Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutCC 05-19-2026 Item No. 1 Study Session Health and Safety Element Update_Written CommunicationsCC 05-19-2026 #1 Study Session: Health and Safety Element Update Written Communications From:Lauren Sapudar To:Tina Kapoor; Michael Woo; Kirsten Squarcia; Benjamin Fu; Luke Connolly; Piu Ghosh (she/her) Cc:City Clerk Subject:FW: Written Communications Study Session Item 1 Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 1:32:27 PM Attachments:KM SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DRAFT ELEMENT.pdf FYI Lauren Sapudar City Clerk ​​​​ City Manager's Office LaurenS@cupertino.gov (408) 777-1312 From: Kitty Moore <KMoore@cupertino.gov> Sent: Tuesday, May 19, 2026 1:30 PM To: Lauren Sapudar <LaurenS@cupertino.gov> Subject: Written Communications Study Session Item 1 Dear City Clerk, Please include the attached document for Written Communications, Item 1, Study Session. Thank you, Kitty Moore Kitty Moore Mayor ​​​​ City Council KMoore@cupertino.gov (408) 777-1389 SUGGESTED IMPROVEMENTS TO THE DRAFT ELEMENT KM, 20260519 FIRE SAFETY & EVACUATION 1. Upgrade Dual Ingress/Egress from Discretionary to Mandatory Current: Policy HS-3.4.1 lists "more than one point of ingress and egress" as a plan requirement but does not specify dimensions or mandate enforcement. Recommended: Adopt objective standards requiring that all new residential developments of 5 or more units in High or Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones provide a minimum of two independent, paved access points each at least 20 feet wide. Make this a non- discretionary condition of project approval, consistent with California Government Code §65302(g)(5). Cities such as San Jose and Marin County have codified minimum widths in their Safety Elements. 2. Mandate Zone 0 Non-Combustible Perimeters Current: The element references defensible space and California Fire Safe Regulations but does not explicitly require the 5-foot Zone 0 ember-resistant perimeter called for in 2021 CAL FIRE regulation updates. Recommended: Add a strategy under Policy HS-3.4 or Policy 3.7 explicitly requiring a 5-foot Zone 0 non-combustible perimeter for all new construction and significant remodels in Moderate, High, and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones, consistent with current CAL FIRE guidance. Reference PRC §4291 and the updated 2021 defensible space regulations by name. 3. Adopt a Total Evacuation-to -Safety Framework with Dynamic TraYic Assignment Current: Strategy HS-2.3.3 (Evacuation Route Assessment) calls for periodic review but uses planning-level V/C ratio methodology with year-2000 capacity data that predates current rezoning. Recommended: Add a new strategy requiring the City to conduct a Dynamic Tra_ic Assignment (DTA) evacuation study updated to reflect post-rezoning buildout conditions by 2028, and to repeat this study with each subsequent General Plan update. The study should model time-to-safety (not merely bottleneck identification), scenario-based simulations (Red Flag Warning conditions, school-day evacuation, signal failure), departure behavior, and phased evacuation by zone. This matches the approach already adopted by Marin County and recommended by the Fehr & Peers consultant guidance cited in public testimony. 4. Street-Level Modeling for FHSZ Evacuation Zones Current: The element does not distinguish between evacuation zones located inside and outside Fire Hazard Severity Zones for the purposes of modeling depth. Recommended: Add a strategy requiring street-level tra_ic modeling for any evacuation zone that (a) lies within a Moderate, High, or Very High FHSZ and (b) has a V/C ratio exceeding 1.0 under the current analysis. Zones CUP016, CUP017, CUP029, and CUP032 should be called out for immediate priority study. Results should be integrated into phased evacuation planning and real-time tra_ic management protocols. 5. Identify and Map Single-Egress Parcels Current: The element does not explicitly identify parcels with constrained single-egress access as required by California Government Code §65302(g)(5). Recommended: Add a strategy requiring the City to complete a GIS-based inventory of all residential parcels in Fire Hazard Severity Zones with only a single point of vehicular egress, publish this inventory publicly, and use it to prioritize capital investments in secondary access routes or turn-around facilities. Sunnyvale's Safety Element includes a similar parcel-level access constraint inventory. 6. Improve Evacuation Map Usability and Public Communication Current: The City maintains 34 evacuation zone maps (CUP-E001 through CUP-E034) available as PDFs but without neighborhood labels or contextual geographic references, making them di_icult for residents to use. Recommended: Add a strategy requiring the City to (a) label all evacuation zone maps with neighborhood names, major street intersections, and school or park landmarks; (b) publish an interactive online version allowing residents to enter their address and see their zone; and (c) conduct annual community outreach to ensure residents know their zone. Mountain View's Emergency Preparedness section sets a good precedent for interactive, address-specific evacuation zone tools. 