improvements. The Department of Public Works shall consider physical
improvements for the designated diverters during each year's budget process.
Any such improvements shall be processed in the same manner as any capital
improvement in the City, except that the Department of Public Works may accept
contributions in cash or in kind to provide for improvements of diverters. First
priority shall be given to improving any diverter to enhance public health and
safety. Second priority for placement of physical improvements shall be given to
diverters in order of their date of installation.
From:Calley Wang
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:9/3 Council meeting comments on agenda items 18 and 19
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 1:28:46 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.
Honorable Mayor Chao, Council Members and Staff,
Here are my comments on the following agenda items:
18: Stevens Creek Boulevard Corridor Vision Study
I urge the council to adopt the Stevens Creek Vision as recommended. The vision plan
contains common sense recommendations and best practices for improving safety and
attractiveness on suburban streets. As a Cupertino native who travels Stevens Creek by car,
bus, foot, and bike and has followed the outreach process from the beginning, I think the
vision plan will make the corridor safer, more pleasant and less congested. These will have
such a positive impact for seniors, families, and youth, who I often see walking or riding
transit on the Cupertino section of Stevens Creek. Morever, the scope of the of the vision
should be maintained to include Foothill Boulevard, which this Council initially advocated for
to ensure greater funding eligibility for Cupertino's section of Stevens Creek.
The Vision also aligns with Cupertino's General Plan goals of promoting walking and biking,
better local and regional transit, and an attractive Heart of the City. As Stevens Creek
develops, it will become a better place for residents to walk around and for small businesses to
thrive.
A vocal minority has insisted that Cupertino should prioritize increasing car traffic above all
else on Stevens Creek. This would give Stevens Creek all the safety, smooth traffic flow,
economic potential, and neighborhood character of Lawrence Expressway. It is a major
corridor but it is not an expressway. It forms the commercial heart of the city and should be
safe and welcoming for all residents of all ages to visit by car, foot, bike, or transit.
Adopting the Vision maintains local control -- it does not cost Cupertino any money or require
it to carry out any projects without city approval. It is the best way to secure a future for safe
and smooth travel on Stevens Creek for all residents and all visitors.
19: Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
I support Option 3 from the staff report, which is to maintain a commission with oversight on
transportation issues. We are asking Planning Commission to do too much with their limited
time and city resources, on top of complex state housing requirements. Meanwhile a separate
Mobility Commission with a clarified mandate would have the time and attention needed to
focus on transportation issues, especially those impacting our most vulnerable road users.
Remember that many cyclists and pedestrians in Cupertino are students and kids; their
perspectives also deserve to be taken into consideration. Additionally, having a separate
commission is in line with best practice in other Bay Area cities like Palo Alto and has
successfully obtained lots of outside grant funding for transportation improvements in
Cupertino.
This is the best choice for maintaining Cupertino's attractive quality of life and the most
fiscally responsible choice.
Thank you,
Calley Wang
West Hill Court, Cupertino, CA 95014
From:Jennifer Griffin
To:City Council; City Clerk
Cc:grenna5000@yahoo.com
Subject:Item 19- Referral of Transportation Matters to the Planning Commission (9/3/25)
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 1:01:39 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:
(Please include the following as public comment for the Study Session on Item 19 at the
Cupertino City Council meeting on 9/3/25: Referring Transportation Matters to the Planning
Commission.)
Item Number 19 on the Cupertino City Council Agenda for 9/3/25 is a Study Session on the Referral
Of Transportation Matters to the Planning Commission. I think the Planning Commission should have
Transportation Matters referred to them. They should be able to look at and review the issues
With Transportation Matters and they can study the Transportation changes or updates. They have the
expertise and resources to find out exactly the parameters being discussed. The Planning Commission has
The whole big picture and can ascertain best how situations may change etc. They can make suggestions
And ask questions and get information. They look out for everyone and try to anticipate how something
Will affect the infrastructure of the city, especially in the realm of traffic and transportation areas.
The Bike and Pedestrian Committee just looks at one area of Transportation and we need to have
A larger and more focused evaluation of Transportation issues. The Planning Commission is most
Most important commission behind the City Council and they are there to provide the City Council
With valuable information from the Planning Commission's investigation into areas of concern and
Public interest.
