HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 11-18-2025 Item No. 16 Mary Avenue potential sale and negotiator appointment_Written Communications_2CC 11-18-2025
Item No. 16
Potential sale and
appointment of
negotiator for Mary Ave
property
Written Communications
From:Rachel Rose
To:City Clerk; City Council; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Re: Pull Agenda Item 16 from Consent Calendar
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 1:50:17 PM
CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you
recognize the sender and know the content is safe.
I apologize, I mistakenly added more to that email than intended. Here’s what it should have
said:
Hello City Clerk, Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25
City Council meeting.
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City
Manager Tina Kapoor, I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so
there is explicit council discussion with public comments for it. I have read the
supplemental report. It says the City used exemptions to bypass normal procedures to call
the parcel surplus or exempt surplus. This was not noticed to the public. This was not put on
any council agenda. No proper information on this was given to the public or Council. No
Council vote was taken explicitly to approve the use of this exemption so as to be skipping
public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This may be a violation of
the Brown Act. Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared
surplus or exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings. Please
provide these documents. In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary
Ave Villas project. Its use is already assigned. It is not surplus land. Public notice, hearings,
and community input are required before vacating land or using exemptions to bypass
normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus. Please follow state laws and
brown act. All actions must be noticed as directed by a vote of council especially something
such as deeming land surplus.
Thank you,
Rachel Rose
US Citizen and registered voter
Glenbrook Apartment resident since 2019
Against further development of Mary Ave
On Tue, Nov 18, 2025 at 1:36 PM Rachel Rose <rachelrosemd@gmail.com> wrote:
Hello City Clerk, Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25
City Council meeting.
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City
Manager Tina Kapoor, I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so
there is explicit council discussion with public comments for it. I have read the supplemental
report. It says the City used exemptions to bypass normal procedures to call the parcel
surplus or exempt surplus. This was not noticed to the public. This was not put on any
council agenda. No proper information on this was given to the public or Council. No
public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This may be a violation of
the Brown Act*. Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be
declared surplus or exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings.
Please provide these documents. In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35
Mary Ave Villas project. Its use is already assigned. It is not surplus land. Public notice,
hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or using exemptions to
bypass normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus. Please follow state laws
and brown act. All actions must be noticed as directed by a vote of council especially
something such as deeming land surplus.
Brown act violations:
1. They went from ground lease to sale. Not directed from dais.
2. Went from land approved for SB-35 back to surplus land. Not allowed. No direction from
dais.
3. No vacation of public right of way. Not directed from dais.
4. No actions to deem parcel as surplus. Not directed from dais.
5. No actions to community notice vacation, deem surplus, or exempt surplus or exemption
of the process to deem. Not directed from dais.
6. No notification to HCD. Not directed from dais.
7. No publication of NOA. Not directed from dais.
8. No notification to other affordable housing agencies. Not directed from dais.
Thank you,
Rachel Rose
US Citizen and registered voter
Glenbrook Apartment resident since 2019
Against further development of Mary Ave
From:B Nataraj
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Pull Agenda item 16 from Consent Calendar
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 10:47:37 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 City Clerk,
I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so there is explicit council discussion
with public comments for it.
Regards,
Nataraj
From:manju lnu
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Remove Agenda Item 16 from Consent Calendar
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 10:09:27 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.
Hello City Clerk,
Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25 City Council
meeting.
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City
Manager Tina Kapoor,
I request that agenda item 16 be removed from the consent calendar so there is explicit council
discussion with public comments for it.
I have read the supplemental report. It says the City used exemptions to bypass normal
procedures to call the parcel surplus or exempt surplus. This was not noticed to the public.
This was not put on any council agenda. No proper information on this was given to the
public or Council. No Council vote was taken explicitly to approve the use of this exemption
so as to be skipping public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This may
be a violation of the Brown Act.
Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared surplus or
exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings. Please provide these
documents.
In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary Ave Villas project. Its use is
already assigned. It is not surplus land.
Public notice, hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or using
exemptions to bypass normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus.
Please follow state laws and brown act. All actions must be noticed as directed by a vote of
council especially something such as deeming land surplus.
Thank you,
Manju
From:Jean Schwab
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Pull Agenda item 16 from Consent Calendar
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 8:37:20 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.
Subject: Pull Agenda Item 16 from Consent Calendar
Hello City Clerk,
Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25 City Council meeting.
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City Manager Tina Kapoor,
I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so there is explicit council discussion with public
comments for it.