7. Require Wildfire-Updated Evacuation Modeling Before Ministerial Approvals in FHSZs Current: Policy HS-3.4 requires review of new development in Fire Hazard Severity Zones but does not tie permit issuance to a finding that the a_ected evacuation zone retains adequate time-to-safety capacity. Recommended: Add language requiring that, for projects of 10 or more units in High or Very High FHSZs, the applicant demonstrate through tra_ic analysis that the project will not degrade the time-to-safety performance of the a_ected evacuation zone below an established threshold (e.g., 90% of residents reaching safety within 60 minutes of a Red Flag Warning). This mirrors objective standards used in Marin County's Community Wildfire Protection Plan integration. 8. Seismic Retrofit of City Hall and EOC — Time-Bound Objective Goal Current: The element notes that "there may be additional physical and seismic improvements" needed at the EOC but sets no timeline or funding commitment. Recommended: Add an objective strategy to complete a full seismic retrofit of City Hall and the Torre Annex to Essential Facility standards (CBC Occupancy Category IV) within a defined timeframe, with a funded capital improvement plan adopted by 2027. City records from 1985, 2005, and 2014 document this need. An EOC that fails in the first hours of a major earthquake eliminates the City's emergency coordination capacity. Oakland's Safety Element contains explicit seismic retrofit timelines for critical public facilities. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS 9. Require Phase I Environmental Site Assessments for Historically Industrial/Commercial Parcels Current: Policy HS-5 (Hazardous Waste and Materials) calls for coordination with state and federal agencies but does not require site assessments as a condition of development approval on potentially contaminated parcels. Recommended: Add a strategy requiring that any development application on a parcel with a documented history of industrial or commercial land use must include a Phase I ESA prior to entitlement approval, and a Phase II ESA if Phase I identifies recognized environmental conditions. This is standard practice in San Jose, Sunnyvale, and Santa Clara's Safety Elements and is especially relevant given Cupertino's proximity to Silicon Valley semiconductor and industrial sites along with historic dry cleaners. 10. Adopt Numeric PFAS/PCE Cleanup Thresholds Referenced to California EPA CHHSL Current: The element does not set numeric thresholds for contaminant cleanup in connection with development approvals. Recommended: Add a strategy stating that no certificate of occupancy shall be issued for residential use on a previously contaminated site until soil and groundwater contaminant levels have been remediated to or below California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSL) for residential land use, with specific reference to PFAS and chlorinated solvents (PCE, TCE) given their documented presence in South Bay groundwater. Mountain View's Safety Element (which addresses the Superfund site history in that city) provides useful precedent for CHHSL-referenced occupancy standards. 11. Address Artificial Turf as a Hazardous Material and Heat Hazard Current: The element does not mention artificial turf, despite Cupertino having approximately 18 acres of it at its three high schools alone, and despite California's DTSC designating PFAS-containing artificial turf as a Priority Product in 2025–2026. Recommended: Add a new strategy under Goal HS-5 (Hazardous Materials) and cross- reference under Policy HS-9.4 (Extreme Heat) that: (a) prohibits new City-funded installation of artificial turf or poured-in-place rubberized surfaces on public property, parks, and school grounds, consistent with DTSC Priority Product findings; (b) requires existing turf to be inventoried for PFAS content and replaced with natural or certified PFAS- free surfaces upon end-of-life; and (c) discourages residential artificial turf installation through public education. Note surface temperature hazards (160–180°F) as a heat risk consistent with Policy HS-9.4. Several Bay Area cities including Berkeley have adopted similar restrictions. 12. Microplastics and Stormwater from Synthetic Surfaces Current: The element addresses stormwater and permeable pavement (HS-9.3.2) but does not address microplastic runo_ from synthetic surfaces. Recommended: Add language under the stormwater or hazardous materials sections noting that synthetic surfaces including artificial turf shed microplastics into stormwater, the Bay, and ultimately drinking water sources, and that this is inconsistent with the City's water quality and environmental health goals. Require microplastics impact analysis for any new synthetic surface installation on public property. 