Transportation Matters really must involve cars and traffic impacts etc. As our city is pushed to build
More and more housing, we must evaluate how the traffic in our city is being managed and how
Traffic loads will change and traffic will be impacted by construction and additional car demands
Etc. From additional traffic.
We need realistic and reliable studies of Transportation impacts from additional construction of
Housing etc. so that we can adequately plan for future mobility for everyone. Automobiles are
A major source of mobility and we cannot ignore them and their needs in the new Transportation
Demands.
If SB 79 passes, we will have highrises in many areas of the city. This law says nothing about
traffic impacts and the city is left to have to supply all methods necessary to make sure roads are
Not at absolute gridlock level. LOS (Level of Service) Is an excellent way to conduct traffic
studies as it predicts the future state of an actual intersection. VMT (Vehicle Miles Traveled) is
Often not as reliable as it does not discuss the degradation at particular intersections and there
Have been times that developers or others moved bus stops when it was convenient etc.
I am really concerned Cupertino is losing all its retail to housing. The housing built will have
No associated infrastructure requirements with it so that the city and the public will bear the
Cost of that added infrastructure, and one of the added infrastructure will be vehicle impacts
To the roadways and the needs for transportation studies.
Finding out how cars will move in the new Transportation Future is very importation and the
Planning Commission should bear that responsibility.
Thank you very much.
Best regards,
Jennifer Griffin
From:Yvonne Strom
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Agenda item 19. Urge the City to keep all transportation related topics with the Bike Ped Commission
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 12:48:05 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.
Please include in public comments for item 19 in the City Council meeting on Sept 3.
To Mayor Chao, Vice Mayor Moore, and City Councilmembers,
I am writing in support of the Bike Ped Commission and keeping all transportation related
topics in their charter. Consolidation would effectively erase representation of any person who
is not inside a car. Pedestrians, cyclists, transit riders, and wheelchair riders have a lawful right to use the public
streets. All people, including children and students, have the right to expect their safety is just as important as the
motorists they share the space with.
Making streets safer for everyone is more efficient for everyone. That's why Cupertino needs the expertise of the
BPC on all transportation related topics. Please vote for Option 3 from the Staff report.
Respectfully,
Yvonne Thorstenson
A concerned resident and parent
From:Cate Crockett
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk
Subject:Tonight"s Council Meeting
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 12:46:41 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.
City Council members,
Please support Option 3 and retain all transportation related items with the Bike Ped Commission.
Thank you,
Cate Crockett
10564 Apricot Ct
Cupertino Ca
From:Ishan Khosla
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Protect the BPC - Support for Option 3
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 12:05:26 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 City Council Members,
My name is Ishan Khosla, and I am a junior at Cupertino High School. As someone who relies
on biking to get to school, the library, and around town every day, I can confidently say that
the BPC has a great impact in improving safety and accessibility for all of our citizens.
The proposal to eliminate the Bike-Ped Comission and rather transfer its responsibilities to the
Planning Comission simply unjustifiable, and is only an attempt to silence the voices of
pedestrians and cyclists. People who walk and bike are one of our most vulnerable
populations, and having a commission to represent their needs and safety is crucial to keeping
Cupertino accessible to all. Even more, eliminating the BPC will make it much more difficult
for Cupertino to obtain federal, state, and county-level grant funding, which can make future
projects more expensive and even unfeasible.
I ask for your help in supporting Option 3, of Continue with BPC oversight, rename to
“Transportation and Mobility Commission”. This change will allow the commission to
continue improving safety and conectedness for our city, rather than silencing the voices of
pedestrians and cyclists across Cupertino.
Thank you for your consideration.
Best, Ishan Khosla
From:Joel Wolf
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Item 19 on September 3 Agenda
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 11:55:18 AM
Attachments:image.png
Dear Mayor, Vice-Mayor and Councilmembers
I am writing in regard to Item 19 on the September 3 Council Agenda, Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation
Matters. The recommended action is to “Provide input to staff on the preferred options for having transportation projects
reviewed by commissions and provide direction to staff to take the necessary steps to implement the changes.” The staff
report provides Council with four options for the Council to consider. Three of the four options remove some or all (i.e. BPC
disbandment) powers and functions from the BPC, transferring these power and functions to the Planning Commission. Only
Option 3 maintains the BPC in current form with the exception of a name change. As a current member of the BPC and a 40-
year resident of Cupertino who walks and bikes throughout the city, I strongly urge the Council to adopt Option 3.
