Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 12-16-2025 Item No. 5 FY 2024-25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report_Written CommunicationsCC 12-16-2025 #5 FY 2024-25 Annual Comprehensive Financial Report (ACFR) Written Communications From:Santosh Rao To:City Council; Tina Kapoor; City Clerk; Kristina Alfaro; Public Comments Subject:Please pull agenda item 5 (ACFR) from consent calendar by council vote if it pulled by any council member already. Date:Tuesday, December 16, 2025 1:51:31 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 kindly include the below in written comments for agenda item 5 (ACFR) for the 12/16/25 council meeting. Thank you. [Writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino resident] Dear Cupertino city council, CM Kapoor, Finance Director Alfaro, I am a Cupertino resident writing on behalf of myself only. I am writing about agenda item 5 (ACFR) and related financial aspects of city operations and the burden the city’s operating costs and expenses place on us Cupertino residents. I am very concerned that the 2023 cost recovery policy passed by prior council majority and the resulting 10+% successive annual fee increases are making life unaffordable for Cupertino residents. The City should urgently be looking to cut its own costs before raising or maintaining high fees and instead undertake measures to reverse the fee increases and lower costs on residents instead. City financial reports show three clear issues. First, actual General Fund spending has been well below the final budget because many posts remain vacant year after year. Second, large operating departments such as Public Works, Parks and Recreation and Community Development absorb most spending. Third, several fee‑funded operations, such as the Sports Center, Blackberry Farm and recreation programs, still need subsidies even though user fees are high. I respectfully request that the Council consider the following future actions: 1. Turn vacancy savings into real cuts The City should identify posts that have been vacant in non-essential areas such as administrative, non-automotive transportation, and other non-community facing support areas. These posts should be reduced or converted to external contractor positions to eliminate the burden of healthcare and pensions for those roles, not carried forward in future budgets. Management should also remove duplicated analyst and “special project” roles that do not directly serve residents. 2. Move staff to front‑line community roles The City should protect and, where needed, strengthen staffing for building and planning review, development services and code enforcement. Instead of hiring new people, staff from lower‑priority internal projects and discretionary initiatives should be reassigned or reduced to realign funding into these critical roles. This will speed up permits and enforcement without raising fees. 3. Slim down high‑cost departments Public Works, and Community Development should be reviewed program by program. Low‑use or low‑value activities should be merged or ended. Supervisory and back‑office roles linked to these activities should be removed or shifted to higher‑priority work. 4. Cut consultant dependence and linked internal roles Spending on consultants and contracts / study projects should be reduced. Where possible, existing staff should take on key project and analysis work. As consultant use falls, internal roles that exist mainly to manage discretionary contracts should be phased out, and the savings should support planners, inspectors and code officers. 5. Reduce non‑automotive transportation staffing and projects Transportation staff and funds should focus on essential traffic management, safety and congestion relief on busy Cupertino roads and main corridors. Roles and projects not directly tied to these core functions, including niche or low‑usage mobility initiatives and prolonged pilots, should be reduced or discontinued. Any positions that exist mainly to design, market or manage low‑usage transportation projects should be eliminated or redeployed to essential traffic engineering and safety work. 6. Make staff realignment part of every fee decision When the Council considers fee schedules, staff should first show which posts have been cut or reassigned in that programme. Only after this should any fee change be discussed. Essential community services, especially in building, planning, code enforcement and core traffic management, should not be priced to cover overhead roles that could be removed instead. Cupertino faces revenue pressure and residents face very high housing and living costs. It is fair and reasonable to expect the City to expedite reduction in non‑essential roles, realign staff, and lower its own cost base before asking residents to pay more in fees. By doing this, the Council can ease the cost recovery burden and help keep Cupertino more affordable for the people who live here. Yours faithfully, San Rao (writing on behalf of myself only as a Cupertino Resident)