13. Strengthen PFAS Policy in Groundwater Protection Current: Goal HS-5 addresses hazardous materials generally but does not mention PFAS, which is the most widespread emerging contaminant in Santa Clara County groundwater. Recommended: Add an explicit strategy directing the City to partner with Santa Clara Valley Water District and the Regional Water Quality Control Board to monitor, map, and communicate PFAS contamination status across Cupertino's groundwater basin. Require disclosure of PFAS contamination status in project environmental review documents where applicable. This reflects the approach taken in Sunnyvale and Santa Clara's recently updated Safety Elements. NOISE 14. Add Nighttime Lmax Standards for Industrial Truck TraYic Current: Policy HS-8.7 addresses trucking noise through coordination with the County and restricting truck hours on Foothill and Stevens Creek Boulevards, but relies on CNEL (24- hour average) standards that do not capture sleep disturbance from peak single-event noise levels. Recommended: Add a strategy establishing a Maximum Noise Level (Lmax) standard — not to exceed 65 dB — for industrial trucks operating in or adjacent to residential zones between 10 PM and 6 AM. CNEL averages mathematically obscure late-night Lmax peaks; the WHO recommends single-event nighttime Lmax as a more health-relevant metric. San Jose's Noise Element includes both CNEL and Lmax standards for sensitive receivers. 15. Formally Advocate for I-280/SR-85 Noise Barrier Eligibility Review Current: Policy HS-8.4 mentions rubberized asphalt along SR-85 and I-280 but does not call for systematic noise barrier evaluation or advocacy with Caltrans. Recommended: Add a strategy directing the City to formally request that Caltrans evaluate the I-280 and SR-85 corridors, including the Foothill Expressway interchange, for eligibility under the Caltrans Retrofit Noise Barrier Program. Include a timeline for initiating this request (within 12 months of element adoption). Where soundwalls are infeasible due to ramp geometry, the strategy should require evaluation of alternatives including sound- attenuating fences, acoustic panels on chain-link fencing, and noise-reducing vegetation bu_ers. Neighboring cities including Los Altos and Sunnyvale have pursued similar formal Caltrans requests for retrofit noise barrier studies. 16. Require Noise Mitigation Analysis for Interchange Improvement Projects Current: The element does not specifically address the noise exposure gaps that occur at freeway interchange zones where soundwall geometry is interrupted by ramp configurations. Recommended: Add a strategy recognizing freeway interchange zones as a distinct and underaddressed category of residential noise exposure, and requiring that any future Caltrans or VTA interchange improvement project within or adjacent to Cupertino include a noise impact analysis and mitigation plan as a condition of City comment and cooperation. This directly addresses the gap at the I-280/Foothill/SR-85 interchange identified by a resident whose neighborhood experiences 70 dB levels — above both EPA (65 dB) and WHO (40 dB) daytime thresholds. 17. Adopt VTA Rubberized Asphalt Advocacy as a Named Strategy Current: Policy HS-8.4 calls for roads to be "designed and improved" to minimize neighborhood noise, including rubberized asphalt, but does not name VTA as a specific advocacy target. Recommended: Add a strategy explicitly directing the City to formally advocate with VTA for use of rubberized asphalt on I-280 within Cupertino's geographic limits. Rubberized asphalt can reduce tra_ic noise by 4–6 dB — a meaningful, cost-e_ective reduction. Given VTA's jurisdiction over portions of this roadway, formal City advocacy is the appropriate mechanism. 18. Establish a Noise Monitoring Program with Public Reporting Current: The element does not include any ongoing noise monitoring or community reporting mechanism. Recommended: Add a strategy directing the City to establish a periodic (biennial) ambient noise monitoring program at five to ten representative noise-sensitive locations, including sites along I-280, SR-85, and adjacent to major industrial operations. Results should be published on the City's website and used to evaluate the e_ectiveness of noise mitigation strategies. Oakland and San Jose both include noise monitoring programs in their Noise Elements with public-facing dashboards. EXTREME HEAT AND CLIMATE RESILIENCE 19. Designate and Expand OYicial Cooling Center Network with Performance Standards Current: Strategy HS-9.4.3 calls for developing a Heat Action Plan and identifying cooling centers but sets no timeline, minimum number, geographic distribution requirement, or operating hour standards. Recommended: Add specific performance criteria: the Heat Action Plan (to be completed within 18 months of element adoption) should identify a minimum number of publicly accessible cooling centers distributed across the city such that no resident is more than one mile from a designated site; specify extended hours (minimum 8 AM–8 PM) on days when temperature exceeds 95°F; ensure ADA accessibility; and include a transportation strategy for residents without vehicles. Partner with CUSD and FUHSD to make school gyms available during heat emergencies. This mirrors standards in the City of San Jose's Extreme Heat Action Plan and Sunnyvale's updated Climate Resilience chapter. 