The current “Powers and Functions” of the Bicycle Pedestrian Committee (BPC) as listed in the Cupertino Municipal Code are
as follows:
It is extremely important that these powers and functions remain with the BPC. There is no advantage of transferring all or part
of these powers to the Planning Commission for the following reasons:
Expertise—The BPC focuses on the current state of art in micro-mobility modes of transportation (biking, walking, scooters).
The BPC monitors and follows the design guidance from local, state and federal agencies for micro-mobility infrastructure.
This requires a significant amount of time and energy from the BPC. The Planning Commission will not be able to devote the
required time to adequately study, consider and address micro-mobility infrastructure needs for the citizens of Cupertino.
Advisory Nature of BPC—The BPC is an advisory commission with no decision-making powers. The BPC recommendations
include input from the public. Ultimately, the Council does not have to accept every recommendation from the BPC. However,
the work of the BPC allows the council to consider some or all options for viable active transportation modes in the city. This is
important when considering making our streets safe, especially for our students going to school, young children, elderly and
handicapped. The council should be getting the best advice from a strong BPC dedicated to these issues, whether or not it
accepts this advice.
Climate Change—The work of the BPC is extremely important in reducing greenhouse gases and associated climate change.
The 2022 Cupertino Climate Action Plan recommends a 15% and 23% share for active transportation modes by 2030 and
2040, respectively. This plan includes many other recommendations related to active transportation modes. The work of the
BPC, including a strong Active Transportation Plan, are important in achieving these goals. Reduction in the powers and
functions of the BPC will make it much more difficult to achieve these goals
Traffic Reduction—The work of the BPC can provide alternatives to driving which can reduce congestion. The construction of
nearly 4700 housing units by 2031 in Cupertino could add significantly to congestion and pollution within the city. The BPC can
provide alternative solutions to driving for both future and current residents making Cupertino a more pleasant community to
live.
Public Confusion—Splitting or eliminating the current powers and functions of the BPC will add to public confusion regarding
the appropriate commission to bring active transportation issues to. This simply does not serve the public well.
I strongly urge the Council to adopt Option 3.
Thank you for your consideration on this matter.
Joel Wolf
Joel Wolf
Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission
JWolf@cupertino.gov
From:Robert Neff
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Item 19 - Support option 3 expand and rename Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 11:38:27 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 Cupertino City Council,
As a commuter who drives his bike through Cupertino almost daily, I have been impressed
with the progress and span of recent bike and ped projects in Cupertino, including new
trails, better wayfinding, and new separated bike lanes. The scale and speed of
improvements has been exceptional.
Regarding item 19 on your agenda, I understand that you have a structure where all local
transportation projects go through the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission.
In the neighboring city of Los Altos, the city has a "Complete Streets Commission" which
handles all transportation projects, and I think that works well to get expertise and
feedback for vehicular, bicycle, and pedestrian improvements and impacts on one
commission.
In contrast, in my city of Palo Alto, we have a Pedestrian and Bicycles Advisory Committee
which only advises staff, while a separate Planning and Transportation Commission
works through city council. There are many planning issues these days, so the
transportation focus from that commission is shortchanged.
I think the Los Altos model works well, with a commission dedicated to transportation issues
of all kinds.
I think choosing option 3, with a renamed BPC continuing with a sole transportation focus is
the better approach.
--
-- Robert NeffPalo Alto PABAC memberrobert@neffs.net
From:helen wiant
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please Support Option 3 in Staff Report on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 10:31:41 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.
There are many things in our community that need attention, change and improvement. Limiting or eliminating the
Bicycle Pedestrian Commission is certainly not one of them. Just because someone in the planning commission or
city council is unhappy with a project promoting safety for bikers and pedestrians is not a good reason to limit or
even eliminate the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission. Frankly this smacks of a tendency towards authoritarian
governance. Involving the Planning Commission in the review of transportation-related matters is not at all more
efficient or constructive or beneficial to Cupertino, but rather it is regressive for our community and politically
motivated.
We elect 5 council members who take input from commissions and from the community and make their decisions. If
you don’t like the results, make your voices heard in the next election but please don’t try to silence the voices that
you disagree with.