I have read the supplemental report. It says the City used exemptions to bypass normal procedures to call the parcel
surplus or exempt surplus. This was not noticed to the public. This was not put on any council agenda. No proper
information on this was given to the public or Council. No Council vote was taken explicitly to approve the use of
this exemption so as to be skipping public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This may be a
violation of the Brown Act.
Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared surplus or exempt surplus without
proper public meetings and written findings. Please provide these documents.
In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary Ave Villas project. Its use is already assigned. It is
not surplus land.
Public notice, hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or using exemptions to bypass
normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus.
Please follow state laws and brown act. All actions must be noticed as directed by a vote of council especially
something such as deeming land surplus.
Thank you,
Jean and Christopher Schwab
10353 Mary Ave
Cupertino, CA
Sent from my iPad
From:Mahesh Gurikar
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Agenda item 16 on Consent Calendar -City Council Meeting on 11/18/2025
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 7:37:58 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 City Clerk,
Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25 City
Council meeting.
—————
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members,
City Manager Tina Kapoor,
I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so there is
explicit council discussion with public comments . It appears City has used
certain exemptions to bypass normal procedures to call the parcel surplus or
exempt surplus.
However, This was not noticed to the public, This was not put on any council
agenda, No proper information on this was given to the public or Council and No
Council vote was taken explicitly to approve the use of this exemption so as to be
skipping public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This
may be a violation of the Brown Act.
Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared
surplus or exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings.
Can City provide these documents?
In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary Ave Villas
project. Its use is already assigned. It is not surplus land until proper procedures
are followed and fully documented.
Public notice, hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or
using exemptions to bypass normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt
surplus.
Please acertain the city follows state laws and Brown act. All actions must be
noticed as directed by a vote of council especially something such as deeming
land surplus.
Again, I request Agenda item 16 to be removed from the consent calendar.
Thank you,
Mahesh Gurikar
Cupertino Resident
From:Vidya Gurikar
To:City Council; City Clerk; Tina Kapoor
Subject:Agenda item 16 on Consent Calendar -City Council Meeting on 11/18/2025
Date:Tuesday, November 18, 2025 7:31:53 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 City Clerk,
Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25 City Council
meeting.
—————
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City
Manager Tina Kapoor,
I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so there is explicit council
discussion with public comments . It appears City has used certain exemptions to bypass
normal procedures to call the parcel surplus or exempt surplus.
However, This was not noticed to the public, This was not put on any council agenda, No
proper information on this was given to the public or Council and No Council vote was taken
explicitly to approve the use of this exemption so as to be skipping public engagement and
written findings to deem this as surplus. This may be a violation of the Brown Act.
Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared surplus or
exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings. Can City provide these
documents?
In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary Ave Villas project. Its use is
already assigned. It is not surplus land.
Public notice, hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or using
exemptions to bypass normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus.
Please action the city follows state laws and Brown act. All actions must be noticed as
directed by a vote of council especially something such as deeming land surplus.
Again, I request Agenda item 16 to be removed from the consent calendar.
Thank you,
Shrividya Gurikar
Cupertino Resident
From:Aref Shaikh
To:Tina Kapoor; City Council; City Clerk
Subject:Pull Agenda Item 16 from Consent Calendar
Date:Monday, November 17, 2025 10:11:23 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.
Hello City Clerk,
Please include the following in written communications for the 11/18/25 City Council
meeting.
Hello Mayor Liang Chao, Vice-Mayor Kitty Moore, Cupertino Council Members, City
Manager Tina Kapoor,
I request that agenda item 16 be pulled from the consent calendar so there is explicit council
discussion with public comments for it.
I have read the supplemental report. It says the City used exemptions to bypass normal
procedures to call the parcel surplus or exempt surplus. This was not noticed to the public.
This was not put on any council agenda. No proper information on this was given to the
public or Council. No Council vote was taken explicitly to approve the use of this exemption
so as to be skipping public engagement and written findings to deem this as surplus. This may
be a violation of the Brown Act.
Under California Government Code § 54221 (2024), land cannot be declared surplus or
exempt surplus without proper public meetings and written findings. Please provide these
documents.
In April 2025, the City approved this parcel for the SB-35 Mary Ave Villas project. Its use is
already assigned. It is not surplus land.
Public notice, hearings, and community input are required before vacating land or using
exemptions to bypass normal procedures to declare it surplus or exempt surplus.
Please follow state laws and brown act. All actions must be noticed as directed by a vote of
council especially something such as deeming land surplus.
Thank you,
Aref Shaikh