20. Set Measurable Green Roof and Living Wall Targets Current: Policy 9.9 (Nature-Based Solutions) encourages green roofs and living walls but sets no goals, timelines, or metrics. Recommended: Add a strategy establishing a target — for example, green roof or living wall features incorporated into at least 25% of qualifying new commercial and multi-family developments of 20,000 sq ft or more — and a monitoring mechanism to track citywide cool-surface coverage. Reference the cooling benefit quantification methods used in Oakland's Urban Heat Island Reduction Strategy. 21. Install Cooling Infrastructure in High-Use Public Spaces Current: Strategy HS-9.4.1 and HS-9.4.2 address shading at transit stops and parking lots but do not address active cooling in crowded public gathering spaces. Recommended: Add a strategy directing the City to install misting or evaporative cooling features combined with shading structures in high-use public spaces such as town centers, parks, and school-adjacent areas where residents congregate during hot weather. Prioritize spaces with high youth and senior foot tra_ic. This aligns with heat mitigation approaches used in Phoenix, Sacramento, and parts of San Jose. 22. Integrate Artificial Turf Prohibition into Climate Resilience Policies Current: Policy HS-9.4 (Extreme Heat) promotes shading and vegetation but does not address heat-intensifying synthetic surfaces as a counterproductive practice. Recommended: Add cross-reference language within the Extreme Heat section noting that synthetic impervious surfaces such as artificial turf contribute to the urban heat island e_ect and are inconsistent with the City's extreme heat reduction goals. Direct that city capital projects avoid these surfaces and that private development projects in areas subject to urban heat island mitigation requirements use vegetated or high-albedo alternatives. This directly aligns with the CAP's vulnerability assessment (Table 2) identifying extreme heat as Cupertino's highest risk. OVERARCHING STRUCTURAL IMPROVEMENTS 23. Transition Key Safety Standards from Discretionary to Objective and Non- Discretionary Current: Much of the element uses language such as "encourage," "support," "consider," and "where feasible" — discretionary language that can be preempted or ignored. Recommended: Conduct a systematic review of all fire, evacuation, and hazardous materials policies to identify which should be converted to mandatory objective standards. Priority candidates for mandatory language include: dual access requirements in FHSZs, Phase I ESA requirements, PFAS cleanup thresholds, and Zone 0 perimeter requirements. Objective standards in Safety Elements provide regulatory certainty and are more defensible under state housing streamlining laws. This reflects best practices in Marin County and City of Oakland Safety Elements. 24. Add a Climate-Integrated Cumulative Health Impacts Section Current: The element addresses noise, hazardous materials, heat, and fire as separate sections without explicitly assessing their cumulative health impact on sensitive populations (seniors, children, low-income residents, residents with chronic illness). Recommended: Add a brief section or strategy identifying locations in Cupertino where multiple hazards overlap — for example, areas near I-280 that experience both high noise levels and urban heat island e_ects — and direct the City to prioritize these areas for cumulative mitigation investment. This approach is used in Oakland's Environmental Justice chapter of its Safety Element and is consistent with California's SB 1000 environmental justice requirements. 