The Bike Pedestrian Commission has an important responsibility and has achieved truly great benefits for our
community at no expense to cars. The BPC mission — to review, monitor, and make recommendations on
transportation matters to improve safety, mobility, and overall quality of life for all residents — is essential for a
thriving Cupertino.
The Planning Commission already has a huge responsibility to provide expert advice on land use matters. Given the
significant challenge in housing in our state and the resulting issues in our local communities, land use needs
focused and informed attention of the Planning Commission. Adding transportation to their responsibilities would
necessarily deprioritize the attention that transportation requires and would also lose focus and expertise on how to
continue improving the safety and health of our community.
Therefore I strongly support Option 3 presented by the city staff, to leave all transportation matters under current
Bike Pedestrian Commission purview. All the other options are regressive and result in added staff cost, confusion
in responsibilities, reduced focus on transportation issues, loss of specialized bicycle and pedestrian advisory body,
and negative impact on transportation grant eligibility. They are bad for Cupertino. Please vote for Option 3.
Helen Wiant
10354 Westacres Drive
Cupertino, CA
From:Andrea Lund
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please continue with BPC oversight
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 9:27:45 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.
Hello,
I’m a resident of Cupertino writing in strong support of Option 3 regarding Item No 19 on tonight’s City Council
meeting agenda. I urge the Council to continue with Bicycle Pedestrian Commission oversight, renaming it to the
Transportation and Mobility Commission. This option ensures that the transportation needs of all Cupertino
residents are considered, regardless of their ability to own and operate a motor vehicle, while minimizing disruption
to existing structures within the city’s government. I am concerned that Options 1, 2 and 4 will marginalize the
needs of children, the disabled and the elderly.
Multimodal transportation options, including active transportation on foot and bicycle, vastly improve the quality of
life in our city. The integration of bicycle and pedestrian projects into the Planning Commission would further our
city’s dependence on motor vehicles. The proximity of my home to the highways that cut through Cupertino already
make me feel as if I have no choice to use my car, though my family and I prioritize walking and biking when we
can. We value the health benefits (both mental and physical) of walking and riding bikes and aim to reduce our
carbon emissions by making as many short trips through town as we can on foot and bike. We benefit from many of
the bicycle and pedestrain infrastructure projects that have been completed over the last decade, but we still see
many opportunities for further improvement of our quality of life through active transportation.
As a mother to small children who are approaching school age, I am also concerned about the safety of streets and
availability of walking and biking paths for children to get to and from school. The motor vehicle traffic around the
schools in our neighborhood is awful at drop-off and pickup times, and would be made worse if motor vehicle
infrastructure is further prioritized over active transportation.
Many opportunities to further improve bicycle and pedestrian infrastructure and quality of life in our city would be
threatened if Bicycle Pedestrian Commission oversight is somehow split, shared or taken over entirely by the
Planning Commission. In the interests of all residents of Cupertino, regardless of mode of transportation, please vote
for Option 3 to continue with Bicycle Pedestrian Commission oversight.
Thank you for consideration and for keeping the interests of all residents of Cupertino at the forefront of your
deliberations.
Sincerely,
Andrea Lund
From:Siva Annamalai
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 9:09:18 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.
Hi Cupertino City Council members and Officials of Cupertino City,
I learnt that the council and city staff will be discussing various options for the oversight of
transportation matters in the city of Cupertino. I am a resident of the city of Cupertino and
have been a resident for the last 29 years and feel the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission of the
city has done a great job of highlighting the needs of ensuring the development in the city is
done taking into consideration the safety needs of pedestrians and bicyclists in the city.
I commute to work on a bicycle at least 3 times a week and have experienced first hand the
spectacular work done by this commission and would strongly recommend that the city vote to
preserve this commission. Considering the options on the table for the council to vote on I feel
option 3 - continue with BPC oversight, rename to 'Transportation and Mobility commission'
makes the most sense and I would urge the council to vote for this option.
Regards,
Siva Annamalai.
From:Revathy Narasimhan
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Please continue with BPC oversight
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 8:52:01 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 esteemed council members,
Regarding: Agenda item No. 19 on the Council Meeting on September 3rd. Subject: Options
on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
I am a proud Cupertino resident for the last 14 years, and our family has raised both our kids
in the local elementary, middle, and high schools. We are very thankful to the city for
supporting the schools and the kids.
A significant factor in our decision to raise our family in Cupertino was the safety it provides
for populations that are either too young or too old/have other disabilities to drive. Our kids
were part of the first group, and we see over about 20,000 such kids across the elementary and
high school districts. We also have several elderly neighbours in the second group. I am
writing this email so their voices are heard.
I see kids regularly bike and walk to school. I heard routinely from my kids how safe they felt
with the dedicated bike lanes. I am thankful each time I cross my neighborhood street,
Rainbow Drive, with a flag in hand that the city provides, and am so thankful for the many
lighted crosswalks we have around -> all this was possible because there was a group
dedicated to thinking and planning what it meant to be safe on the roads as every member of
the city. It is easier to focus on the folks in the cars, but having a dedicated group meant we
specifically considered the folks who didn’t use the car, advocated for their needs, and have a
shining example of how this works well in practice now!
For this reason, I ask that you continue to have a group dedicated to bike and pedestrian
safety. I support Option 3 - Continue with BPC oversight, rename to “Transportation
and Mobility Commission”.
Thanks
Revathy
Resident, Cupertino.
From:Sharlene Liu
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:council mtg agenda 19: do not disband BPC
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 11:18:46 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 Cupertino City Council,
I am providing input for agenda #19: option for commission oversight on transportation
matters. I strongly support Option #3, which is to keep a bike-pedestrian commission and
rename it to "transportation and mobility commssion". Having a commission focused on
transportation and mobility issues is essential to the smooth functioning of Cupertino.
Where I live, Sunnyvale, we have both commissions. There is rarely an overlap in function
between these 2 commissions. Our Planning Commission focuses almost exclusively on real
estate development while our BPAC focuses exclusively on active transportation. The
expertise needed on each commission is distinct from each other. Rarely will you find
commissioners interested in both areas -- real estate development and active transportation.
By combining them, you will surely lose the focus needed in each area. I used to be on the
Sunnyvale BPAC, and I can say that I was not interested in Planning Commission work, and
my counterparts in the Planning Commission were not interested in BPAC's work.
I live on the border of Cupertino and I often bike into Cupertino. I am often impressed by the
progress Cupertino makes in its bike and pedestrian infrastructure. Cupertino's BPC and its
transportation staff are commendable in what they achieve. Keep up the good work. Don't
disband the BPC.
Warm regards,
Sharlene Liu
Former Sunnyvale BPAC commissioner
Sunnyvale resident living near Cupertino
From:Seema Lindskog
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Agenda Item 19 - Please keep all transportation matters with the Bike Ped Commission
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 10:31:50 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.
Mayor Chao, Vice-Mayor Moore, and Council members,
I'm on the Planning Commission but I am writing today as a resident of Cupertino who drives,
walks, and bikes in our city.
As Chair of Walk Bike Cupertino and as a current Planning Commissioner, I have a uniquely
deep understanding of the responsibilities and work done by both the Bike Ped Commission
and the Planning Commission. They are fundamentally different roles that cannot be
combined. The BPC requires in-depth understanding and experience of walking and biking in
our city, NACTO standards, and active transportation best practices. Most importantly, the
BPC's charter is to represent and advocate for pedestrians and cyclists, which requires
extensive personal experience as a pedestrian or a cyclist.
The MTC, in their Resolution 4108, requires all TDA3 projects to be prioritized by the city's
BPC. They also require that, in order for a city to be eligible for MTC grants, the city's BPC
must be constituted of commissioners who are active cyclists and pedestrians "who are
familiar with bicycle and pedestrian needs in the jurisdiction" to "represent the interests of the
bicycle and pedestrian communities" (See MTC Memo entitled TDA3_BAC_Guidance dated
October 6, 2014).
Planning Commissioners on the other hand are tasked with implementing the General Plan,
specifically in the area of "zoning, subdivisions, and sign ordinances." (Cupertino City
Municipal Code). That is a completely different focus that requires a completely different type
of expertise.
All of our neighboring cities in the South Bay and the Peninsula have a dedicated BPC to
focus on transportation issues. Every single one. Do we really want Cupertino to have the
dubious notoriety of being the only city that values its pedestrians and cyclists so little that it
eliminates their dedicated representation in our city governance and effectively silences their
voice? What does that say about our city? What message does it send to Cupertino pedestrians
and cyclists, a majority of whom are our children and our parents? How will you look in the
eye the next student cycling to school who gets hit by a car and justify this action?