25. Establish Annual Health and Safety Element Implementation Reporting Current: The element does not include a monitoring or annual reporting requirement for its strategies. Recommended: Add a strategy requiring an annual Health and Safety Element implementation report to the Planning Commission, tracking completion status of all time- bound strategies, outcomes of monitoring programs (noise, hazardous materials, heat), and evacuation planning progress. Make this report publicly available. San Jose and Sunnyvale both include monitoring frameworks in their Safety Elements, providing a clear model. APPENDIX: BENCHMARK CITIES The following Northern California city Safety/Health Elements were used as benchmarks for the recommendations above: City Notable Strength Marin County Dynamic Tra_ic Assignment evacuation modeling; wildfire FHSZ objective standards City Notable Strength San Jose Lmax nighttime noise standards; PFAS/ESA hazmat requirements; heat action plan metrics Sunnyvale CHHSL numeric cleanup thresholds; biennial noise monitoring; Phase I ESA requirements Mountain View Interactive evacuation zone tools; contaminated site occupancy standards Oakland Cumulative health impact mapping; seismic retrofit timelines; urban heat island targets Berkeley Artificial turf restrictions; nature-based cooling mandates From:Liang Chao To:City Clerk Subject:Written Communication for the Health and Safety Element update Date:Tuesday, May 19, 2026 3:43:27 PM Here is a list of suggestions I have made to the City Staff through the City Manager. They are summarized here as a written communication on this item for the reference by the public. Part A: Proposed revision for the Policy HS-3.4.1 and HS-3.9 in the draft to add evacuation route study and mitigation when necessary: HS-3.4.1 (Recised) : Review in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones. For proposed development in High and Very High Fire Hazard Severity Zones identified by CAL FIRE, prior to issuance of the first permit, whether ministerial or discretionary, plans shall include, at a minimum: Site plan, planting plan, planting palette, and irrigation plan with designs to reduce the risk of fire hazards and with consideration of site conditions, including slope, structures, and adjacencies. Development and maintenance of defensible space. More than one point of ingress and egress to improve evacuation, emergency response, and fire equipment access, and adequate water infrastructure for water supply and fire flow that meets or exceeds the standards in the California State Minimum Fire Safe Regulations, including Subchapter 2, Articles 1–5, commencing with Section 1270, and Subchapter 3, Article 3, commencing with Section 1299.01. An evacuation-route assessment when the project would add residential units, increase occupancy, or intensify land use in an area served by an evacuation route segment classified as at capacity or over capacity under the City’s adopted evacuation route capacity assessment. For purposes of this review, an evacuation route segment shall be considered at capacity when the V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, over capacity when the V/C ratio is 1.5 or greater, severely over capacity when the V/C ratio is 2.0 or greater, and a critical bottleneck when the V/C ratio is 3.0 or greater. Where a project would add evacuation demand to an at-capacity or over- capacity route, plans shall identify feasible measures to avoid, reduce, or offset added evacuation constraints, such as additional ingress and egress, emergency access improvements, site design changes, evacuation management plans, parking management, traffic-control measures, or evacuation-route improvements. Class A roofing assemblies for new and replacement roofs. Location and source of anticipated water supply. Policy HS-3.9 (Revised): Access for Fire and Emergency Vehicles and Equipment Require proposed development to provide adequate access for fire and emergency vehicles and equipment that meets or exceeds the California State Fire Safe Regulation standards, Santa Clara County Fire Department standards, and City standards. These standards are found in two parts of the California Fire Safe Regulations (California Code of Regulations, Title 14, Division 1.5, Chapter 7): Subchapter 2, Articles 1-5 (commencing with Section 1270, SRA Fire Safe Regulations); and Subchapter 3, Article 3 (commencing with Section 1299.01, Fire Hazard Reduction Around Buildings and Structures Regulations). Developments must also comply with the applicable provisions of the California Fire Code (California Code of Regulations, Title 24, Part 9) to ensure fire safety measures, including emergency access, fire protection systems, and defensible space requirements, align with statewide fire prevention standards and include adequate unobstructed roadway width, vertical clearance, grade, turning radius, turnarounds, load-bearing surface, fire lane parking controls, and emergency access easements, as applicable, to allow fire engines and aerial apparatus to safely access and maneuver, including right-turn and turnaround movements, as approved by the Fire Code Official. For development in Fire Hazard Severity Zones, hillside areas, evacuation- constrained areas, or areas served by private or dead-end roads, require confirmation that fire engines and aerial apparatus can safely access and maneuver on-site and off-site, including right-turn and turnaround movements, through compliance with adopted fire access standards or a turning-movement analysis approved by the Fire Code Official. Part B: Proposed