Please consider carefully whether this is the legacy you want to be remembered for - silencing
the voices of our children and seniors and enshrining disregard for their safety in our city
governance.
Do the right thing. Choose Option 3 and keep all transportation matters with the Bike Ped
Commission.
Thanks,
Seema Lindskog
___________________________________________________________________
"You must be the change you want to see in the world." - Mahatma Gandhi
This message is from my personal email account. I am only writing as myself, not as a
representative or spokesperson for any other organization.
From:Alvin Yang
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Options on Commission Oversight of Transportation Matters
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 10:06:52 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.
Dear City Council,
I am writing to urge you to not encroach on the Bicycle Pedestrian
Commission's responsibilities on transportation and instead take up option 3 of the staff memo
to re-designate the BPC as the Transportation and Mobility Commission.
Nearly every other city in the Bay Area has a separate transportation commission from its
general planning commission. Cities all across the bay all recognize that it is important to have
a separate entity to manage transportation issues separate from general planning because
transportation is an equally broad and important aspect of city planning that requires a
different perspective from the planning commission.
The BPC has created an important voice for people using alternative means of transportation
in Cupertino including those who are unable to drive. By rolling some or all of the BPC's
responsibilities into the planning commission you are effectively silencing these people; who I
remind you are your very own constituents. As a reminder there are not only many students
who are below the driving age that bike/walk to school there is also an increasing amount of
elderly in Cupertino who will eventually be unable to drive as well. How will these people get
around Cupertino if cars are the only viable mode of transportation? It's incredibly
shortsighted and ignorant to disregard the voices of anybody who does not drive to get around.
As it stands now, the BPC has done a great deal of work in creating a transportation system
that benefits all users.
The BPC has also helped secure a great deal of grant funding for the many projects that have
promoted alternative modes of transportation. These funds would not have been acquired if,
say, a plan was put forward for more car-centric infrastructure. Not only that, the overhead
costs of planning commission are much higher than the BPC's and would only further increase
as you move more responsibilities over to the planning commission. By eliminating or
diminishing the BPC it would cost the city more and earn the city less grant funding.
I hope you make the choice that prioritizes the well-being and safety of all your citizens as
well as the financially responsible decision.
Regards,
Alvin Yang
From:J Shearin
To:City Council; Cupertino City Manager"s Office; City Clerk
Subject:City Council item 19: Keep the BPC & Planning Commission functions as is
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 9:38:54 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 this letter in official communication for the 9/3/2025 Council meeting.
Dear Mayor Chao and City Councilmembers:
Changing the responsibilities of the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission and the Planning
Commission is an unnecessary change which adds additional cost to our city while making it
harder for the city to receive grant funding. I urge you to not pursue this step which does not
seem to have any benefits to the residents of our city. The City Council is the appropriate
place to consider all the input from the commissions and residents of the city, and to weigh the
various positives and negatives of a project.
We’ve always had a separate Planning Commission and Bicycle Pedestrian Commission
because of several important reasons:
(1) They have different functions and priorities The Planning Commission’s focus is on land
use, and the Bicycle Pedestrian Commission’s focus is on safe transportation. Rolling these
two functions into one Commission will inevitably result in the loss of resident input as
there are fewer opportunities for residents to speak on the issues they care about. The
city should encourage more resident input, and not less. This is important for resident
transparency and engagement.
(2) As the staff report for this Study Session states, rolling the BPC functions into the
Planning Commission or increasing the Planning Commission mandate to more
transportation matters will likely result in “a measured increase in staff time", which is
more of our taxpayer dollars being spent on an unnecessary change.
(3) Bicycle Pedestrian Commissions (or “Transportation, Complete Streets Commission, etc)
exist because several grant-awarding bodies require them as a condition for a city
receiving grant money for a wide variety of projects. This includes not only bike lanes, but
also grants for safety features such as speed monitoring signs.
Continuing to have separate commissions with distinct responsibilities keeps these positives
for our city.
Thank you for considering my input, and your work on behalf of Cupertino.
Sincerely,
Jennifer Shearin
resident of Cupertino
From:Stacy Bruzek Banerjee
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Agenda item #19 Transportation Matters
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 9:24:08 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.
Honorable Mayor, Vice-Mayor, and Councilmembers,
I am the Chair of the VTA BPAC (the Bicycle and Pedistristrain Advisory Committee for
VTA and Santa Clara County) ... I am writing this email as a parent who has raised a child
who attended CUSD and FUHSD schools. My son and his friends rode their bicycles on
Cupertino city streets to reach school, to frequent Cupertino businesses (restaurants, boba
shops, etc etc.), and to visit friends. Of course this came with many safety risks, and frankly
alot of fear of the potential of being hit by a vehicle such that the bike was often left in the
garage ... especially after we witnessed one of my son's long-time friends hit on a Cupertino
street as they were biking to high school about a year ago (not the fault of the student, yet the
student flew up in the air ...).
Cupertino's Bicycle Pedestrian Commission working with city staff has made
improvements on the roadways given their focused attention to bicycle and pedestrian safety
issues and needs. Our family is appreciative of these improvements. HOWEVER, there are
many more Cupertino streets that still need improvement (like the one where my son's friend
was hit). Many parents don't let their kids have the independence (and health benefits!) of
biking because the streets aren't safe. Instead there are more cars on the road (making
congestion) to take kids to/from school, to drive them to/from activities, to take them to meet
friends, etc.
To solve this, the dedicated and specialized attention of a commission that focuses on multi-
modal transportation CONTINUES to be needed. The roadways were designed a long time
ago when there were fewer cars, slower speeds, less distraction, school buses, etc etc. Today
the BEST improvements can be planned ONLY when a commission has dedicated focus AND
expert multi-modal experience, and knowledge (including bicycle, pedestrian). It's BEST to
have a commission dedicated to transportation and have that commission chartered for all
transportation related items.
Further, MTC Resolution 4108 states, "Each county and city is required to have a Bicycle and
Pedestrian Advisory Committee (BPAC) or equivalent body review and prioritize TDA
Article 3 bicycle and pedestrian projects and to participate in the development and review of
comprehensive bicycle pedestrian, or active transportation plans. BPACs should be composed
of both bicyclists and pedestrians." My interpretation of MTC's intent here is that they are
looking for the city BPAC/equivalent to be filled with experts in the area of active
transportation. What comes to mind for me is people who traverse the city streets -- miles each
day -- using active transportation, know NACTO guidelines, understand Complete Streets
policy, follow the VTA Bicycle Program, know local transportation plans (including those of
adjacent jurisdictions), etc. are the right experts. With all respect intended, this is NOT the job
description, or the skill set, or experience, or knowledge base of a typical planning
commissioner. In fact, I have spoken to several planning commissioners over the last couple of
years from different cities in the county ... and what I regularly hear from them is that they are
not bike/ped experts.
Cities throughout Santa Clara County recognize these things and prioritize commissions
dedicated to mobility (with focus on bicycle and pedestrian needs) including:
Sunnyvale BPAC
Santa Clara BPAC
San Jose BPAC
Los Altos Complete Streets Commission ("safe mobility for all users, including
pedestrians, bicyclists, motorists, and transit users")
Saratoga Trails Advisory Committee ("planning, acquisition, and development of trails
and sidewalks") AND Saratoga Traffic Safety Commission
Monte Sereno Better Streets Commission "considering pedestrians, bicyclists, transit,
traffic controls, lighting, vehicular circulation and parking"
Campbell BPAC
Los Gatos Complete Streets & Transportation Commission ("related to bicycle,
pedestrian, and other multi-modal transportation means")
Los Altos Hills Pathways Committee ("Bicycle Plan", "public trails, and pathways")
Palo Alto Pedestrian and Bicycle Advisory Committee
Mountain View BPAC
The City of Cupertino should continue to join other nearby cities and bring leadership through
a dedicated commission to solve the multi-modal safety issues on its streets.
Please vote to ensure dedicated commission focus on mobility and to prevent anyone walking
and biking -- a student, an elderly person, anyone -- from being severely injured or killed on
your streets.
Thank you,
Stacy Banerjee
From:Taghi Saadati
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:BPC
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 7:42:38 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, as an avid biker & long time resident of Cupertino I urge you to keep BPC as their recommendations has
made Cupertino safer for pedestrians & cyclists.
Also, I support option 3 which I believe it would continue safety recommendations for pedestrians & cyclists.