policies on Evacuation routes Policy HS-2.11A: Evacuation Route Capacity and Bottleneck Reduction Maintain and periodically update an evacuation route capacity assessment that evaluates evacuation routes, roadway capacity, safety, viability, evacuation locations, and distance to evacuation gateways under a range of emergency scenarios, including wildfire, earthquake, roadway closures, school-day conditions, visitor activity, and power outage conditions. For purposes of this policy, an evacuation route segment shall be considered at capacity when its V/C ratio is 1.0 or greater, over capacity when its V/C ratio is 1.5 or greater, severely over capacity when its V/C ratio is 2.0 or greater, and a critical bottleneck when its V/C ratio is 3.0 or greater under any adopted evacuation scenario. The City shall prioritize mitigation, operational strategies, and emergency planning for route segments meeting these thresholds, especially routes serving neighborhoods with limited evacuation alternatives, longer distances to evacuation gateways, schools, vulnerable populations, or visitor-serving open- space areas. Policy HS-2.11B: Development Review in Evacuation-Constrained Areas Require discretionary development in wildfire hazard areas or evacuation- constrained areas to evaluate whether the project would increase evacuation demand on any evacuation route segment classified as at capacity, over capacity, severely over capacity, or a critical bottleneck under the City’s adopted evacuation route capacity assessment. Where a project would add evacuation demand to such a route segment, the City shall require feasible measures to avoid, reduce, or offset added evacuation constraints, such as improved emergency access, site design changes, evacuation management plans, traffic-control measures, parking management, transportation demand management, one-car-per-household evacuation planning, shelter-in-place or nearby shelter strategies where appropriate, or contributions to evacuation-route improvements. Policy HS-2.11E: Evacuation Corridor Design Standards When resurfacing, redesigning, or improving critical evacuation corridors, evaluate design treatments that preserve or increase emergency evacuation capacity, such as mountable or painted medians, emergency shoulder use, emergency vehicle access features, traffic signal backup power, and designs that can support temporary traffic control during evacuations. Policy HS-2.11H: School and Visitor Evacuation Coordination Coordinate with schools, parks, preserves, golf courses, and open-space managers in the evacuation area to prepare site-specific evacuation plans, parent reunification plans, bus or shuttle staging plans, and traffic-control protocols. Part C: Proposed Policy to provide standards for city infrastructure projects involving roadway changes Policy HS-3.X: Emergency Access Standards for City Infrastructure Projects Involving Roadway Changes City infrastructure projects involving roadway changes, including lane narrowing, road diets, protected bike lanes, raised bike-lane dividers, medians, curb extensions, traffic calming, resurfacing, restriping, or other changes to the public right-of-way, shall maintain adequate emergency vehicle access, fire apparatus access, ambulance access, and emergency vehicle maneuvering. Such projects shall meet applicable California Fire Code, California Fire Safe Regulations, Santa Clara County Fire Department standards, and City standards for unobstructed roadway width, vertical clearance, grade, turning radius, right-turn movements, turnaround access, load-bearing surface, fire- lane parking controls, hydrant access, and emergency vehicle maneuvering. No raised divider, curb extension, median, traffic-calming device, or protected bike-lane barrier shall be installed where it would prevent the design fire apparatus or ambulance from meeting required turning movements, right-turn movements, turnaround movements, or minimum clear access width, unless the City Council makes findings, based on substantial evidence and after consultation with the Santa Clara County Fire Department, that equivalent or improved emergency access and emergency response performance will be maintained through other design or operational measures. Projects shall not reduce emergency access, fire apparatus access, ambulance access, emergency response times, or evacuation route capacity unless the City demonstrates, in consultation with the Santa Clara County Fire Department, that equivalent or improved emergency access and evacuation performance will be maintained through other design or operational measures. For designated evacuation routes, projects shall preserve the City’s ability to implement temporary evacuation traffic controls, including managed outbound flow, lane conversion, turn restrictions, emergency shoulder use, or other evacuation operations. Liang Chao Vice Mayor ​​​​ City Council LChao@cupertino.gov 408-777-3192