FYI, recently the city of Mountain View made
a major safety improvement on Califia Avenue , West of Shoreline Blvd., by moving the bike lane next to the curb
& parking next to moving cars, plus safety improvements for street crossings.
I hope Cupertino could do the same on street with a lots of moving cars like Stevens Creek Blvd.
Thank you
Taghi Saadati
Sent from my iPhone
From:Hervé Marcy
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:City Council 9/3 item 19
Date:Tuesday, September 2, 2025 6:34:05 PM
Attachments:OpenPGP_0x2E75B4858B936689.asc
OpenPGP_signature.asc
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.
Mayor Chao and esteemed councilmembers,
I am part of the Bicycle pedestrian commission of the City of Cupertino,
but am writing in my name only.
98% of all Bay Area cities have a separate Bike Ped/Transportation
Commission and Planning Commission. And there are good reasons for that:
the planning commission has a very specific mission, which is vastly
different from the BPC. Planning commissioners are not nominated for
their knowledge of biking and pedestrian infrastructure. They do not
know the challenges that vulnerable groups, such as seniors and people
with disabilities, face when using the city infrastructure and nor
should they, because the BPC is here for that! It allows an increase in
community feedback and input from pedestrians, cyclists and residents
impacted by projects.
I am of the opinion that decentralizing power is healthy . If you
believe in the fact that "powerful interest groups" can manipulate
decisions, then you should be worried about concentrating power into the
hands of a single commission. You may be in power today, but if you are
not tomorrow, the agenda of your opponent may be much easier to
implement with a single commission. It is not a matter of policy, it is
a matter of good city governance.
For these reason, I am humbly asking you to vote for Option 3 - Continue
with BPC oversight, rename to “Transportation and Mobility
Commission” on item 19 on the agenda.
Best regards,
Hervé Marcy
--
Hervé MARCY
herve@hmarcy.com
From:Neil Park-McClintick
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Item 19—Support option 3, Protect Walking and Cycling
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 5:20:21 PM
Attachments:image.png
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,
Please support option 3 for item 19—to preserve the distinction between the planning
commission and the bicycle and pedestrian commission.
Most municipal governments—including all of our neighbors in Santa Clara County—
maintain a transportation-focused commission separate from their planning commission.
These commissions promote good governance by allowing cities to better allocate staff time,
leverage outside funding, and provide an essential advisory voice for a future where residents
don’t have to rely on driving everywhere.
Part of what makes Cupertino so livable today is our willingness to embrace positive changes
that encourage walking, biking, and transit. Thanks to the Bicycle and Pedestrian Commission,
Cupertino is far more walkable and cycling-friendly than many other cities. While some
drivers may complain about these improvements, few would actually want to live in a fully
car-dependent environment—examples of which exist across the U.S., a country already
heavily car-oriented:
In addition to the positive effects of cycling and pedestrian infrastructure, having a separate
mobility-focused commission is also just good governance. The planning commission will
always be focused on residential, commercial etc projects and the rules that enable land use
potential. With the largest Regional Housing Needs Assessment requirement ever placed on
municipal governments, the planning commission will understandably be preoccupied with
planning around thousands of new homes. They will not and should not be using valuable staff
and commissioner time on whether a new crosswalk is needed in a neighborhood, or if a speed
bump could reduce fatalities.
Even Cupertino’s own staff report underscores this point. The only listed con for Option 3—
the option to preserve a dedicated mobility commission—is that it does not align with
Council’s stated direction. That is not a substantive reason. Making decisions simply because
“Council wants to” without evidence or rationale is poor governance. It risks placing
Cupertino on par with the kind of arbitrary, power-consolidating decision-making we criticize
at the national level.
Please support option 3.
Thank you,
Neil Park-McClintick
former 15+ year resident of Cupertino, with family still there
From:John G
To:City Council
Cc:City Clerk; Cupertino City Manager"s Office
Subject:Council Agenda item 19, Transportation, Plase support Option 3
Date:Wednesday, September 3, 2025 4:02:14 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.
Hello Cupertino Council,
Please support option 3 in order to maintain a dedicated Bike Ped Commission.
This is in order to maintain good governance and obtain grant funding.
Thank you,
John
John Geis
408-209-6970 mobile
jgeis4401@gmail.com